Review of Season One of "His Dark Materials"

Season one of His Dark Materials, based on The Northern Lights/The Golden Compass by Philip Pullman has completed its run on the BBC and on HBO, and they didn’t alter the ending! Overall, season one was a great adaptation to the books and some of the “fillers” worked well for the narrative that was presented to the audience. Readers got to enjoy scenes that were denied to them from the 2007 movie and viewers were able to grasp the demeanor of all of the characters thanks to both the actors’ portrayals of the characters and the “fillers” which were added for additional context. 

            It should be mentioned that the TV mini-series was a better adaptation than the movie, but this is due to the fact that neither the studios, nor the test audience (these are based on rumors, which have circulated over and over again) interfered with the editing of the series. The order of the events presented matched the way they occurred in the books, the “true” ending of season one ended the way it does in the books, and the revelations of what was happening to the missing children weren’t glossed over. Yes, the movie did get a lot of things right, and those were repeated in the series, but the TV series is more in tandem with the books.

            The issues I have with the series so far should be mentioned as well. First, is the aging up of some of the younger characters. Lyra, Roger, and Billy were all close to the age of the characters they portrayed (between 10 and 12 years-old), but Will Parry was aged up to 15 years-old (he’s around 12-13 years-old when readers first meet him). I want to say this was because of the age of the actor who is portraying Will, but it’s difficult to determine whether or not this is the case. Yes, there have been some cases in which the age of the character(s) have been altered due to the actors that play them, but there have been even more examples of when it’s happened because the studio(s) believe it’ll make the narrative “more believable.” If it’s the former, then I have no complaint; but if it’s the latter, then they should stop making it so obvious. 

            Next, were the ways the proximity of daemons were presented to the viewers. While in the books, it is unclear what the actual distance a human can be “away” from their daemon, it is clear that the proximity has to be very close in order for human and daemon to maintain their bond and their lives. However, there are moments when the proximity is unclear and that is due to the way some of daemons are presented. Sometimes they are far enough for the individual not to experience pain, and then they are so far away that you wonder whether or not they could be similar to a witch’s daemon. I hope the network and the studio corrects this misconception for season two because it became very confusing between each episode. 

            Last, was the way Dust is presented throughout the season. The mystery of Dust was portrayed better than the knowledge of it. The explanation provided in the season finale is straight from the books, but the “danger” of someone outside of Jordan College and the Magisterium having knowledge of what Dust is—which, was presented better in the movie—wasn’t demonstrated in the series the way it should have been, in my opinion. Then again, Dust is supposed to be remain a mystery throughout the series until the end. 

            Besides the casting and the special effects, there were several things that I enjoyed about season one from the titles of the episodes—based on chapters in the books—to the way the parental figures were portrayed in the series. Presenting both Mrs. Coulter and Mrs. Parry as “damaged” individuals who try to balance their demeanor with their desire to be mothers to their children was presented extremely well. The issue of succession and power amongst the panserbjørne and the Magisterium—which, are both essential to the plot of the story—were presented (with the details given throughout the books) with the hypocrisy immensely. And, the motives of Lord Asriel and his reasons for doing everything he does comes back full circle. Lord Asriel is what keeps the narrative moving along and the series makes sure that the viewers do not forget it. Yet, it was Ruth Wilson’s portrayal of Mrs. Coulter that grasped the viewers’ attention the most. 

            Overall, season one of His Dark Materials was the adaptation fans of the books waited for patiently, and the wait was worth it. All of the details that were omitted from the 2007 movie were included, the pacing matched the books and were appropriate for a TV mini-series, and the inclusion of source material from other books in the Philip Pullman’s universe—both The Book of Dust and The Subtle Knife—enriched the narrative more than expected and it worked well for the audience, both readers and viewers. Season two was announced by the BBC (with HBO promising to continue showing the series in the U.S.), which is great because this news is what book fans have been waiting for the most! The adaptation of The Subtle Knife will not only continue Lyra’s story, but also continue the narrative from the multiple cliffhangers this time around. Yes, the books should be read, but knowing that the mini-series will continue makes book fans as excited as the viewers more than anyone else can imagine! 

If you want the reviews of each episode, then you can click on each of the episode titles below:

S1, Ep.1: Lyra’s Jordan

S1, Ep. 2: The Idea of North

S1, Ep. 3: The Spies

S1, Ep. 4: Armour

S1, Ep. 5: The Lost Boy

S1, Ep. 6: The Daemon-Cages

S1, Ep. 7: The Fight to the Death

S1, Ep. 8: Betrayal

My Rating: 8.5 out of 10! 

Who or What Is Shireen Baratheon supposed to be?

(Please Note: Spoilers from A Song of Ice and Fire series are found within this essay.)

Most of us has read, heard, or seen a version of The Iliad. The blind poet, Homer, is credited for compiling the epic tale of the Trojan War. The film, Troy (2004), has Achilles played by Brad Pitt, Sean Bean as Odysseus, and Orlando Bloom as Paris. However, like other media adaptations of literary and oral stories, little details are often left out. If one saw Helen of Troy (2003), then he or she would see more of what was part of the story.

Besides the backstory of how Helen became the pawn of the Trojan War, the audience saw more of what was happening within the kingdom of Sparta. For example, both Helen and her twin sister Clytemnestra marry brothers Menelaus and Agamemnon respectively. Helen and Menelaus have one daughter, Hermione; and Clytemnestra and Agamemnon have four children. One of who is their daughter, Iphigenia.

Iphigenia was the daughter who was sacrificed by her father in order to appease the goddess Artemis for favorable winds in order to sail to Troy. While it is unclear on the exact age of Iphigenia, the truth remains that the sacrifice brought the Greek Army to Troy. At the same time, Clytemnestra vowed vengeance against her husband for what he did to their daughter. The Trojan War lasted for 9 years with the Greeks sieging and destroying Troy. Helen returned to Sparta with her husband, and Agamemnon returned to Mycenae with Cassandra, the prophetess sister of Paris, as his prize. Soon after, Clytemnestra and her lover, Aegisthus, killed both Agamemnon and Cassandra as retaliation for Iphigenia’s death.

Shireen Baratheon is the daughter and only child of Stannis Baratheon and Selyse Florent. She almost died from grayscale and it left her disfigured. However, she is often described as being a sweet child. Her parents have renounced their religion of the Faith of the Seven and become worshippers of the Lord of Light, a religion from Essos, whose priestess is Melisandre, who is convinced that Stannis is the prophesized hero, Azor Ahai. While Stannis and Melisandre campaign throughout Westeros, Shireen is left at Dragonstone with her mother; her cousin, Edric Storm (a bastard); and her fool, Patchface.

Stannis’ campaign has led him to use dark magic provided by Melisandre. This magic had killed his brother, Renly; Cortnay Penrose, a guardian of Edric Storm and Renly’s castellan; and, Maester Cressen. However, Stannis believes that the magic has assisted him so far with “removing” his adversaries, and was considering sacrificing his brother’s bastard son until Davos Seaworth, his Hand, smuggled him out of Westeros. This was because Melisandre believed that “king’s blood” would “wake the dragons from stone” which would prove and provide Stannis’ status as King of the Seven Kingdoms.

King Robert Baratheon had sixteen bastard children, most of who were killed on the orders of Queen Cersei Lannister—to hide her infidelities and the parentage of her children. In addition to Edric Storm, only Mya Stone, Gendry, and Bella are what remain of the bastards. However, those who are looking for them do not know where they are in Westeros. So, what does this mean for Stannis and his “blood sacrifice” for dragons?

I believe you see where this is going based on what I started with, but that is because the series author, George R.R. Martin, has admitted that Greek and Roman mythology are huge influences in A Song of Ice and Fire. Additionally, there was some foreshadowing about what might happen to Shireen in A Dance with Dragons. It was when the wildling Val told Jon Snow that Shireen was “unclean” and should be killed due to her grayscale. It was then that Jon Snow observes that Queen Selyse is fond of Shireen, but like her husband, would put their efforts for the crown before their family’s well being if the Melisandre told them to.

The story of Azor Ahai states that when the hero forged his sword for the third time, he drove it into the thing he loved most, his wife, Nissa Nissa, and the sword was named “Lightbringer.” It was then that Azor Ahai was able to defeat the Others, their creatures, and the “Long Night.” Sounds very much like the story of Agamemnon and his daughter, Iphigenia.

Now, Selyse, Shireen, and Melisandre are at Castle Black while Stannis continues his campaign to get support from the Northerners. Between the wildings’ beliefs and Melisandre’s visions, Shireen’s chances for survival are looking grim. Victory for the Baratheons is starting to outweigh rational thinking, and even Melisandre does not understand some of the visions she has been receiving. Melisandre says that “king’s blood” will raise the dragons and give Stannis the power that he needs. All that is left of Stannis’ blood—as far as he knows—is his daughter, Shireen. Does Stannis reflect Agamemnon? Is Shireen supposed to be Iphigenia?

There are two more books and several character plots that are neither complete nor revealed. There is a possibility that Stannis will gain support from the North. There is a possibility that Melisandre is wrong about who the reincarnation of Azor Ahai really is. All the same, no one knows what to expect from a novel written by George R.R. Martin. And yet, I believe that Shireen Baratheon is going to end up becoming a sacrifice for someone whether or not anyone wants to believe otherwise. Remember, the sword is a fake!

Knowing What to Love on Valentine’s Day

Valentine’s Day is supposed to be a day about (courtly) love. However, it started off as an acknowledgement to a man who—during the Roman Empire—was jailed for performing forbidden marriages. In other words, Saint Valentine of Rome was jailed for performing acts of rebellion that he believed was the right thing to do. How many other people in human history have died for the same thing? Please note that February is Black History Month.

Today, a shooting in Denmark occurred because there Lars Wilks, a cartoonist from Sweden—who depicted a parodied version of Mohammed—, was attending a forum about free press. Today’s Denmark shootings are a reminder of what occurred in France 3 weeks ago! Apparently, al-Qaeda has a “Most Wanted” list which Stephane Charbonnier, Terry Jones, and Salman Rushdie are on, which is why this shooting occurred. It makes you wonder if Trey Parker and Matt Stone have a secret to all the mocking and avoiding they’ve done over the years.

This year for Valentine’s Day, in addition to reminding ourselves of who we love, we should also take time to recall what we love. At the moment, simple joys of life are costing us simple joys of love. Freedom of religion, press, and happiness are being taken away by a few who believe that one group deserves more than another group. Parodies and insults have existed for millennia, but societies forget how to take a joke, or even when something needs to be mentioned through comedic jokes. South Park and Family Guy are still on T.V. for a reason. Humor cartoonists and comedians are a necessity that we forget we need until something tragic happens. Practicing one’s religion in peace is a given right, but there is more about the few who causes harm while claiming that it is what their religion preaches.

Earlier this week, madman Craig Stephen Hicks shot and killed three college students in North Carolina “after a dispute over a parking space.” Just like the victims’ families—and to the rational mind—no one actually believes that is what happened. Those innocent people were killed because they were practicing Muslims. There is a federal investigation taking place, but who knows what conclusions will be revealed. At the same time, there has been no recent news about John Crawford and/or Tamir Rice. And, several States are attempting to overturn gay marriage.

I think it is time to look again at what is happening in the world and remind ourselves what would happen if we did not have the rights that everyone throughout the world is trying to hold on to. Yes, the world wants to fight ISIL/ISIS and their extreme radical notions, but in the United States, we are killing and segregating people due to their religious beliefs and/or physical appearances. Yes, the Islamic faith does not believe in there being a physical depiction of their prophet, but death threats and assassination attempts are not the answer. Then again, the scandal surrounding #GamerGate has not faded from media coverage.

In the United States, it seems no “minority” is safe whether Indian, Black, Muslim, or LGBT. The U.S. got to add Deah Shaddy Barakat, Yusor Mohammad Abu-Salha, and Razan Mohammad Abu-Salha to the “victims’ list,” which already had Trayvon Martin, Medgar Evers, Harvey Milk, and Addie Mae Collins on it. These United States citizens were either living his or her life or trying to make life better for others like themselves. However, people forget that terrorism exists in the United States, too.

So, like the legacy left behind by Saint Valentine, let us remember the different types of love we enjoy in our everyday lives. We get to love each other. We get to love the freedoms—press, religion, and happiness—that are still being fought for each and every day and have cost the lives of so many. Remain vigilant and hopeful! Vigilantism does not and should not involve innocent lives! Remember who and what you love!

Choose: A Movie Based on a Book or Your Religious Beliefs

With The Hobbit movie trilogy ending and with one more The Hunger Games movie left to be released, the public awaits the other movies within the same genre (Book to Film): Insurgent, Fifty Shades of Grey, Child 44, etc. (I will discuss comic books and their media adaptations in another post). While movies based on books are nothing new (i.e. The Exorcist, The Godfather, The Silence of the Lambs), we have been seeing more of them since the turn of the century. Harry Potter, The Lord of the Rings/The Hobbit, Twilight (it makes me cringe to mention that one) are some of the franchises that were the most successful and saw all of the books in the series adapted into movies.

Children’s books are always popular for media adaptations. And, the same can be said bestselling novels. Fans and audiences of both books and movies are always curious as to how the movie will look and how true to the book the movie will be. This is the main issue people often see in media adaptations, but it is NOT the only one. Recently, there have been complaints as to why there have been series in which there is only one movie, and then the rest of the books in the series do not receive the same translation.

Now, with franchises that have had more than one movie adaptation, audiences are wondering whether or not the movies will ever be completed. The Chronicles of Narnia saw three out of their seven books get translated into movies (The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe; Prince Caspian; The Voyage of the Dawn Treader). However, the actors were also signed to doing an adaptation of The Silver Chair; and, as we figured out, the movie never got made.

Ironically, the situation surrounding The Chronicles of Narnia was not just about public and studio interest, but also about the religious overtones found within the remaining novels. The Magician’s Nephew, The Horse and His Boy, and The Last Battle all contain allegories and allusions to Christianity. C.S. Lewis, the author of the series, also included some mockery of the Islamic faith in those same novels. Many of us who have read those books as children and/or adolescents did not even notice the insult within the pages. However, as adults you tend to look at what is written into children’s books more intensely. I will admit that it was a pastor I know who pointed out to me what was really taking place in the pages of those books. He is a fan of C.S. Lewis, but he said that those insults should not have been placed in a children’s book. Given the fact that there is still a religious war within the Middle East, one can quickly understand why filming those books into movies would be an issue.

On the opposite end, there was the planned movie trilogy based on Phillip Pullman’s His Dark Material trilogy. The Golden Compass/The Northern Lights was a success in North America and Europe, but due to the anti-Christian themes found within the books, the movie was met with several protests. While Phillip Pullman is an atheist, the trilogy is a retelling of the classic work Paradise Lost. Plus, the author is a professor at Oxford University—just like C.S. Lewis was—so there are more allusions within the text that readers might have missed during the first reading.

For instance, “dæmons” are not based on present day society’s belief of “demons.” The former comes from Greek and Roman mythology. They were invisible beings assigned to every individual—masculine for men and feminine for women—who acted as guides for the duration of that person’s life. These dæmons sound more like angels, consciences, etc., not the “evil demons” we have transcribed them to be in modern society. I believe Phillip Pullman used these ancient deities within his novels to point out how much Christian mythology twisted other mythologies to where we forget the actual origins of them. To be honest, I am a little surprise that Rick Riordan did not mention dæmons in his Percy Jackson and the Olympians and The Heroes of Olympus series. Those books were perfect to include such a reference.

This is the scenario that Hollywood has had to deal with, adapting books into films regardless of the backlash they might get due to religious institutions. His Dark Materials halted the series after one movie because too many people called the first movie “anti-Christian” while The Chronicles of Narnia films was halted because people feared that the Muslim community would be offended by them. Other movies have poked fun at religion regardless of the protests and the backlash from society (i.e. the Catholic Church with The DaVinci Code). South Park has mocked all religions for several years (18 seasons), but the creators saw protests when both Islam and Scientology (Isaac Hayes, who voiced “Chef,” quit the show afterwards) were parodied.

Throughout history, many challenged religion with “new” knowledge and these people were either threatened or executed (i.e. Galileo, Sir Isaac Newton, etc.). However, it seems that the bigger concern within the religious powerhouses are how they are portrayed in within society, and it appears that the “new” threat is coming from children’s books. While some of the religious themes will most likely be glanced over by younger readers, it is the adults that make something as trivial as messages within a book to be a big deal. The Harry Potter series, while not religious, was met with several protests throughout the world because the books were about a school of witchcraft. Ironically, all seven books were adapted into eight movies, and those novels contain more lessons on morals and ethics than other modern children’s books. The Chronicles of Narnia and His Dark Materials also contain choices involving morals and ethics, but remain somewhat controversial as well. When you think about it, there is not really that much of a difference amongst these children’s literary series.

Current events within society have allowed us to witness what happens when there is no balance between literacy and religion. Boko Harem and Al-Qaida are doing everything they can to limit knowledge within their communities (especially amongst women). However, we cannot want every popular book to become adapted into a movie. At the same time, we cannot protest against every movie and/or book with influences to religion due to fear that a mob might be opposed to what is written in the text.

My question is: how many of these “protestors” take the time to read the book? Many people go by what they “hear” about the book instead of reading it. Also, it is known that media adaptations are not always similar to the book! Yes, Harry Potter and The DaVinci Code are books that go against organized religion. However, they are also great stories with interesting information. And yet, I did NOT see any petitions for the continuation of The Chronicles of Narnia movies! Protests work both ways!

To me, it looks as if we must choose between literature and their adaptations and our religious beliefs. No decision needs to be made because not many people want to do one or the other. Movies are straightforward, you either want to see them or not. Religion on the other hand, contains more layers. There are the devout, the spiritual, the ones who take part in it a few times a year, etc. Those who are leaders of these foundations assume the worst before they see what happens. Thus, everyone suffers because of it.

To prove my point further, the novel The Satanic Verses is (supposedly) an excellent work of literature (I just started reading it). However, the amount of backlash the book received upon its publication (1988) and the number of death threats its author, Salman Rushdie, received makes the book sound too dangerous to read. And yet, the book has been read and translated into languages all over the world. Unfortunately, no one has tried to make a media adaptation of the book because everyone is afraid of protests from the Muslim community. Has it ever occurred to you that some of them might have read the book and want the same thing as the other fans/readers?

We should not have to choose between the two because both of them have more in common than we know. Both The Bible miniseries and The Red Tent were successful adaptations based on religious texts. However, we also got Exodus, the visually acclaimed, but historically inaccurate adaptation of the story of Moses (Egypt has refused to show the movie for obvious reasons). There should not be a choice because everyone—even if they are in the same religious community—has a different way of interpreting a work of literature. As long as it is done appropriately, no one should have to choose. Plus, the author almost always includes a personal belief within the pages of their book.