The Golden Compass

Playboy

Eglinton wrote: »

Well, after much talk it's finally here. The first in the series of His Dark Materials.

I saw it in Dundrum tonight. I think it was a full house but mind you it took some time to fill.

I'm a HUGE fan of the books but it's a long time since I've read them so they've all kinda merged into one so I was unsure about what exactly would be in this episode.

As you would expect the effects were good. The Daemons are cool. The bears are big and strong.

Dakata Richards is excellent. I had my doubts after watching the trailers. Looked a bit wooden. But no, she really flows. Perfect casting.

The rest of the characters are played well by all the respective actors but don't have much depth.

Now, to the controversial bit - the heresy! There's not much of this in the first book anyway but there was a surprising amount of references to the Authority and free thinking. Good stuff.

There's a lot of info in each book and I guess it's difficult to cram it into a 1.40 flick. I was surprised at how short it was.

Just in case the rest is a spoiler

It ends way before the first book. The part about crossing though the aurora is completely absent. What the ####! BUT IT'S IN THE TRAILER! Have they started work on the second film? It must be a very confusing ending for those who haven't read the book and even more confusing for those who have. It the second two don't get made, I'll be pretty annoyed. And we have to wait a full year.

I predict a lot of people saying it's rubbish (they won't get it till the rest come out) but overall, apart from what I say in the spoiler, it's what I expected and I'm really looking forward to owning the complete box set.

7/10

EDIT: I'm giving it a generous 7/10 because I know it's difficult to set the world alight in a film that really only sets the scene per the book. As a stand alone, it's more of a 4 or 5.

I saw it tonight. Had read about half the first book a couple of years ago but gave up because I couldnt get into it. Movie was really bad imo. Had a really rushed feel to it. Bad character development, no suspense, bad acting, cheesy lines .. overall bad direction. Had the potential to be great but it should have been much longer and with a better director. It just didnt have any magic about it. I thought the Narnia movie was much superior and I didnt really rate that either

Eglinton

Playboy wrote: »

I saw it tonight. Had read about half the first book a couple of years ago but gave up because I couldnt get into it. Movie was really bad imo. Had a really rushed feel to it. Bad character development, no suspense, bad acting, cheesy lines .. overall bad direction. Had the potential to be great but it should have been much longer and with a better director. It just didnt have any magic about it. I thought the Narnia movie was much superior and I didnt really rate that either

Yeah. Having slept on it overnight, I'd kinda agree somewhat with you. As I said though there was a lot of info to explain. I usually don't like voiceovers but this could probably have done with one to get the basics out of the way for each main scene rather than just at the beginning. They could then have concentrated on more character development. Most of these characters though don't really have any role in the first book though. Some people were annoyed that Daniel Craig was hardly in it. But his character got little mention in the first book anyway.

the dee

Not sure if this should be here or not but this is the synopsis cineworld are giving of the film. Is it just me or does this not sound like the book?

"The Golden Compass" is an exciting fantasy adventure, set in an alternative world where people's souls manifest themselves as animals, talking bears fight wars, and Gyptians and witches co-exist. At the center of the story is Lyra, a young girl living among scholars in the hallowed halls of Jordan College, who tears unsupervised through Oxford's motley streets on mad quests for adventure. But Lyra's greatest adventure begins closer to home, the day she hears hushed talk of an extraordinary particle. Microscopic in size, the magical dust- found only in the vast Artic expanse of the North -was rumored to possess profound properties that could unite whole universes. But there are those who fear the particle and will stop at nothing to destroy it. Catapulted into the heart of a terrible struggle, Lyra is forced to seek aid from clans, gyptians, and formidable armored bears. And as she journeys into unbelievable danger, she has not the faintest clue that she alone was destined to win, or to lose, this more-than-mortal battle..."

As far as I remember, Dust was everywhere, giving rise to consciousness. And Lyra was more interested in saving her friend Roger than in finding out about Dust.

Do you think they've changed it a lot? Or are just bad at accurately describing it?

Karl Hungus

To avoid any confusion, some posts here have been moved from Film Reviews.

Lil' Smiler

saw it tonight, really wasn't impressed.

that kid really did my head in, the story seemed to jump all over the place.


was very disappointed as i'd been looking forward to seeing it for a while

Mossy Monk

Lil' Smiler wrote: »

that kid really did my head in, the story seemed to jump all over the place.

This makes up my mind about going to see it. Annoying children should be banned from breathing air.

ixoy

Lil' Smiler wrote: »

that kid really did my head in

I actually thought Dakota did quite a good job of portraying Lyra, who in the story is a little bit of a wild brat with a dash of street cunning.

the story seemed to jump all over the place.

This comes from following a book whose story could not be condensed so quickly. The film needed more breathing room to better bridge the major scenes that the director chose to film.
The book itself has a much better pace - Lyra's journey, for example, takes a lot longer and makes it feel more suitably like a quest. Other scenes are vastly truncated, e.g.

there's much more to the labatory where the intercession kids are and more time is spent there

. Some of the directorial edits make sense but others make the story less coherent and lose some of its charm.

I enjoyed it overall as a decent adaptation, but not a wonderful one. The daemons were done well and most of the characters were well cast, but I think they had to cram too much into the story's length and it did give a feel of jumping from major scene to major scene without the more progressive natural flow that a novel can bring.


was very disappointed as i'd been looking forward to seeing it for a while [/QUOTE]

Mark Hamill

Is it true that there is no mention of the church in it, that its just a totalitarian state. ( if this is true, i don't know how the rest of the books will work,

some of the later characters are angels and even god makes an appearance

The Bollox

Playboy wrote: »

I saw it tonight. Had read about half the first book a couple of years ago but gave up because I couldnt get into it. Movie was really bad imo. Had a really rushed feel to it. Bad character development, no suspense, bad acting, cheesy lines .. overall bad direction. Had the potential to be great but it should have been much longer and with a better director. It just didnt have any magic about it. I thought the Narnia movie was much superior and I didnt really rate that either

QFT. watched it tonight and it was a snorefest. they took LOTR and Harry Potter, added a sprinkle of The Animals Of Farthing wood and charred for 1:40. terrible acting all round, not one of the 'big names' shone (I was appawled by Craig, the rest I didn't have high hopes for anyway).

I was never a fan of the books, I tried reading them a few times and never could get into them, so that could be why I didn't like the story in the film, but that doesn't excuse my other peeves with this flick.

pretty*monster

I hated it, left before the end, which I never do.
The whole thing was rushed and so everything seemed pointless because you didn't have a chance to care about what any of the characters were up to.
Bad acting and bad editing.

Petey2006

Here's what I thought- Golden Compass review

GreenHell

Thought it was alright, filled a few hours like. Story was a bit rushed though.

Smugbug

Had no expectations going in to see this film. Simply to pass a few hours. After watching it I had to say to myself, 'well that passed a few hours'. I will say that I liked the whole idea with the demons an' all but after that I got bored. Some of the acting was bad and I thought a bit more imagination could've gone into the way she reads the compass. I think I'll wait for the sequel to be shown on TG4 before I watch it. Disappointed.

Jack Sheehan

This may seem a little immature but did no one else laugh when Iorek said 'You wish...to ride me?'?

I mean Chris Weitz did direct it...

internelligent

THANK YOU! I've been quoting that to a few people and getting a few laughs alright. I'd say there are some confused little ones when they hear everyone else laughing at the comment!:D

Vokes

There were a number of excrutiating lines, wasn't there - the dialogue really was terrible.

Not much more to add to what others have said above, other than it was a pretty bad film all around - the acting and screenplay in particular. And a special mention to the prologue sequence at the start - it really wasn't needed at all - keep some mystery about it ffs.

Ballerina

Jack Sheehan wrote: »

This may seem a little immature but did no one else laugh when Iorek said 'You wish...to ride me?'?

I mean Chris Weitz did direct it...

i was AMAZED when i seemed to be the only person in the cinema who laughed at that.thought it was hilarious, i thought the cinema would erupt with laughter...oh well haha

i thought it was really good,although was a little confused at parts.

i thought Dakota was brilliant in it!overall it was a really good film although i didnt read the books

and for those of you who read the book and were surprised/disapointed by some ways they changed things or showed things then shouldnt you be used to it by now after Harry Potter, Lord of the rings and The de vinci code???stories must be changed for films.....fact

ehhowaya

Originally Posted by Jack Sheehan
This may seem a little immature but did no one else laugh when Iorek said 'You wish...to ride me?'? ---- I laughed my ass off!


I really liked the movie, thought it was really good, mind you I never read the book so I wasn't comparing it. I loved nicole Kidman in it, thought she did the calm and collected evil thing really well and her monkey was scary! Bring on the next one, I can't wait!

Retr0gamer

Ballerina wrote: »

and for those of you who read the book and were surprised/disapointed by some ways they changed things or showed things then shouldnt you be used to it by now after Harry Potter, Lord of the rings and The de vinci code???stories must be changed for films.....fact

It was the fact that the film felt like it was aimed at a very young audience was what got to me, it remained very faithful to the book despite racing through it. The book was a lot more mature and complex.

c0y0te

hmm:rolleyes:

I hadn't read any of the books and had no expectations as such going in, although there had been rumours that this was another LOTR competitor... but having seen the film I have to say it's not in the same league.

The acting was fairly wooden across the board, and for anyone who hasn't read the books the film was a bit rushed, a bit too vague in parts and didn't really hang together to be honest.

Entertaining to be sure and it's fine for a rainy afternoon, but I didn't get any sense it was something special.