 | Studio: | New Line Cinema |
| Release: | December 7, 2007 | |
| Genre: | Action/Adventure, Drama, Science Fiction/Fantasy and Adaptation | |
| MPAA Rating: | PG-13 for sequences of fantasy violence |
I loved the novel, which is why I had to see this movie. Like most adaptations, a lot of stuff from the novel was cut out. They are little things that probably wouldn't matter in the movie, but in the novel they emphasized the differences between our world and Lyra's world - like Texas being a country separate from the United States (the label "lone star state" makes more sense in their world), and the Church under the title of Magisterium had retained and spread its power over nations.
The pace of most of the movie is slow ... and might actually bore those who are looking for adventure. Although I don't think that the issue of "Dust", which is the root of the trouble Lyra finds herself in, was explained enough in this movie, I also think that the academic discussion of it will add more to the boredom factor. The movie is picture perfect though, and has a good cast.
Kidman played the enigmatic Mrs. Coultier perfectly, although she did not really look like the Coultier described in the novel. Dakota Blue Richards wasn't my idea of Lyra either, but she was feisty enough when the scenes needed her to be... and it is important that Lyra comes across as the girl who always gets into trouble for being too inquisitive. There's even less of Lord Asriel here than in the novel, which makes the character more mysterious.
When it comes to Lee Scoresby, my image of this cowboy was more of the "Marlboro" commercial type, or the rough cowboys Clint Eastwood played. That's because Scoresby was always on the go, and basically lives in his air balloon. I had not thought of Scoresby as the dapper, sheriff type of cowboy I saw in this movie.
On daemons... I don't know if those who didn't read the novel actually grasped that they are souls. It was wonderful how the CGs for daemons were created in this movie. Pan is as cute as I pictured him to be. The artists really studied animals ... it was lifelike when Pan was in the form of a cat and bristling with anger. It was also cool how they showed that Mrs. Coultier controls or hurts other humans by making her golden monkey make a move on their daemons first.
Since we are on the subject of CG animals I must say that Iorek rules! Loved the bear in the novel, love the bear in this movie. The combat scene just rocks! Your heart will truly go to, and cheer for, Iorek as he tries to defeat his bigger adversary. When Iorek's paw is hurt, he hops along and tries to retain balance ... and I find that piece of detail coming from the CG artists great! I don't know why they had to change the name of the bear king from Iofur to Ragnar ... I could only speculate that Iofur is too close to Iorek and therefore confusing.
I did say that most of the story went at a slow pace. It does pick up a bit and climaxes at the battle of Bolvangar ... with Serafina Pekkala's witch clan (I have to emphasize that it is Pekkala's clan that helped Lyra, since in the novel some withches were on the other side) and Gyptians overrunning the facility and saving the kids - including Lyra and her friend Roger. After that, the movie ends abruptly, with promise of more adventure coming from Lyra who intends to "makes things right" - whatever that means for the character (at this juncture in the timeline, she has not yet grasped how much worse the problem is).
This ending is albeit more positive than the novel's ending. In the novel, Lyra joins her father Lord Asriel, believing him to be on the good side since her mother (Mrs. Coultier) and the rest of the Magisterium is after him. Lyra would later feel betrayal when Lord Asriel "kidnaps" Roger when she is asleep, then kills the boy in order to get the big burst of energy he needs for his experiment. Watching the portal between worlds open after the death of Roger, Lyra realizes that her mother and father have similar goals though they may not be on the same side. The promise of more adventure in the novel comes from Lyra's decision to cross the portal on her own and try to find the source of Dust herself.
I don't know if this movie will make enough money to justify making the sequel. The movie has two problems to deal with: (1) a boycott from religious organizations who take offense at the portrayal of the Church in the novel, and make an issue of the author being an atheist; and (2) the novels may have a fanbase that will definitely see the movie, but that fanbase is not as big as that Narnia, Harry Potter, and Lord of the Rings.
The boycott for the Golden Compass is ridiculous in my opinion. The movie has actually toned down the reference to the Church in its portrayal of the Magisterium, and there is little in the movie that encourages atheism.
On the other hand, a boycott on a movie based on the second novel, The Subtle Knife, would be understandable. Pullman's Dark Materials novels are intended to be anti-Narnia. And like the Chronicles of Narnia, where it is not apparent that Aslan is Jesus until one reads the sequel, Pullman's atheism and the heretic elements that religious groups would find offensive are to be encountered by the reader in the second book. Witchcraft in Harry Potter is nothing to compared to what one will find in the Subtle Knife and the Amber Spyglass. The theories presented in the last two books are actually in league with what is "revealed" in Dan Brown's DaVinci Code when it comes to unsettling religious groups. And if we're talking of quality and not merely shock factor, then the Da Vinci "revelations" are crap compared to what Pullman presents in his novels. I must say that if you weather these without losing your faith, then you would end up with stronger faith.
The movie's website is http://www.goldencompassmovie.com/
It has a page where a series of 20 questions will reveal your daemon. I took the "quiz" twice:
Which do you think fits me better:
Alexius - who is solitary, fickle, flexible, passive and spontaneous?:
or Callum? ... who is solitary, modest, fickle, flexible and passive?
No comments:
Post a Comment