His Dark Materials - BBC

>anti-Christian, anti-male, anti-white propaganda.
will boycott

why would Yahwe intervene when we have free will and know the rules?

>he must know when he needs to intervene and at what points.
If the watchmaker has already wounded the clock, he has already prepared all things from the start. There is no need for "intervention" when all things are preordained.
>What does god do day to day then?
The same thing he has done since the dawn of time, sustain Creation

Get fucked, retard

She needs to be on TV more.

>What does God do day to day then?
It doesn't really work like that. He doesn't wake up with a to-do list and, since He's all-knowing, almost certainly doesn't perceive the flow of time as we do.

>He needs to intervene
In fact, he doesn't. Following the crucifixion and resurrection of Jesus, there is no need for God to intervene with anything, since every human has been provided with all the tools and instructions necessary to receive salvation and eternal life. What else do you need?

This
>ppplease watch my atheist propaganda for children
Nah, bro...I'm all set.

She needs to be my GF

What's your evidence for any of this? Your post reads like you're citing something from a fantasy novel.

God knows that a Person gets to their lowest point and prays for help or forgiveness.
He answers it.

If he knows all what we do in our lives, he knows that he answers the call at that time.

So the whole thing is automated?

>since every human has been provided with all the tools and instructions necessary to receive salvation and eternal life. What else do you need?
Personalised instructions!

awfully rude, for an NPC. Who scripted you?

Imagine unironically getting memed into being religious. Pathetic.

No, the only good book was the second, the first was mediocre and the third was shit.

>Personalised instructions!

So
>Accept Jesus as your lord and savior, repent your sins, and follow His teachings as laid-out in the Gospels.
becomes
>user, accept Jesus as your lord and savior, repent your sins, and follow His teachings as laid-out in the Gospels.

Absolute cringe.
Northern Lights > The Amber Spyglass > The Subtle Knife

Attached: tipsfatora.jpg (403x537, 26K)

>The BBC might be full of fags, but they are short on blacks.
Actually watch other programmings on BBC other than the ones that are marketed internationally.
It's full of Blacks and Asians(middle easterners only)

>Imagine unironically getting memed into being religious. Pathetic.

Attached: the_quote_of_the_sophisticated_gentleman.jpg (332x396, 34K)

So what's that picture supposed to mean? Does that prove that Christianity is right, somehow?

Look at it. No matter which way you bend on free will, divine intervention is unnecessary.

Besides, one of the most defining characteristics of the Christian God is his immutability. God is incapable of changing his mind, so you can't really have a divine intervention in the sense of "God suddenly decides to save you from a car crash" because he already knew you weren't going to die in said car crash from the moment the universe was created. God spans all of time. If the history of the universe was a book, God would be simultaneously reading all pages at the same time, while we are going through it from page to page.
But again this is on the basis that "divine intervention" here means "God changes his mind and chooses to save you from a moment of peril"

>The Amber "will and lyra blindly stumble through resolving the plot of these lousy books and we pretend the disgusting mustafas matter" Spyglass being over anything

filming ended two months ago

You're saying that people have an epiphany or religious experience/or contact with god, it's preordained and he isn't involved with that right in that moment?

They way overrespresent blacks because they are doing it in response to shrieking twitter mobs. Those people take all their cultural cues from American websites rather than reality, so poos and chinks are basically invisible to them.

>What does god do day to day then?
He makes sure the pre-ordained (by him) number of babies are born already suffering from terminal medical issues that make their lives a living hell before their allotted 11 years are up. What an absolute bastard.

Dr Carne is a nigger for some reason. Dropped.

>it's preordained and he isn't involved with that right in that moment?
I mean the birth, life, death and resurrection of Jesus in the first place could be considered Divine Intervention by that definition, so I suppose I must concede.

>it's preordained
yes
>he isn't involved with that right in that moment?
He is involved with all things at all moments

>corny as fuck.
>Just look at Dr Who.
Dr. Who is children's tv show.

aww, did someone take your falafel?

I'm sure they'll notice your boycott and make good all their heinous crimes bwuhahahahaha

There are some Christian groups that hold that, since Jesus delivered the fullness of God's Law, there is no further need for Him to intervene with human affairs and, as such, all claims of miracles, prophesy, angels, devils, etc that occur after the Resurrection are false.

>Who scripted you?
God, apparently. Didn't you know everything is preordained?

Basically he's everywhere, everywhen.

Seems silly to me he just packs up and leaves and doesn't get involved anymore.

>What does god do day to day then?
That is like like asking what a transcended mult-dimensional intelligence capable of changing time and space at a whim will do

And they're disgusting heretics

>British TV: let's just make any random character a nigger and call it a day.

britcucks are forced to pay for this at a gunpoint
the absolute state

can't wait to start lewding this dumb little fucktoy again

Attached: dafne shorts.jpg (423x813, 152K)

Why does it bother you? Was being white somehow important to the original character? It's no different than when they cast someone with the wrong-colored hair.

Fucking rude

>Why does it bother you?
Because it's fake diversity. Taking white stories and replacing white characters with "not-white" characters re-enforces white supremacy by making white "default" and not-white "other".

>white stories
But that goes back to what I was saying - how is it a white story? What does "whiteness" actually have to do with the story of His Dark Materials?

you know what's rude? her not sitting on my dick

Attached: dafne legs.jpg (1000x742, 577K)

It was created by a white man.

you better not shit up discussion threads with this shit

I'm guessing you don't remember or were here for Logan threads.

Attached: 1493796773249.webm (320x320, 2.69M)

A Song of Ice and Fire was written by a fat white man with gray hair. Tyrion the dwarf is supposed to have blonde/gray hair, but in the television adaptation, they cast a dwarf with brown hair. They took a blond hair story and made it brown hair!

You see what I'm saying? You see how absurd that sounds? It's because neither the hair color of the author or the character actually matters - they're not important to the story or the characters.

It does sound a little odd because it's a false equivalence

In what way?

It reeks of forced diversity.

But how does it actually negatively impact the adaptation?

In every way. Your analogy doesn't work.

So you can't be specific?

Yes.

Tyrion's hair and Carne's race are absolutely different standards. One is a detail, the other one is a defining feature like male and female. The difference is day and night, you fool.

It came from a white man's mind.
True diversity would take stories from black people but instead they reenforce white supremacy by nearly always adapting white created stories and tokenizing non-whites.

Only the first book is good. The second is okay, and the third goes high into the writer's own arse.

>puerto rican meme man as the Texan

Gg boys lets try this again in another ten years

>It came from a white man's mind.
I'm sure this is how the author summarizes his career and creative process. He wouldn't find this insulting at all.

No. I am not a fan of tedious allegory.

you keep ignoring the point and taking out phrases.

>One is a detail, the other one is a defining feature like male and female.
Can you justify why that's true? Your perception that differences in skin color are more important than differences in hair color is rooted in your own subjectivity.

A Song of Ice and Fire came from a fat man's mind. If His Dark Materials is a white story, does that make ASoIaF a "fat man story"? Does it really makes sense to take some attribute of any work's author and describe that story as belonging to that attribute?

Can't be worse than the film but I probably won't watch it anyway because I've grown out of children's fiction.

so this is like chronicles of narnia but it sucks ass and is for atheists right?

>It's a racists pretend to care about true diversity in order to stop black people being in tv shows episode

Actually, he's not ignoring the point. You're describing Pullman primarily as "a white man" and his work therefore as "a white work" as if whiteness is Pullman's only attribute and that somehow, his *whiteness* is what made the story what it was.

>Can you justify why that's true? Your perception that differences in skin color are more important than differences in hair color is rooted in your own subjectivity.
Race is more than just skin colour. Don't spread this meme.

If they don't respect the source material enough to keep the characters the way they are in the books then they're not going to care about changing the story around either. See: The Dark Tower film. The main character from The Dark Tower being a white male actually plays an important role early on in the story, but the people who made the film said FUCK THAT and cast a black guy to play him and the rest of the movie was a godawful dumpster fire.

Yea it's like Narnia but atheist instead of Christian.

ummm let's go back to dafne keen

Attached: dafne-keen-on-set-of-ana-in-puerto-rico.jpg (2282x1200, 1.28M)

you're assuming god works like a human
if he exists then he probably doesn't

Oh the Wolverina is this? I didn't know.

Sure, there are also a few differences in skeletal structure. But beyond that? Nothing. But my real point, which I think I finally articulated, is . How does Pullman being a white man make His Dark Materials a white work? Is the story somehow rooted in and defined by whiteness?

But characters are so much more than their appearance. In fact, most people would argue that a character's character usually isn't tied to their appearance at all. Aragorn could have had any color hair. Luke Skywalker could have been Asian. These things wouldn't have impacted who the characters actually are, and my point is that an adaptation should focus on adapting who the characters are - not what they look like.
>The Dark Tower
I've read the series and Elba is a legitimately good Roland. It's not his fault the movie was shite.

>Sure, there are also a few differences in skeletal structure. But beyond that? Nothing.
And eye colours, and hair, and noses, and and voice, and genitalia, and odor. Basically completely different individuals.

yeah she's in the show

Attached: 42598651_2719643588260175_7810274749498196543_n.jpg (1080x1081, 154K)

Alright, and how is His Dark Materials rooted in whiteness? It takes place in Europe, but there are black people in Europe.

>But characters are so much more than their appearance. In fact, most people would argue that a character's character usually isn't tied to their appearance at all. Aragorn could have had any color hair. Luke Skywalker could have been Asian. These things wouldn't have impacted who the characters actually are, and my point is that an adaptation should focus on adapting who the characters are - not what they look like.
Then you should want whatever the characters are from the source material to remain the same as the author intended.
>I've read the series and Elba is a legitimately good Roland. It's not his fault the movie was shite.
The movie was shit because the writers didn't care about shitting all over Roland so they didn't care about shitting all over the story either. I've already explained this: the vast majority of the time when adaptions switch the race or gender of a character from the source material it's for political/ideological reasons. And if they're willing to shit on the characters like then they're more than willing to shit on the story as well.

If it were written by a black man and black characters were replaced by white characters you wouldn't be defending this. Black achievements are black achievements.
White achievements = why does it matter that he's white it's everyone's achievement

Changes from the source material are supposed to be justified, not the other way around.
>It takes place in Europe, but there are black people in Europe.
Missing the point.

>Then you should want whatever the characters are from the source material to remain the same as the author intended.
But you're still missing my point - the *character* is who they are internally, not they're appearance. I want their character to remain intact. Their appearance is much less important.
>The movie was shit because the writers didn't care about shitting all over Roland so they didn't care about shitting all over the story either
You're right, but that has nothing to do with Roland having been black.

I personally wouldn't care. Flipping it around and (mistakenly) presupposing that I'd treat the two situations on a double standard isn't an argument.

Then what's the point?

>I personally wouldn't care.
Not an argument

>my point is that an adaptation should focus on adapting who the characters are - not what they look like
Liberal propaganda.

Why do you feel so persecuted, user?

Your entire "argument" in was that I would think differently if the situation were reversed. That's a false assumption, and doesn't respond to .

This is just how dramatic storytelling works, mate. It's an old rule that characters are defined by who they are inside - what their struggles are, what their flaws are, what their goals are, etc. Cringe on you.

>Then what's the point?
The point is that they changed the original race of an established character in order to appeal to some diversity utopia and being politically correct. They made an aesthetic and fundamental change for mere political reasons.

And that goes back to the entire point. How is it a "fundamental change"? How does a character being black *fundamentally impact* the story?

I didn't post anything you responded to in >110431560
And if you think injecting a white person into a black story told by a black storyteller would in any way be received decently you are a fool

>This is just how dramatic storytelling works, mate. It's an old rule that characters are defined by who they are inside - what their struggles are, what their flaws are, what their goals are, etc. Cringe on you
So Jim the Nigger from Huckleberry Finn could've been a Japanese guy? Judge Holden from Blood Meridian could've been a Mexican? All the cast from Les Misérables could've been Indians? Macbeth could've been an African American? Don't take your narrative to retarded levels. A character's appearence and origins are fundamental.

>atheist propaganda
Literally all life is connected together by Dust. If that doesn't strike you as theological then you're a cretin.

>The BBC might be full of fags, but they are short on blacks.

Not when it came to finding boyfriends for the doctor's white, female companions.

It's supposed to be set in a Victorian-era kind of England, not in diverse 21st century England. It changes everything.

How it would be received isn't part of this discussion. Just like a white man being cast in an adaptation of a story written by a black man wouldn't actually negatively impact the story unless that character's race was somehow important, a black man being cast in an adaptation of a story written by a white man wouldn't be important either.

Jim's race was important because it informed his relation to the rest of the characters and to Huck - his role in the story is shaped by the socioecomomic status of black people at the time. Can you say the same about Carne? No, you can't. He's just a guy at the College.

I'm serious, how dumb are you? Why don't these things occur to you? That response appeared in my head a split second after I finished reading your post. Why didn't you think of it yourself?

It's set in steampunk 21st century England. Not quite the same as our Victorian England.

>the *character* is who they are internally, not they're appearance
If you ignore reality then sure. But the idea of a black James Bond globe-trotting all over the place and people treating him as if he weren't black is the most absurd bullshit imaginable. I know that's not an example you used, but there are plenty of people out there using the same argument you're using to turn James Bond black and it just wouldn't make work AT ALL unless they completely ignore reality.

>It's set in steampunk 21st century England.
So they changed the setting just to please politics? lmao

>You're right, but that has nothing to do with Roland having been black.
Yes it does because they made him black because they WANTED him to be black: not because they couldn't find any actual white actors to play him. They consciously made that decision to ignore the role Roland being a white male played in the story for ideological reasons and once they did that they also stopped caring about the story.

You just know

>Jim's race was important because it informed his relation to the rest of the characters and to Huck - his role in the story is shaped by the socioecomomic status of black people at the time. Can you say the same about Carne? No, you can't. He's just a guy at the College.
So race IS actually important, except when it comes to muh diversity, then it's just "like the hair colour xddd". Absolutely disgusting thinking. Consider suicide.

I want those dark materials in my mouth

>
>part of this discussion isn't part of this discussion
>Just like a white man being cast in an adaptation of a story written by a black man wouldn't actually negatively impact the story unless that character's race was somehow important, a black man being cast in an adaptation of a story written by a white man wouldn't be important either.
So false. What a terrible opinion to hold.

>I know that's not an example you used
You're right, it's not.

The novel is set in 21st century steampunk England, braniac. Lyra's entire world works differently - there are aspects of Victorian England, but there are also talking polar bears.

You're basically pointing out that casting a black man as Roland was "forced diversity" - you're right, and that's not something I'm contesting. I'm contesting that Roland being black somehow hurt the story or the character.

Appearance can be important, but it isn't always. Let's look at two non-race examples from A Song of Ice and Fire (I know I keep bringing it up). Tyrion's appearance is important because it limits him physically, it makes him a source of shame for the Lannisters, it drives him to make his mind his weapon since his body is crippled, etc. Ned's appearance, by contrast, isn't important - rather, his innate obsession with things like honor and duty are.

No argument in this post.

>I'm contesting that Roland being black somehow hurt the story or the character.
It DID hurt the character and the story because if you've read the books like you claimed then you know Roland being a white man played a very important role in the characterization of a very important character. I know she's not in the movie, but that's my point: once they made Roland black they stopped giving a shit about making the story good. It's all wrapped up in the same package.

>then you know Roland being a white man played a very important role in the characterization of a very important character?
Except it didn't - unless you can explain how it did. Maybe you could stop saying "Roland being white is important!" and just explain why him being white is important?

>Appearance can be important, but it isn't always.
Backpedaling this hard. Now appareace "can be important" lmao @ your life

>Ned's appearance, by contrast, isn't important - rather, his innate obsession with things like honor and duty are.
Ned Stark's appearence is also important. He's supposed to look like the First Men and the author gives a particular description about him. It would've been historically innacurate (inside the ASOIAF universe) to portray him as Nigger Jim just because some faggot on Yea Forums(nel) says so.

does his dark materials refer to idris elba's dick

Attached: 1550520741068.png (488x488, 193K)

There's no backpedaling here. I've consistently told you that internal character is what's important - and in some cases, outward appearance can impact internal character - in Tyrion's case, it does. In Ned's case, it doesn't.
>He's supposed to look like the First Men
He's supposed to look like his family - long-faced and solemn. That's how the Starks are portrayed. There's really no indication that he or any of the Starks are supposed to look like the first men - Robb certainly doesn't, as GRRM points out.

kek

>/r/atheism propaganda

Attached: 30611C8F-0E06-4B8F-AA68-A196BC1190DE.png (446x435, 79K)

And to elaborate, the Starks are given a certain stoic, cold "northern" attitude - Robb and Ned both have it, despite looking different. They're defined by their attitude and leadership style, not appearance.

>t. psychic consigned to the hebdomad

This could use more work

His Dark Materials peaks in the first 50 pages.

That is not good.

>There's no backpedaling here
There totally is, though. You said appearence wasn't important and now you're saying it can be important. There's a shift there.
>I've consistently told you that internal character is what's important - and in some cases, outward appearance can impact internal character - in Tyrion's case, it does. In Ned's case, it doesn't.
I'm not saying the inner being is not important. I'm saying both inner and the outer being are fundamental. Thinking otherwise is simply retarded.
>He's supposed to look like the First Men.He's supposed to look like his family - long-faced and solemn. That's how the Starks are portrayed. There's really no indication that he or any of the Starks are supposed to look like the first men - Robb certainly doesn't, as GRRM points out.
Yea, but he's not supposed to look like a round-faced fat black man, does he? Which exactly the point I'm making

This is one of my favorite YA fantasy trilogies of all time. Fuck, I forgot this was coming out, can't wait for this shit.

Maybe it's because I've grown up on JRPGs and it's cliched as fuck by why do people go on an on about how anti-religion these books are?

the not-Catholics were led by someone pretending to be an archangel who ruled by imprisoning somone pretending to be god. It even implies that there's a real god

Outside of the church being the baddies it doesn't really shit on religion all that much.

Isn't the whole point of the story abour two kids on their way to kill God or something?

I thought it would be a sequel to Garth Marenghis' Dark Place.

What's funny is that Philip Pullman more than likely doesn't even give a shit.

Sounds like a British person wrote this book.

>American DVD release
>never
Fuck...the commentary tracks and bonus features were KíÑo

>all of a sudden Yea Forums is super religious

>avoiding babby's first atheist propaganda = super religious
You're a brainlet.

Lyla's father wants to kill him. Kyla herself is just being led by The Dust.

Major spoilers:

God is just some ancient being that got mistaken for god and is so old that he basically evaporated when freed from his prison

>the not-Catholics were led by someone pretending to be an archangel who ruled by imprisoning somone pretending to be god. It even implies that there's a real god

Sounds like it's more Gnostic than atheist.

>internet goes crazy about them slightly downplaying the anti religion aspect in the movie
>internet is completely silent about them trying to remove as much of the Christian themes from Chronicles of Narnia as possible

The books have different protagonists for each one?

>avoiding some of the only YA books with any real substance
You're a brainlet.

>only YA books with any real substance
Holy crap, you have a very low bar.

There are two protagonists, second is introduced in the second book.

>internet is completely silent about them trying to remove as much of the Christian themes from Chronicles of Narnia as possible
You're joking right? NETFLIX isn't doing that right?

>Holy crap, you have a very low bar.
Name 5 other YA books that have as much to say or that have any real depth.

They tried pretty hard in the Disney films. There's only so much you can strip away and keep the plot intact though

Captain underpants
/thread

What are the odds of Harry Potter being done/remade as a BBC series. One that follows the books more closely, since the likelihood of director's cut versions of movies 3-8 seem very unlikely.

I've been holding out on buying the HP films in the event of an inevitable re-release of an extended cut a-la LotR.

Just admit that you've lost and I have won.