Genres

Visitors Review

john-4316 2012-05-25 06:22:25

Impressive Special Effects Entertaining Movie

I did not read the book and do not know anything about Pullman. But Idid enjoy the movie The Golden Compass immensely. The special effectsare simply the best I have ever seen, they are absolutely amazing andworth the price of admission. For those who complain that it was notrealistic, I have to agree. Of course it isn't it's a fantasy, a placelocated in a parallel universe to ours where animals "Demons" speakperfect English.The actors did a great job and pulled me into the original story andmade it believable. The action occurs at a good pace so the story flowssmoothly.As I was looking through the IMDb site on The Golden Compass, I couldnot believe how anyone could think this movie is a threat to religiousbelief. This movie is a fantasy. It does not take place on this worldso how can it be against any organized religion? This is a family movieand my kids thoroughly enjoyed the movie as well. So suspend yourbelief in reality for 113 minutes and enjoy the story.

fearless531 2012-05-24 17:17:24

A Faithful Adaptation, and a (Mostly) Exciting Journey

As someone who loves the original books, I felt that the movie wasabout as faithful an adaptation as can be expected given timeconstraints. Most of what was left out or abbreviated did not destroythe overall storyline. I also thought that the actors portrayed thecharacters wonderfully, even those who didn't physically resemble thecharacters in the book perfectly (Nicole Kidman is a blond Ms. Coulterwhile in the book she is a brunette, etc.). I was especially pleasedwith Dakota Blue Richards, who plays Lyra. From the few clips I hadseen in previews, I had mediocre to low expectations, but she was infact a great choice for the part. The scenery/CGI was also quite good(Bolvangar was exactly as I imagined it!).What kept me from giving the movie an even higher rating was that therewere parts of the movie that were a little big slow, as anotherreviewer has commented. I understand that this movie needed to set up alot of information and thus couldn't be action and excitementthroughout, but it was a little choppy in its execution. I felt likethe first LoTR movie did a better job of doing a lot of set-up and backstory but keeping the overall delivery smooth.Finally, *and here are the spoilers* I was more than a little surprisedby the ending. The movie cuts before Lyra visits Lord Asriel and thebridge to another world is created. I imagine it will be used as thebeginning of the second film, but more than a few people in the theaterwere obviously surprised (and perhaps disappointed) when the film endedin a way that may have worked for people who have not read the book,but seemed very abrupt for a person who has read the books and wasexpecting a few more major events to occur in the movie.

badidosh 2012-05-22 22:15:40

Tries to get into as many directions as possible and gets lost along the way

The best thing that can be said about "The Golden Compass" is that it'sa visual spectacle as far as the merging of humans and CGI go, butthat's just about it. Otherwise, this film written and directed byChris Weitz is a perfunctory film that's too eager to cram as much intoa two-hour narrative.I've never read Philip Pullman's novel from which this film was basedso I have no background whatsoever of the universe this fantasy talerevolves around, and it doesn't help that Weitz hastily scampers fromone point to another in expense of proper character development andexposition. And considering the story's rich mythology, it's reallyunfortunate to have a hard time getting into the story.Lyra (newcomer Dakota Richards) is an orphaned girl living in aparallel universe where the Magisterium, an overbearing ideologicalgroup, plans to extend their dictatorial rule to other universes. Whenher best friend is kidnapped by the enigmatic group along with otherchildren for an undisclosed experiment, she sets on a journey to rescuehim. With her on the adventure are, among others, Iorek Byrnison(voiced by Ian McKellen), a talking polar bear; Lee Scoresby (SamElliott), a Texan aeronut; Serafina Pekkala (Eva Green), a queen of thewitches; and Ma Costa (Claire Higgens), a member of a Gyptian familyand mother of a kidnapped child. All the while they are pursued by Mrs.Coulter (Nicole Kidman), head of the Magisterium faction GeneralOblation Board, which is responsible for the kidnappings.Everyone in the cast do their thing well, including under-utilizedDaniel Craig as Lyra's uncle, the Lord Asriel, and the productiondesign and special effects team bring their A-game to the table. Yetthe film feels unfortunately inert. The action scenes don't inspiretension nor awe, and when the climactic battle finally takes place, itdoesn't even reach a sense of grandeur to make up for a lacklusterbuild-up."The Golden Compass" is heralded in local promotional posters as amovie "From the Producers of The Lord of the Rings Trilogy." It wouldbe too harsh to expect of Weitz to deliver a Peter Jackson-type of anepic adventure, but at least it could have been a little more fun. Asit is, this compass tries to get into as many directions as possible,and gets lost along the way.

Black_Heart_Wilbo 2012-05-22 12:03:12

Excellent adaptation

I was of course disappointed with the fact that the original ending wascut. But due to my attention being on the film's production, I had timeto get used to it, and there was little or no disappointment with whatwas actually there on screen. I didn't let what wasn't there spoil thequality of what WAS. I am fully aware that a lot of people were notprepared, but once you hear their reasoning, it does make sense.Pullman himself had a hand in this decision and he was fully consulted.He gave his approval.Something that certainly had a hand in taking this film down a peg wasthe decision to edit it in such a way that certain parts would makelittle sense and the events wouldn't exactly flow. For instance theswapping Bolvanger and Svalbard. It was decisions like this that NewLine made that really helped towards the over-blown budget. However, Ican see why this needed to be done after the ending was removed:Because ending it on a bear fight is obviously not a cliff-hanger, andis probably not climactic enough for it to have been the ending.Something else that shouldn't have happened was the change of Iorek'sback story. Though that is just a little thing that only readers of thebook will be irritated about, and as it does not lessen the richness ofquality of what's on screen.This film, as I said, is very true to the source material. There is theessential plot and the whole feeling of it, which Writer/Director Weitzgot down to a tee. Perfect.The acting was phenomenal, especially from the star of the film, DakotaBlue Richards. For an unknown British actor (because we all have toadmit, our young talent since the beginning of the decade has notreally been all that impressive), Miss Richards is excellent as thetough and inquisitive Lyra Belacqua. She, out of the entire cast, fitsher part best and provides an accurate and believable (though heraccent slips a couple of times, it is impressive for a thirteen yearold girl) on-screen representation of the character us fans have cometo love through reading His Dark Materials. Kidman's acting isbrilliant as usual, perfect as the steely, complex character that isMarisa Coulter. Craig also suits the part of Lord Asriel well, beingjust as assertive and strong of mind as his book counterpart. Otherperfect cast members include Eva Green as Serafina Pekkala and SamElliot as Lee Scoresby.Now Sir Ian McKellen: He is great as Iorek. He got Iorek's characterdown to a tee. But his casting and the removal of Nonso Anozie from theproject was not a good idea, as New Line seem to have thought. I feel Iam not alone in saying that Iorek's part was meant for someone whosevoice we are not all familiar with. But don't get me wrong, Sir IanMckellen is one of my favourite actors, and he is still great in thepart.The visuals were absolutely fantastic. The creators of such creaturesas the Panserbjorne and the Daemons (especially Pantalaimon's polecatform) were very deserving of the Oscar they received. Especiallyconsidering the enormity and complexity of the project they had. Notonly that, but the scenic images such as Svalbard, the North ingeneral, Oxford and London were all incredible and totally believable.The sets and costumes were lavish and accurate to how I'm sure a LOT ofpeople imagined them from the book.The dialogue is one of those problems that doesn't affect everyone.Some fans who read the books (I'm not going to say all, as that isnowhere near true at all) were disappointed with the non-complexity ofthe dialogue and the fact that this film had been marketed forfamilies, not young adults as they wanted. But to be honest, it's hardto promote a film like The Golden Compass and make it look like it'sspecifically for young adults. No such problem would be had with anypotential sequels, due to the content of the stories. But I fear thatNew Line did not exactly help anything by removing any parts of thisfilm that had anything remotely complex, any helpful explanations, anyevents that were shown instead of just told to us with exposition.I say that, but there are quite a few instances, and if you know whereto look, you can find a lot of depth in this film. Especially scenesthat Pullman himself wrote in, such as the part where Marisa Coulterslaps her Daemon. Some people just laughed. Others, who understood whatwas happening, did not.Now, what this film did, as did the book was create a hell of a lot ofquestions. This, I believe, is a lot of the audiences main problem withthe film, and a problem that is not actually a problem, just an attemptat getting people interested and getting people to THINK about things.This film may have been confusing for some, but not for others. When Italk about the others who understood it perfectly, these are the peoplewho realise this is the first story of a trilogy and the people whorealise we are not meant to understand everything just yet. My adviceto the people who got confused would be to read the books, and thenthey would understand why they were "confused".Over all, this film was great fun, a roller-coaster ride of excitementand interest and a chance to see the first part of my favourite booktrilogy get brought to life. With great turns from excellentestablished actors and young unknowns alike, a deep plot (just asinvolving as the book), awesome visuals, and just a fantastic over-allfeel, this film scored high in my list of the best films of 2007.

Matty H 2012-05-20 20:23:32

Great move until end...talk about a BIG hook

Ok, the movie holds up, good story, great effects, lots of feel-good moments, even a drunken bear awww...(go watch) anyway, the end was a decent final battle, yet you were like...ok there is more, but alas it was just the softening of your our movie souls so they could set a very large and clumsy hook for the next movie, it was such a lame ending HONESTLY I was stunned. I actually think I felt worse at this ending then I did after Steven King's The Mist...(just bad in different way) more of ..."oh you dumb movie goer" here is a clunky rusty hook for the next movie"I would have rather have just seen "to be continued" on the screen, then the LAME set up they put on the end. Also, Nicole Kidman, get some EYE DROPS! & your golden monkey looked like an old pervy dude

2012-05-20 13:16:51

The Golden Compas

This review is from: The Golden Compass (Two-Disc Widescreen Edition) (DVD) I received this is good time and in good condition. The movie was very enjoyable and i look forward to seeing the next installment.

Roberto 2012-05-13 05:45:28

Courage and Infamy

The courage to announce 'Earth is not the center of universe", once again! The wickedness of inquisition again! This is just a movie, it says something, whatever. By now we were supposed to learned that people can say anything and a blind trust of our convictions could be the core of evil itself. The movie worth watching, the fact that it is not a supporting cliché of oligarchy makes is courageous and admirable.

filmvisuality 2012-05-12 20:14:10

Disappointing - How Roger Ebert got it all wrong!

Shallow. Disappointing.Not the kind of terms you would have expected from the film thatcritics labelled "a darker, deeper fantasy epic than the "Rings"trilogy, "The Chronicles of Narnia" or the "Potter" films". Thank youRoger Ebert for that quote.What the hell was he thinking? Ebert is basically the most well knowncritic in America, maybe even the world for that matter. He gave it 4stars, the highest rating he ever gives, whilst "The ShawshankRedemption", the film placed at #2 on IMDb's top 250, wallows with 31/2 stars.Come on. Pull your thumb out.This film was essentially rushed and shallow. I myself haven't evenread the books and I can identify that painstakingly clear fact.Everything didn't all make sense - the dust? the parallel world? Don'tworry, that's not a spoiler, that's the opening dialogue! Thecharacters were badly drawn out, some not even at all, actually mostnot at all. The film seemed to be more of a fantasy than the subjectmatter! The structure was bad, the narrative was completely rushed andthe journey seemed as if someone had been skipping the scenes like on aDVD. It all went way too quickly.And then comes the Catholic issue. It's obvious why they are upset butseriously - the film doesn't depict the modern day Vatican, it depictsthe Catholic Church that believed the Earth was flat, the one thatjailed scientists for defying them. Any normal person can differentiatethe both.The positive side however, is the cinematography. Top notch effort.Landscapes were magnificent. If you enjoy all the cinematography infilms - put this one on mute.The casting was well done - Dakota Blue Richards is cute, andsurprisingly less annoying than most kids in film! Daniel Craig and EvaGreen are themselves, Nicole Kidman is OK, gets annoying at somepoints, Ian McKellen is very good as the polar bear and my favourite ofthe film - Sam Elliott.I don't want to be scathing - and both my younger sister and littlecousin loved it - so I'm giving it 5.visuality.

2012-05-08 23:40:41

skip the movie--read the book

A Hollywood studio spent millions of dollars making a movie that sucks the life out of a fantastic book--what a surprise!This movie has a fine cast, lavish production values and great special effects. All it lacks is a soul.By all means, read the book, and the remainder of Pullman's wonderful trilogy. But don't waste your time on this pointless exercise.

mnpollio 2012-05-08 12:43:03

Rousing, visually stunning epic for young adults

Rousing fantasy based on the first in a trilogy of novels for youngadults by Australian writer Philip Pullman centers on the adventures ofa young girl named Lyra Belacqua in a strange parallel universe whichstrikingly combines equal parts Victorian England with futuristictrappings. The mischievous Lyra is housed at a prestigious Britishschool through the auspices of her aloof adventurer/scientist uncle.Her life changes drastically with a series of strange kidnappings ofchildren (including her best friend) and the arrival of the glamorousenigmatic Mrs. Coulter, who arrives determined to whisk Lyra into herbizarre circle. Pullman's novel is an impressively heady mixture ofadventure, betrayals, and philosophical discussions regarding thenature of the soul, the universe and the suppression of knowledge by aquasi-religious/government association – sadly only some of which makesit to the screen in any great detail. The story has been slightlysanitized to avoid offending those who live to be offended and some ofthe film feels rushed. There are a number of moments where a great dealof exposition is unleashed in torrents that leave one gasping to keepup, but one can never accuse the film of being boring. While the filmfails to achieve the scope or impact of The Lord of the Rings trilogy,it is definitely on a par with some of the better Harry Potterspectacles and much better than the eye-catching, but empty Chroniclesof Narnia films. Definitely the film has ambition to spare and despitethe best sanitizing there is still a fierce intelligence pulsingbeneath the surface. Lyra's adventures are always novel and fast-pacedfeaturing encounters with gypsies, spies, narrow escapes, witches,scary scientific/religious experiments, and a journey towards thewintry wastelands of the north, complete with talking polar bears.There are numerous fascinating flourishes, such as each characterhaving a soul/conscience which represents itself as an animal spiritwhich tags along with them to provide advice. One suspects Mrs. Coulteris up to no good as her spirit embodiment is a rather vicious blondmonkey that skulks around on the edge of scenes. The visual effects arequite strong, although the battle sequences do look a bitCGI-influenced, but nowhere near the embarrassing vein of some the lastStar Wars films or the Narnia epics. And extra credit for therefreshing change of having the hero of the film be a young girl ratherthan the tiresomely typical young boy. The cast is aces, although thefilm belongs to Dakota Blue Richards, who manages to be appealing,sympathetic and plucky without ever being sickeningly cute. The voicesof the animals are ably contributed by Freddie Highmore, Kathy Bates,Kristin Scott Thomas, Ian McShane and Ian McKellan, who is perfect forthe polar bear saved by the young girl who then accompanies her on heradventures. Sam Elliott is a lot of fun as a cowboy with a sassyjackrabbit as his spirit who ferries the heroes around on hisdecked-out balloon. Eva Green is striking as a sympathetic witch andDaniel Craig manages to be both bookish and dashing in an all-too-briefrole as the girl's uncle hot on the trail of a earth-shatteringrevelation in the Arctic. Nicole Kidman has never been more strikinglybeautiful and alluring as Mrs. Coulter and manages to craft amulti-layered villainess whose treachery never reaches camp levels andkeeps both the heroine and the audience guessing. Lots of foolishnessaccompanied the film's opening in the US with Catholic associationscrying foul over the film's depiction of organized religion as anoppressive force which tries to suppress knowledge and any contraryideas that it does not like. Proving that irony is not dead, thoseassociations proceeded to en masse try to boycott and suppress thefilm…much like the organized religion in the film that they insisteddid not reflect them in reality. While there was definitely some impactto the film's domestic box office over this, it failed to prevent thefilm from achieving more than $400-million at the box officeinternationally and becoming a hot seller on the DVD market. Sadly itdoes not appear that with the subsequent collapse of New Line Cinemasthat the remainder of Pullman's trilogy will see the light of day – atleast not with this particular cast.

kosmasp 2012-05-04 12:57:07

Maybe we are spoiled or maybe it just isn't good ...

First of I have to say that, as with the Lord of the Rings, I haven'tread the novel(s) to the film here too. So I can't say anything aboutthat or compare anything for that matter. But as with Lord of the Rings(I haven't seen or read for that matter "Narnia" yet) that doesn't meanI can't be entertained.Well in this case it seems impossible a task. It does try to entertain,of course, but it never fully does. When you're doing fantasy moviesthat are aimed more at the younger audiences, it doesn't mean you can'thave anything exciting for adults too (see Stardust). But it's not thatI don't think it will appeal to adults (to most of them anyway), butthat it doesn't even achieve to grab the attention of the youngeraudience. It's incoherent, the pacing is wrong, the villains seem tochange their moods as other change their ... pets (no pun intended).Nicole Kidman seems completely out of place, Mr. "Bond" (Daniel C.) hasan "encounter" with an evil man and doesn't even do anything againsthim (a deliberate choice to make it more family friendly I guess, thegood guys can't be doing revenge stuff or anything like that), just tobe topped by some horrible scenes (pun intended), that might be eventoo gruesome for the target audience. And this inconsistency continueswith the story structure ...There are of course a few good things (Sam Elliot, who almost helpsthis movie into another/better level) and other little things. Butoverall, this is not really something that I can recommend, especiallyif you haven't seen Lord of the Rings or even STARDUST (even if it'sfrenzied) :o)

digital_smurf_burglar 2012-05-03 20:22:38

A huge disappointment

I'm not going to harp on about how much a fan i am of the books(although admittedly when i discovered these way back in the mid/latenineties i was hugely impressed), however due to the fact that this isa screenplay based on the books; i may digress. I'll start how i meanto go on.... on a low note! From the first words uttered of thenarration i knew that this film would be a disappointment. Looking backat l.o.t.r, special effects can indeed be special, however no matterwhat i have heard from film reviewers on T.V, these do disappoint, asdo the costumes and sets. Everything seems just 'fake,' it allresembles the shoddy sets and costumes you see on made for t.vprogrammes (i'm thinking Dr Who or the Indiana Jones Chronicles). Itall seems all a bit too much in place for, example the poor wearingrags that are as clean as the day they were made. There is just no eyefor detail in this movie, all the props LOOK like they were made forthe film, even down to the non CGI buildings. Thats that for thephysical faults with the film. The actual cinematography, the panningof shots and editing would i'm sure would look better should the actualbackgrounds look believable but still it just looks cheaply made andput together by a first year film student. Setting apart Eva Green andSam Elliot who are by far act best parts, all the actors have letthemselves down. I don't expect adults to act as if they believe in thecharacters in a fantasy novel, but even the the children manage to putin more ham than the meat counter at a butchers, even the extra's andminor characters look as if they don't belong. The accents are overexaggerated and so is the delivery. This film could have been so muchmore and it breaks my heart to write all this but this really is anawful picture. Think of the original Harry Potter and also Chroniclesof Narnia, well they beat this hands down. Hopefully like the harryfilms the direction, acting and effects will improve with each film,the only problem is there are only 3 parts to this story where it tookthe producers of Harry Potter double that to get even a watchablemovie. Alarm bells are ringing. To end as i started, the plot line hasmore holes in it than a sieve, the director hasn't even tried to stickto the book, and i'm not sure just how everything is going to fittogether in the end, as in the books, every last detail is relevant anddue to the fact that the director left chunks out and just seemed toadd parts to the story leaves me with the impression that he knew thiswould be his first and last in the series, and that as long as he gotthe film finished it would be somebody else's problem making the followups to tie up loose ends and fill in the gaps. All in all - Don'tbother with this film, read the books and use your imagination. It'llbe far more satisfying and realistic.

shaunissey 2012-04-26 06:50:39

What A Horrible Let Down

This movie was an if for me at first, being that it just seemed likeone of the many quickly thrown together fantasy novels/movies that havesupposed huge followings. However, I found myself sitting there in thetheater, and to be honest, I was somewhat impressed at first, theeffects were very good, and although you can still obviously tell CGIversus live action, very smooth. The actors did a great job with whatthey had, and what they had is what ruined the movie. The script wasrough at best, with randomly thrown together scenes that were leadingtowards an Aha! moment that never came. The whole movie kept building,and the plot kept thickening. However, in the end we are left with asub par battle and more questions than when the movie started.It seems as if the sole purpose for this movie was to be the directorsvehicle for a sequel, as the end comes at a point in the story whichtraditionally would be the arc of the plot, however we end up gettingrolling credits in place of explanation. If there is one thing that Idid actually enjoy in this movie, I will say once again, the animationwas superb, the ice bears were magnificent, and the actors were good,but not even those could save this movie. Unless you have the mentalcapacity of a young child, this film will seem like a huge waste ofyour time and your dollars once the credits roll, and you as I will endup walking out unfulfilled, and ultimately let down.

2012-04-26 03:37:43

FAKE advertisement!

This review is from: The Golden Compass [Blu-ray] (Blu-ray) The Shipping was extremely slow and half week after estimated date, but what really bothers me is that it does not come with the golden extra cover, which was the main reason why I decided to ordered it from Amazon,It only came in a bloody standard blu-ray chase that does not even has the same picture as they announce it. Too cheap looking. This is the second time that they do not deliver the product as they show in their pictures and the last time that I order in Amazon!

dandebs 2012-04-25 11:20:38

Yawn

Superb acting (especially Kidman, and Richards (Lyra)) Superb CG(better than Lord of the Rings) Decent cinematography let down by awful editingdirectionless directing and a pedantic story (maybe the book is better?).It also didn't help that every 5 minutes the movie had to stop andpreach to us about the evil Christians - sorry, Magisterium. Someoneshould tell these people that allegory doesn't need to beexplained.in.great.detail. It ruins the pacing of the movie! A big let-down. One of very few movies where I've actually closed my eyes because I'mgetting sleepy!Don't waste your money. (Note to Christians - don't even bother protesting - the movie destroysits own message much more effectively than people waving placards &getting up everybody's nose. The anti-Christian message is soham-fisted it appears foolish & unattractive.)

2012-04-24 16:21:32

EXCELLENT

EXCELLENT MOVIE AND EXCELLENT EDITION! IF YOU ARE A FAN OF THE HARRY POTTER MOVIES, RETURN TO OZ, THE DARK CRYSTAL OR THE LAST UNICORN , THIS IS A MOVIE TO ENJOY. THIS IS A BIT OF THE ALLEGORY AND HIDDEN MEANING ALONG WITH FANTASY IN THE STYLE OF CS LEWIS MEETS DAN BROWN. PARENTS AND CHILDREN OF ALL AGES CAN ENJOY AND EXCAPE TO A STORY THAT MAKES YOU THINK, IMAGINE AND LIVE IN A GREAT EXPERIENCE!

toddles-2 2012-04-19 21:04:57

Good fantasy film.Worth taking the kids to see this Christmas

I enjoyed the film especially on the big screen. I have read the book afew years ago, so basically understood the plot line.Dakato Blue was radiant and a well rounded character. Nicole Kidmanplayed her menacing part well.The landscapes and the sets were impressive. I liked the arctic sceneryand the way they had changed some familiar places like Greenwich NavalCollege into other worldly palaces.I found Sir Ian Mackellan's voice of the bear a bit distracting as Iassociated his voice with another character in a different film. Only asmall down point though.Kids in the cinema I was in applauded the film at the end.

fedor8 2012-04-19 14:01:07

"Luke... I am your mother."

Why didn't this compass lead the girl to another director, script and abetter set of teeth?When one of the producers of "American Pie"(!) decides to direct afantasy rip-off, don't be surprised when it turns out a turd. TGC looksas if someone collected rejected/discarded scenes from "Star Wars",LOTR and the HP movies, stuck a ginger girl into them, and thenreleased it as its own film.The story is muddled, characters come and go - only to reappear for thebadly filmed final battle, there is ultra-cliché dialogue, mediocreCGI, dull pets (sorry, "demons"), and a totally flat soundtrack whichonly serves as an additional sleeping pill. The special effects werelaboured on with the meticulous care of an F student vomiting on hismaths paper. Never has the North Pole been so unimpressive. There ismore magic to be gotten from watching Michael Palin urinate on theAntarctic in his "Pole To Pole" documentary series, than watching anysnowy scene in TGC. But I guess it couldn't have been easy for thedozens of computer nerds in charge of the CGI here, slaving awayplaying PC games instead of working to make this silly world lookbelievable. Weitz probably didn't have the time to overlook the work ofhis hapless computer crew, what with his busy schedule of making finalpreparations for the latest heavily anticipated installments of"American Pie 4", "American Pie 5", and "American Pie 6".Gandalf seems to have jumped from Middle Earth into this otherdimension, taking the shape of a white polar bear who leads a girlnamed Frodo to fulfill her quest. No, it's not a sword or a ring: it'sa compass that shows every direction there is - except the one thatleads out of the movie's obvious mediocrity. The White Wizard: once somighty, but now just a white polar bear in the service of a dull girlwith English teeth. How the mighty have fallen. Sam Neill, on the otherhand, is directly plucked out of one of his westerns and thrown in herefor God knows what reason. Gandalf, a bunch of English-looking gypsies,a cowboy, and some family pets. Why didn't they include a Roman soldierand Homer Simpson, too? On the other hand, who better than Kidman thanto play a baddie who leads a brainwashing program! As anex-Scientologist she's had first-hand experience with having one'sbrain washed, plus living for a decade with her vegetable-brainex-hubby, Cruise. Kidman is so perfectly manicured, pedicured(Scientology-cured?), face-lifted, and silicone-implanted that she lookas if more CGI effort was put into her than all those pets combined.She looks like an aging Barbie Doll trying to portray a strangeDarth-Vader/James-Bond-villain mix. Enjoy one of Kidman's last smileson film, because if she goes on lifting her face any more, she'll endup like Cher, unable to smile, looking like someone stole her from awax museum and stuck batteries into her... The less said about DanielCraig's IMMENSE charisma, the better.Just as in the Harry Potthead movies/books there are some very dumbnames, such as "Gyptians" (Egyptian Gypsies?), the "Magisterium", and"gobblers" (turkeys?). The Magisterium is an obvious allusion to theCatholic Church, i.e. a representation of all religions, but theelement of a struggle against God was taken out of the movie (forobvious cowardly reasons), hence the story didn't really have a pointany more. I haven't read Pullman's atheistic, anti-God books, but theymust be better than this silly drivel. The whole idea of dust anddemons made me snicker, if anything, though. People walk around withtalking pets (how original!), whom they call their "demons" - but don'task me why. I guess one needs as many talking animals as one can get inorder to compete in the over-saturated kiddy-movie market.All this fuss just so kids will be protected from "dust"... When I haveproblems with dust, I merely wipe it off with a cloth. I just wish Icould wipe out the memory of this drudgery as easily. The kids thatreally need saving are the poor little bastards forced to sit throughthis dull crap. I sort of felt as if dust was rapidly collecting on mybody as I watched TGC, which seemed to drag on forever.The bear duel was so convincing maybe it should have been used inanother polar Pepsi commercial for better effect.Why didn't Kidman just take the damn compass while Luke... I mean Lyrawas asleep? Are we to believe that some murderous villains have a codeof honour about theft?Kidman doing a "I'm your mother" Darth Vader shtick on Lukyra was thehighlight: very funny.Do you want to see a sequel to this dull fantasy? Click "YES" or "NO"below.

brewsugar 2012-04-17 05:04:52

Kooky Christians

One of the comments posted says more about the poster than the movie;"This movie was very disturbing. A movie that has to do with killingGod? ...If he doesn't believe {in God} then why does he write aboutGod? I think the movie was lame any way. It's a spin off of Chroniclesof Narnia {which} was an amazing movie. ..I wish I would've know aheadof time what the movie was really about. I am shocked I haven't seenany thing on television about the true meaning of this movie. And I amreally shocked that it was released during the Christmas season." Itwould appear that the poster is bearing false witness; because (1) the"Golden Compass" has absolutely NO references to killing God. Nor is itpossible to infer it from anything in the movie. (2) Obviously theposter has therefore not seen the movie, or they would know better, and(3) Therefore she has clearly been warned "ahead of time" about themovie.Have things really gotten so bad, that christians now use children'sfilms as proxy wars? Compass VERSUS Narnia? Its clear that the posterwould have preferred to live in Lyra's world, where heresy was still acrime.The movie itself was damaged by its rolling over so as not to offendChristians. What did they hope for? That they would avoid a boycott?All they did was to emasculate the movie. Face it; if you have a moviethat talks about spiritual matters, its going to be boycotted unlessyou follow the party line. So make it for those of us who willappreciate it! Read the book; its far better; before it gets burned!The Magisterium is alive and well in modern America.And packersgirl?You look foolish if you post verbatim something you have been told byyour priests without checking it first. "God" is only "killed" in thelater books; in fact, he cant be killed, but there is a war, and hisauthority is threatened. The same story is told in Christian mythology;its called the war between Satan and god. Its actually a veryinteresting plot about "doing over" the expulsion from eden. But hey,you want to take your priests word for it and not enjoy one of the bestbooks on spirituality and theological questions over the past hundredyears of so? Go ahead; stick to the officially controlled low-caloriepap you're used to. God forbid you explore what so much of your liferevolves around.But you'd have to read the books anyhow; the movie has been watereddown into just another shoot-em-up. Wars - now there's something thatchristians seem to warm to. Movies where lions are slaughtered in paganrituals, whipping people with the blood flying off in buckets.

dreammaniac 2012-04-16 19:38:05

Just read the book and wait for another more decent film to come out...

I watched the trailer and was disappointed at how the film looked. ThenI had a look at the poster and disliked it even more.I had a feeling it wasn't working, but I had enjoyed the book so much,I finally did go to watch the thing.Didn't like it.Everything is botched for me, even when they kind of had interestingsets and lighting they shot them from all these stereotypical angles,etc.I hated the design and look in general.The special effects were awful (the flying witches look so stiff and soobviously hanging from cables!) Worse of all, the adaptation was completely downgraded for "children",beginning with the explanatory introduction that kills all possiblediscovery from the audience of what anything means.Everything is said out aloud and everything is kept out on the open.There is no rhythm and the power cuts are just trashy - there's nodevelopment of characters, little sense of reality and frankly, nothingbut a spelt out sequence of images with things moving.The book I really loved, the movie I already forgot.I don't think it deserves watching.Change the director, Weitz, I dislike your work. Every option you tookI am dissatisfied with.