What We Like (And Don’t Like) About HBO’s New His Dark Materials Show

6 responses to “What We Like (And Don’t Like) About HBO’s New His Dark Materials Show”

1. 

   astrogirl

   November 6, 2019 at 4:48 pm

   Apparently, it’s on Foxtel in Australia, if anyone was interested.

   Reply
2. 

   slipoch

   November 6, 2019 at 6:09 pm

   Meh, I read the books and thought they were pretty ham-fisted, like Davinci code but ripping off C.S Lewis instead of the gnostics and modern conspiracy theorists. He starts a lot of threads that are closed with deus ex machina plot cappers and whilst trying to deal with in-depth issues, it only really strikes with the “everyone has to grow up” philosphy. It doesn’t deal with absolute power corrupting very well, nor does he deal realistically with the villains of the books, they are 2d characters at best, caricatures at worst. The mother is given some depth but the father’s character is quite lacking.

   I also felt like the world wasn’t very well fleshed out with vague glimpses at the world, but only just hinting and showing stuff before moving the plot elsewhere. Thankfully this is something a show can enhance by using the background.

   Show looks like they have done the best they can with the material, but the core material needed a lot of work.

   Reply
   1. 

      ctrlsaltdelete

      November 6, 2019 at 10:20 pm

      I could not disagree more. Mrs Coulter and Lord Asriel could be seen as the villains, but both aren’t as villainous as the systems and organisations that surround them, and I think they’re some of the most complex villains in any media, but especially in a book series aimed at kids. I also totally don’t see the conspiracy theorist angle at all, I mean we all know exactly what the church has done in reality, and events in the books aren’t far off at all.

      I also think the world would have been far less interesting if it were ‘fleshed out’. I understand where you’re coming from regarding moving from place to place without deeply exploring each area, but everything is confusing and mysterious because it’s from a child’s perspective. If it was written from an adults all of the themes and concepts would be so oppressively dark that it wouldn’t be much fun to read. I loved C.S. Lewis’ stuff when I was a kid, but while there’s absolutely dark stuff in it there’s a reason I can still return to His Dark Materials as an adult where I can’t do the same with Lewis’ work. On another note both Lewis and Pullman drew heavily from the bible and religious imagery and themes – while Lewis probably was an inspiration, even if his work wasn’t His Dark Materials would probably have been very similar all the same given the religious basis for the books of both authors.

      Also “ham-fisted”? Is it the most subtle book ever written? No. But it’s about as subtle as a kids book could be, and given the capital D dark themes it goes into putting how it’s written in context of it being aimed at children is pretty important. The church literally murdering children in an attempt to preserve their innocence, as well as making statements to the effect of the ‘original sin’ is the greatest achievement of mankind, that heaven would be a literal hell of believer’s own making – overcrowded and full of delusional madmen, that death and total dissolution of the self is desirable where holding on to your individual self would be incredibly painful – those ideas would be pretty on the nose through an adults perspective and comparatively uninteresting, but through a child’s perspective you can read into each observation Lyra makes through a fresh lens, one that reframes your own understanding of the church, death or religion as a whole. The series doesn’t prescribe the correct reading, though it is obviously absolutely scathing when it explores religion, but rather allows you to read into each theme and develop the world and context around them with your own understanding, something I think is incredibly well done.

      Reply
      1. 

         slipoch

         November 8, 2019 at 5:27 pm

         Sorry man, the conspiracy theory thing was about the davinci code not HDM.

         I found the bits in the book annoying where something she has dealt with before in her life was treated as if it was new to her, but then any fleshing out was glossed over because she already knew about it, yet the main themes are thumped in over and over in big dialogues that have already been covered. Pullman also negates/ignores the difference between faith & religion that Lewis does cover, particularly in the last Narnia novel where All the main characters die. or in Screwtape, That hideous strength, etc.

         For good villains you can even look at the fleshing out of Kingpin in the latest versions of Daredevil and Spiderman, good solid reasons for doing what he does, loss, sorrow and abuse. Rather than “I belong to this organisation and will believe whatever they tell me because it gives me power.”, or at Mary Shelley’s works, or Sherlock Holmes (particualry the backstory of the villain in A Study in Scarlet), or Agatha Christie’s works, for modern literature look at the Night Watch series, Peter F. Hamilton’s works or any Terry Pratchett.

         Pullman does cite Lewis as his main inspiration for the works, he’s done so in several interviews. He didn’t like Tolkien, who was a lot more subtle in his religious influences in LOTR/The Hobbit.

         I can go back to Lewis even after all these years, only the first Narnia book was aimed at very young children otherwise it ranges from about 7-10, HDM is targeted at the YA (10-16) age groups. But I read HDM once and was not very impressed based on the loaner’s talk-up, have never had the desire to go back to them. I may have to re-read them, but I remember distinctly thinking it was a bit of a shambles with the massive exposition done for no other reason than informing the reader, rather than using a character’s actions. (Like Lyra having stories made up about her life to make it sound more exciting, cept they weren’t)

         I have no problem with some of the concepts, the essential nhilistic view of the gnostics
         (downfall of self unless you are a religious leader) along with the more modern cult-like interpretations, such as belief forming your own heaven have been used in many books I have enjoyed, however he definitely does prescribe a correct reading as he goes through re-iterating each point and Lyra’s interpretation of it.One of my problems was that he takes this one organisation and expands it’s philosophy to cover all others of it’s kind, tarring them all with the same brush if you will. The only beliefs left untarnished by this are the modern nature-worship ones that ‘witches’ et. al. believe in (not the original Celtic tribes or other indigenous ones).

         Just my opinion.

         Reply
         1. 

            ctrlsaltdelete

            November 8, 2019 at 8:32 pm

            Fair enough. For me I thought stuff like the motivations for both Coulter and Asriel were fairly nuanced, both did ultimately want to protect Lyra, though through very different means and very different ideas, but I can see why you might feel their decisions weren’t properly explained. For me they both represented rigid world views that ultimately weren’t compatible with Lyra’s best interests, something they couldn’t see or understand until the end.

            It does make a lot of sense that Lewis was a main influence, and personally I never got into LOTR (loved the Hobbit, but LOTR didn’t do it for me) so for whatever it’s worth my tastes probably align pretty closely with Pullman’s own, so what may be seen as weaknesses in his work might be exactly what I liked about it.

            I don’t personally think it does prescribe the correct reading (though HDM clearly takes aim at the church and larger organisations that prescribe how someone should live their life) but that’s mainly because I’m looking at where Lyra and other ‘good’ characters differ in beliefs, if I were to follow the actions of Lyra and co in the novels rather than the discussions and arguments she had I would probably agree.

            Reply
3. 

   badge

   November 7, 2019 at 2:31 pm

   Despite some good casting (Kidman & Craig as mentioned above) the movie was bad. Hollywood was always going to stuggle with the underlying themes, and would have had a hard time with the eventual climax had the sequels been made.

   HBO/BBC look like they’re doing it right (though a longer series would have been nice). Very exciting.

   Reply