The Golden Compass
I just got back from seeing The Golden Compass, don't worry all spoilers will be under the cut. But first I have 2 things to point out.
1. The previews for new movies included the new Narnia movie, Prince Caspian the irony of previewing a Narnia movie at a Pullman film was not lost on me. Although I don't think it was accidental either.
And 2. After the end of the movie I was talking to my dad about the way it ended (movie vs book ending and so on) and this guy in the front row turned around to educate us that the movie was really the first part in a "tri-ology." Yes, not a trilogy but a tri-ology. Pronounced like biology. I was almost struck speechless.... and I say almost because it's distinctly possible that I referred to the man as a moron under my breath.
Anyways the rest is cut for spoilers of the movie and book because I will be comparing the two. The book is clearly better, please read it, and then read The Subtle Knife and The Amber Spyglass. It's a fantastic trilogy and these are amoung my most favourite books.
Visually the movie is perfect. There was not one building, set, prop, character, costume or anything at all that I saw and thought "hey that's not at all what I thought that looked like." Total win on that front. Casting was flawless. Even though Miss. Coulter in the books has dark hair Nicole Kidman is so perfect in the role I had no issue with her being blonde in the role.
I'm also guessing that they had Dakota Blue Richards (Lyra) did some work learning Miss Coulter-esque mannerisms with Nicole Kidman because there were moments when they physically mirrored each other. Very well done I think.
Iorek Byrnison was fantasic! One of my favourites. I was also glad to see that while some of the gore was cut out of the bear fight they still were able to leave enough of the fierceness in to keep it feeling raw and scary and real.
The interactions with daemons and people and daemons with each other was fantastic. The effects were amazing. I think one part I found striking so to speak was when Miss Coulter gets angry and slaps her daemon and then when we're shown a side view of her face there's a faint handprint on it. Great work showing the concept of how daemons and their human are so closely linked. Of course that would have been far more effective had we not had it spelled out to us in the first few moments of the film with Pan telling Lyra "if you're slapped I feel it too."
The movie as a whole glosses over a lot of the story. Partly because of length (although I think they certainly could have added another 30 minutes easily and could have filled in a little more plot) and of course partly because a lot of the religious aspects of the story had to be toned down so as to not offend people who I think will probably be offended anyways but who will look like they're reacting over pretty much nothing.
Some of the changes in the movie worked well. For example having Billy Costa taking on the role of Tony with his Ratter. In a film it gave more meaning to finding a severed child because he was one the audience already had been introduced to.
I also liked that Lyra destroyed the lab at Bolvangar. That was brilliant, very Lyra. It works well on film, has that extra movie drama, and yet stayed true to the character and plot.
However there were some odd things changed which made no sense. Iofur's name being changed to be Ragnar. I read in an article earlier that this was being done because it was thought the audience wouldn't be able to differentiate between the names and it would have been "confusing." I guess thiis thought comes from the same great minds who felt that Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone would be confusing and changed the title to Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone. My thought on the matter is that if we keep dumbing things down so that people won't have to challenge themselves to figure things out then really we're doing them a disservice. If people have to think to figure things out then they'll learn to think and might start challenging themselves. Far out idea I know ;)
I also wanted to see Kaisa, Serafina Pekkala's daemon, he did not appear at all unless he was somewhere in the final battle. Odd choice to talk so much about witche's daemons, it was mentioned a few times how they don't have to be near etc, but yet we never saw one.
**ETA** It also just occured to me that the intercision process in the movie is only really shown as a punishment for the kids. Billy Costa is shown being rude and then he's seperated from his daemon. Lyra is caught spying, same thing, it's shown as a punishment. Now what was there but not mentioned was that Billy Costa's daemon had most likely settled as we never saw it as anything other than a rat in the movie. ... they sort of skirted around the main issue there...**
Having the last two major scenes shown out of order from the book jarred me out of the story. In the book first they go to Bolvangar then to Svalbard and in the film that is reversed. As the movie wraps up before Lyra and Roger reach Lord Asriel it sort of makes sense because there was a bit more of an ending of sorts with the freeing of the children from Bolvangar whereas ending with the bearfight probably would have been even more of an abrupt ending.
As for the ending, cutting off a couple of chapters before the actual end of the book, it was not my most favourite way to end this movie. However, it does make sense as the second and third parts are not yet for sure going to be made into movies pending the backlash from this one and more importantly to the studios, pending how much profit this movie makes. However I almost would have rather have had the ending with the bridge to another world being opened and that being the ending. It is a "to be continued" ending but really the way the movie was left with Lyra and Will flying off to Lord Asriel was still a "too be continued" feeling and it was also really leaving things unresolved. I guess what the audience is supposed to think is that freeing the children was the big finish. But for those who know the stories the real big finish just wasn't there.
I'm torn about it. I sort of get why the decision was made to end the movie in the way in which it ended but I definitely do not like the ending.
I dunno, this will be one I'll have to sit on for a while. However I do want the next two books made into films. I'd be interested to see how they would look visually and as to how the stories would be told. The religious aspects get a lot harder to gloss over, especially in the third story, and I guess that's part of the hold up. My dad said after that he'd buy a lot of merch to support this movie just to see the next two get made lol. I think for now I'll take that stance. I'd like to see the rest and this movie isn't bad, it just doesn't hold up that well plot wise to the book. It's almost like a good introduction to the Pullman books. Hopefully the movie will encourage more people to read the books.
1. The previews for new movies included the new Narnia movie, Prince Caspian the irony of previewing a Narnia movie at a Pullman film was not lost on me. Although I don't think it was accidental either.
And 2. After the end of the movie I was talking to my dad about the way it ended (movie vs book ending and so on) and this guy in the front row turned around to educate us that the movie was really the first part in a "tri-ology." Yes, not a trilogy but a tri-ology. Pronounced like biology. I was almost struck speechless.... and I say almost because it's distinctly possible that I referred to the man as a moron under my breath.
Anyways the rest is cut for spoilers of the movie and book because I will be comparing the two. The book is clearly better, please read it, and then read The Subtle Knife and The Amber Spyglass. It's a fantastic trilogy and these are amoung my most favourite books.
Visually the movie is perfect. There was not one building, set, prop, character, costume or anything at all that I saw and thought "hey that's not at all what I thought that looked like." Total win on that front. Casting was flawless. Even though Miss. Coulter in the books has dark hair Nicole Kidman is so perfect in the role I had no issue with her being blonde in the role.
I'm also guessing that they had Dakota Blue Richards (Lyra) did some work learning Miss Coulter-esque mannerisms with Nicole Kidman because there were moments when they physically mirrored each other. Very well done I think.
Iorek Byrnison was fantasic! One of my favourites. I was also glad to see that while some of the gore was cut out of the bear fight they still were able to leave enough of the fierceness in to keep it feeling raw and scary and real.
The interactions with daemons and people and daemons with each other was fantastic. The effects were amazing. I think one part I found striking so to speak was when Miss Coulter gets angry and slaps her daemon and then when we're shown a side view of her face there's a faint handprint on it. Great work showing the concept of how daemons and their human are so closely linked. Of course that would have been far more effective had we not had it spelled out to us in the first few moments of the film with Pan telling Lyra "if you're slapped I feel it too."
The movie as a whole glosses over a lot of the story. Partly because of length (although I think they certainly could have added another 30 minutes easily and could have filled in a little more plot) and of course partly because a lot of the religious aspects of the story had to be toned down so as to not offend people who I think will probably be offended anyways but who will look like they're reacting over pretty much nothing.
Some of the changes in the movie worked well. For example having Billy Costa taking on the role of Tony with his Ratter. In a film it gave more meaning to finding a severed child because he was one the audience already had been introduced to.
I also liked that Lyra destroyed the lab at Bolvangar. That was brilliant, very Lyra. It works well on film, has that extra movie drama, and yet stayed true to the character and plot.
However there were some odd things changed which made no sense. Iofur's name being changed to be Ragnar. I read in an article earlier that this was being done because it was thought the audience wouldn't be able to differentiate between the names and it would have been "confusing." I guess thiis thought comes from the same great minds who felt that Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone would be confusing and changed the title to Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone. My thought on the matter is that if we keep dumbing things down so that people won't have to challenge themselves to figure things out then really we're doing them a disservice. If people have to think to figure things out then they'll learn to think and might start challenging themselves. Far out idea I know ;)
I also wanted to see Kaisa, Serafina Pekkala's daemon, he did not appear at all unless he was somewhere in the final battle. Odd choice to talk so much about witche's daemons, it was mentioned a few times how they don't have to be near etc, but yet we never saw one.
**ETA** It also just occured to me that the intercision process in the movie is only really shown as a punishment for the kids. Billy Costa is shown being rude and then he's seperated from his daemon. Lyra is caught spying, same thing, it's shown as a punishment. Now what was there but not mentioned was that Billy Costa's daemon had most likely settled as we never saw it as anything other than a rat in the movie. ... they sort of skirted around the main issue there...**
Having the last two major scenes shown out of order from the book jarred me out of the story. In the book first they go to Bolvangar then to Svalbard and in the film that is reversed. As the movie wraps up before Lyra and Roger reach Lord Asriel it sort of makes sense because there was a bit more of an ending of sorts with the freeing of the children from Bolvangar whereas ending with the bearfight probably would have been even more of an abrupt ending.
As for the ending, cutting off a couple of chapters before the actual end of the book, it was not my most favourite way to end this movie. However, it does make sense as the second and third parts are not yet for sure going to be made into movies pending the backlash from this one and more importantly to the studios, pending how much profit this movie makes. However I almost would have rather have had the ending with the bridge to another world being opened and that being the ending. It is a "to be continued" ending but really the way the movie was left with Lyra and Will flying off to Lord Asriel was still a "too be continued" feeling and it was also really leaving things unresolved. I guess what the audience is supposed to think is that freeing the children was the big finish. But for those who know the stories the real big finish just wasn't there.
I'm torn about it. I sort of get why the decision was made to end the movie in the way in which it ended but I definitely do not like the ending.
I dunno, this will be one I'll have to sit on for a while. However I do want the next two books made into films. I'd be interested to see how they would look visually and as to how the stories would be told. The religious aspects get a lot harder to gloss over, especially in the third story, and I guess that's part of the hold up. My dad said after that he'd buy a lot of merch to support this movie just to see the next two get made lol. I think for now I'll take that stance. I'd like to see the rest and this movie isn't bad, it just doesn't hold up that well plot wise to the book. It's almost like a good introduction to the Pullman books. Hopefully the movie will encourage more people to read the books.