Religious Bigotry's Biggest Ally

I was fascinated by the reaction of male film critics to The Golden Compass, an excellent fantasy film and an assault on religious authoritarianism. Could it be that most male film critics are religious bigots? This seemed unlikely. Yet there it was: female critics are almost unanimous in praising the film, while male critical responses are almost two to one unfavorable.

The answer, I finally realized, was simple: the film had a female protagonist. I've noticed this in the past: a great many males--including far too many film critics--have such fragile egos they think if they identify with a female protagonist for two hours their little willies will fall off. This issue tends to dominate film criticism.

Of course, the male critics had to find 'artistic' reasons for their dislike. It "doesn't flow quite right", it's "hard to follow", it's "loud" and "disjointed", it's "shallow and inchoate", there's "no sense of wonder", it "doesn't have heart". Several reviewers compared it unfavorably to the Lord of the Rings trilogy, which, they implied, was not loud, hard to follow, disjointed, shallow, inchoate, but had heart and wonder and flowed perfectly. Anyone who actually saw the trilogy, as I did, can only laugh. Not that the trilogy didn't have some wonderful moments. But let's face it: most of all three films was taken up with the slaughtering of an unending supply of computer-generated Orcs. This seems to be what male critics mean by "heart" and "wonder".

The sad truth is, the main thing Rings had that Compass doesn't, was a whole slew of male protagonists. There was hardly a female to be seen.

This persistent bias in male film criticism perhaps explains why a film that doesn't have any comic book superheroes, shootouts, fistfights, or car chases--deals, in other words, with mature people in real-life situations--is stigmatized as a 'chick-flick'. Small wonder women are dominating college campuses these days, while men dominate soup kitchen lines.

To to read more movie reviews, visit the Huffington Post's movie reviews page. More reviews for movies, books and music can be found here.

Comments

[OhgReaTone]

People will criticize this film for a variety of reasons - and some of them will have to do with the merit of the story line and the actual film making. Many will act out of their unconscious prejudices - a common trait among man.
Ohg.
http://thefiresidepost.com/2007/11/28/creativity-spirituality-and-the-golden-compass/

[gregnsf]

I'm curious as to what anyone thinks about the prospects of all three books in the series getting made. It may be fizzling in North America but it seems to be doing quite well elsewhere. But if the budget was $180 million before advertising it seems that this movie would have to make a ton before a sequel (or two) are approved. I'm not getting into the controversy, just wondering what others think about the odds of the whole series being filmed.

[singermuse]

The negative criticism from the majority of male film reviewers is not surprising given the recent comments from the head honchos of a certain movie studio saying they will no longer make films with female heroines. We are in a cultural backlash, big time, and either people can't see it or won't cop to it but it's there nonetheless. Not only is it a backlash but it is aggressively hostile to women and children, what with the constant beating of war drums and the violence that is increasing on and off television and movie screens.
Women are 51% of the world's population and we're still fighting for the right to just be, to have choices about our bodies, our lives, to be able to simply be self sufficient. And all this is very threatening to some people, mostly men, who happen to be in power at this time.

[3fingerbrown]

I don't know. Male critics didn't seem terribly fearful of their little willies when they praised "The Wizard of Oz," "Mildred Pierce," "The Sound of Music," "Thelma and Louise," "Rebecca," "All About Eve" (to name just one of many well-reviewed Bette Davis movies), "Julia," "A Star Is Born," "Imitation of Life," "Coal Miner's Daughter," scores of films starring Meryl Streep, Katherine Hepburn, and Sophia Loren""plus hundreds of other female-driven movies, American and foreign. Seems to me that male film (and theater) critics were among the first men in American society to accept and praise portrayals of strong women protagonists. Butch stars like Garbo or Tallulah Bankhead were critics' darlings (dah-lings?) at a time when nearly all major critics were men.
Have male critics become so remarkably sexist in the last 20 or so years? I suppose it's possible. But it's just as possible that female critics are overpraising "Golden Compass" because they so rarely get to root for a female protagonist. But that lack is the result of the studios' hangup, not the critics'.

[Davee1]

I have no problem with a female protagonist. I'm reading The Golden Compass now and I'm quite enjoying it. However, I thought the movie was not very good. There is no psychology to my opinion other than I just didn't think it was a good movie. The characters are not developed to the point that I cared about them, and yes I can care for a female protagonist.

Saying that LOTR was only beloved because it was a bunch of boys running around doing their thing is insulting. I hate violent movies for the most part, and I don't like the typical "boy" movies like Rambo or whatever. I loved LOTR because I completely bought into the world that was created, and I cared about the characters and their quest as they were developed over the course of the 3 movies. My favorite character, by the way, was Eowyn, the woman who struggles against a male dominated society.

The LOTR movies were so much better crafted than The Golden Compass. From the music, to the characters, to the cinematography, to the editing. That doesn't mean that the story is a more moral one or represents values that we should aspire to. It just means it was better made (in my opinion).

I don't know why more male critics disliked it than female. Perhaps there is truth to what you say. Even more perplexing to me is how so many female critics could have liked it. Perhaps the opposite prejudice is in play. Just something to think about.

[lburnham]

I read The Golden Compass right before the movie came out and responded to the book very strongly. I knew immediately that it was mainly because it had a heroine instead of a hero (I couldn't finish the Rings trilogy and gave up on Harry P a long time ago. Bo-ring.) However, my response was also because the books (now I'm on #2) are wonderful conceptual science fiction. Pullman's ideas re the Dark Materials are even more fascinating than his take on authoritarian religion. But the film downplayed both those aspects and wasted a lot of valuable time on battle scenes (for the money, I assume). The filmmakers should have realized who the audience would be and spent more time on the characters and the concept. It was beautiful but I was disappointed. I took my husband and he couldn't understand it.

[ptillen]

I've been thrilled by Lyra, the protagonist of Pullman's trilogy. It's always been a source of frustration for me that the great adventure stories that kids are growing up with, from Arthur and LOtR to Star Wars and Harry Potter, are all full of boys and men doing the real work. Yeah, people argue, look, there's Princess Leia, there's Hermione, but they're still only adjunct. Leia was a damsel in distress with an attitude, and Hermione, as brilliant as she is, is still only Harry's sidekick.
Why are none of these Campbellian hero's journeys embarked upon by a female??
Ah! Lyra so admirably fills the requirements of a hero, while still remaining a believable pre-adolescent girl. And Pullman's other characters of weight and importance are even divided between male and female. There's a great female villain in Mrs. Coulter, and another great heroic figure in Serafina Pekkola. There may be more wonderful characters to come- I'm not even half way through!
I don't have kids, but I'm giving several copies of the books to young friends this Christmas.
The story may or may be about the Evils of Christianity , and I hope the discussion on this thread doesn't degenerate into another boring round of Christianity-bashing.
Even the Archbishop of Canturbury has said these books are more about the death of the antiquated authoritarian church, but regardless of what you think the religious agenda is or isn't, it is a ripping good adventure story. Like others of its genre (Arthur, HP, LOtR, etc) kids can learn so much about virtue- courage, compassion, self-sacrifice- from them, and I laud Pullman for giving girls and women an equal share in the adventures and the good lessons.

[mae692]

Don't you think that's the reason the book (English author, fantasy) didn't sell nearly as well (in America) as Harry Potter (English author, fantasy)? Isn't that the reason JK Rowling is not Joann Rowling? Maybe American boys are conditioned not to like stories about girls. Take a look at the Newberry Awards and look at the male/female ratio.

I can see how the movie could be confusing if you're not familiar with the book, which very few Americans are. In England it was nominated for a Booker prize, which was a big deal for a children's book. That said, maybe international reviews would give you a better picture.

[Jjc2006]

Thank you, thank you!!! Finally a reality check. Someone calling the misogyny where it is.

[kalapa]

PS. I'm seeing The Golden Compass tomorrow.

[kalapa]

Been wondering when I'd read someone telling it like it is: much appreciated Mr.Slater :)

This is the elephant in the room that has been the bane of film buffs like me forever. The other part of this lunacy is the ongoing mantra that films have to appeal to young men for it to be successful.

I often decide to go to films exactly because they're panned by certain male film critics, knowing that I will love it. I invariably do!

[doojie]

A good book along these lines is called "The Alphabet and the Goddess", by Leonard Shlain. It takes off on McLuhan's study of media and exploiores the alphabetic structure of the written word to focus on the male dominant side of the brain.

However, in defense of the bible, one scripture stands out with some significance, Romans 8:7, which says the carnal, or natural mind, is enmity against God and cannot be subject to God's laws. This woud have two basic effects:
1.No one can organize in God's name, since no physical mind can be subject to God, and all such organizations would have to follow physical laws.
2.Any attempt to do so will result in an infinity of speciating religious concepts of God.

Not only did Gutenberg's printing press place stress on standardization and mechanical repeatability, which are hallmarks of western christianity, but the process affected the male dominant side of the brain, creating a self righteous religious structure that masquerades as truth.

[macfee]

Well said.

Thoughtful words about a subject in need of them.

[darker]

A film without any comic book superheroes, shootouts, fistfights, or car chases is of
no interest to the typical impotent, narcissistic American male who needs constant ego-inflation.

Where are real American "men"?
They don't exist.

That's why we have the mess-of-a-country we do.
There are no real men to take care of anything.
Just shitheads, irresponsible frat-brats, abusers of everything they can abuse.

No real men have come forth to CORRECT THE SITUATION.

[ch4r1iegr1]

We live in a patriarchal society thanks to two thousand years of burning women at the stake, female genital mutilation and murdering of tribes with feminine values, such as collectivism, equality, and respecting the earth.

I'm so sick of Christians spouting off about abortion, sending forwards around the Internet calling The Golden Compass an "anti-God" movie and trying to get their ten commandments into public institutions.

What do they do for life on this planet? What beauty and wonder do they experience? What do they know about the vastness of this universe and the vastness of our collective consciousness? Unfortunately, male-dominated religions have a one-sided preoccupation with warped male values such as individual triumph, division and isolation, control, domination and killing.

If more people practiced religions that honored the feminine principle, such as Wiccan, Animism, or Paganism, we wouldn't be witnessing this wholesales rape, slaughter, and looting of the earth, in the form of wars, poverty, deforestation, chemical pollution and factory farms (where animals, a.k.a. living beings are mutilated, tortured, confined and terrorized before their brutal death).

We can not look to government or corporations to change our culture of death. They are the biggest instigators. It is up to us as individuals to educate ourselves and stop supporting the culture of death. In the new age, people must realize they can be the change they wish to see in the world.