The Golden Compass

Post by **eddievalient** » October 25th, 2007, 9:24 pm

Why is it cheating if they thought he was the best guy for the part? I actually want to see the film more now that I know he's involved.

GeorgeC · Post by **GeorgeC** » October 25th, 2007, 11:32 pm

Ben wrote:
Meg wrote:The screenshots haven't really given me anything to look at either, other than Nicole Kidman looking all mischievous and stuff.

Well, that's one way of putting it!

Hopefully she got some Hopi Indians to work on that box office curse of hers...

When's the last time she was in anything that made money?

But yes, she does look mischievous. Musta been photographed in-between Botox treatments.

Post by **Ben** » October 26th, 2007, 9:54 am

Those chicken fillets are looking rather plucky too!

Post by **Dacey** » October 26th, 2007, 10:13 am

eddievalient wrote:Why is it cheating if they thought he was the best guy for the part? I actually want to see the film more now that I know he's involved.

Because the casting of him may seem to obvious too some people. McKellen was already in "The Lord of the Rings", which is what "The Golden Compass" is desperately trying to look like.

Mind you, I don't have a problem at all with McKellen being in it. I'm just saying that some people probably will.

Post by **Ben** » October 26th, 2007, 11:12 am

Here's hoping McKellen helps this beat the box office numbers for the last time Kidman and Craig teamed up!

Post by **Dacey** » October 26th, 2007, 11:52 am

Are you talking about "The Invasion"?

Post by **Ben** » October 26th, 2007, 12:28 pm

Yah. New Line must be very nervous!

Post by **Dacey** » October 26th, 2007, 12:58 pm

True. But, if they want to be optimistic, they can just think about the last time that Daniel Craig and Eva Green were paired together.

Post by **Ben** » October 26th, 2007, 1:29 pm

Touche!

Post by **Vernadyn** » November 27th, 2007, 2:16 pm

According to the official site, it's been rated PG-13 for "sequences of fantasy violence." The book is quite dark at times, but the trailer for the movie made it look like a Happyland PG movie. I guess we'll see how it really is soon.

Post by **Meg** » November 27th, 2007, 4:38 pm

I actually picked up the book a few weeks ago to see if it was any good...Ended up enjoying it, so I guess I'll be seeing this in theaters after all.

I'm glad about the PG-13 rating - I would have been very disappointed if it had only been a PG.

Post by **Whippet Angel** » November 27th, 2007, 11:29 pm

Ack, I'm really looking forward to The Golden Compass, but I'm hoping that I'll be able to sit and enjoy this film for what it is, without being too biased.

I absolutely LOVE Philip Pullman's book, and I'm not expecting the film to be the exact same thing (there wouldn't be any fun in that anyway).

Post by **Dacey** » November 28th, 2007, 10:22 am

Yay for the PG-13 rating!

That's what I was hoping for.

Post by **Whippet Angel** » December 10th, 2007, 11:58 pm

Went and saw this over the weekend. Not bad, but not nearly as good as it could have been.

They really did a wonderful job of representing the book visually. But I felt they could've done a better job at making the story more accessible to those who are not familiar with the books. The pacing was a problem more than anything else.

Not only did they try to cram in way too many details of the story, they made the rather huge mistake of not spending enough time properly explaining the differences of the parallel world in which the story takes place (especially with the concept of dæmons). I went and saw the movie with my boyfriend and one of my roomates, neither of whom had read any of the books. They had a hard time following the story, and at several points, didn't understand what was going on. They both told me afterward that it took over two thirds of the film before they finally understood what a dæmon was!

I'm really hoping things improve with The Subtle Knife. Hopefully they'll note the criticisms from this film, and avoid making the same mistakes. Like I said, the film wasn't too bad.

Post by **Ben** » December 11th, 2007, 1:53 pm

Unfortunately Whippet, with an under $30m opening, it seems this is it for His Dark Materials on film, at least for now.

I watched the extended preview on the Hairspray DVD last night, and have to say I was very underwhelmed. I love this kind of stuff usually, though this is a rare series of books I <I>haven't</I> read, because I just don't find Pullman very interesting as a writer. There isn't the depth there that one might feel is lying beneath the surface the way there is almost unspoken mythology behind the mythology in books by Carroll, Baum, Tolkien, Lewis or even Rowling.

Then I was expecting to like it as a movie only (where I might have read the book later) but the previews and clips I've seen so far indicate a desperate LOTR wannabe, part Narnia, and with some of the dodgiest CGI I've seen since the early Harry Potters.

The fact that the reviews here have suggested Kidman can't act for all the make-up and Botox in her face, that Craig is barely onscreen for 15 minutes and that the kids' acting leaves more than a bit to be desired, and I can't say I'm hearing anything that's going to prompt me to see this before it hits DVD or PPV.

And then there are the disappointing words from fans such as yourself and others who are saying it's a mess from the book. The biggest silly thing they did was with the marketing. Rather than have "HIS DARK MATERIALS" on the posters, as with LOTR or Narnia, or even by calling the movie by its original book title, they've kind of gone out with this odd title that's supposed to get us all excited because it sounds "magical". The Golden Compass? Ooohh, ahhhh. Not as good a word as "Chronicles" is it?

Sorry, I'm not making the point as clearly as I have it in my head, but the title change seems wrong and merely seems to copy the "elaborate object" attempts that others have done much better before.