We all went out to the movies this afternoon. Katherine and Alex (and Ginger) saw Alvin & the Chipmunks. Nick and Mary and Margie and I saw The Golden Compass.
The Golden Compass (2007)
Overall | Story | ||
Production | Acting |
Story: I’ve not read (yet) the novels that the movie is based on (as a first installment). It is, as presented, solid if not terribly complex. On the one hand, you have the Magisterium, the free-will-consuming authoritarian state (with religious overtones supposedly much clearer in the books) that rules a world of high-tech magic. On the other hand, you have scholars, social outcasts, and various other folks who are helping out a little girl who prophecy (of course) foretells will settle the conflict once and for all. Oh, and there’s a ton of cool CG critters, the outward manifestations of individuals’ souls, called daemons, who add to the number of characters to track, as well as the subject of much plot machination.
As the first installment in a series, the challenge is to tell a relatively self-contained tale while still maintaining interest for the next. The biggest flaw (as elucidated by Nick) is that the movie could have been about twice as long, In fact, it did feel like we got the highlights — some key dialog, some critical scenes, enough to basically hold together, but still feeling like the “synopsis” version. That the writers still managed to make us care about the characters, and slip a bit of development in and amongst the set pieces and plot-driven deus ex machina, is all to their credit.
Acting: There’s some very good talent in this movie — some of it voice-only, others actually on screen. Nobody’s on enough (even the protagonist Lyra) to attain too much depth, but what’s up there is quite good.
Production: Simply too gorgeous. The world is lovingly crafted; the daemons, ice bears, and other CG critters are well put together, and the sets and settings are beautiful. Good music, fine costuming, etc. Great eye (and ear) candy.
Overall: The movie has been in the news largely because of some Christian conservatives who object to the books (they promote free-thinking against religious authoritarians and dogmatists, don’t you know?). For some folks (like me), that’s backfired, since it’s made me want to see the movie (and read the books) much more than I would have likely otherwise.
As far as how much of that leaks into the movie, it’s tolerable. It’s clearly framed as “free will” vs. “the ones in authority know best,” always a popular theme (these days especially), and there’s a lot of dialog to that end — sometimes just a scosh heavy-handed. On the other hand, it’s a legitimate theme (at least as much so as one finds in LotR, the best comparison I can think of at the moment), and it’s handled intelligently, if a bit simplistically (which I understand is more a function of it being a short movie than a longer book).
The movie is rated PG-13, which made it suitable for Nick at 11 (with parental consent), but there were enough disturbing bits and fantasy violence that I wouldn’t soon recommend it for Kitten (who thought Alvin was great).
I certainly recommend seeing the movie before it vanishes into the aether (or comes out on DVD) — which is likely to happen soon, as it was something of a failure domestically (it’s done far better in foreign markets) It’s not clear if the aggregate box office will be enough to generate a second installment of the trilogy, sadly — but it was enough to make me want to pick up the books.
Doyce and I literally just got home from seeing the film ourselves to find your review. We agree wholeheartedly, and I have all three books if you’d care to borrow them.
And … a trilogy of responses! 🙂 (Probably caused by system load — no worries).
I will probably pick up the books myself, but thanks for the offer!
The consensus review from folks has been “Love to see, felt rushed, wrapped up too abruptly,” which I can agree with.
I haven’t seen the movie yet, though it is on my list. However I second (or is it 4th 🙂 ) the call for you to read the books. You could also listen to the audio books if so inclined as they are very well done.
its a good review,i hope they make the sequel
Whyyyyyyy did they cut the ending?
Okay, the production was great. Acting was fantabulous. The way the scenes fit together sometimes left things lacking, and seemed to point straight toward the flaws the book has (namely, the bugaboo that is the Magisterium — what do you call the opposite of a McGuffin? An sham antagonist?). Admittedly, the movie was supposed to be very philosophical, but it was also pretty dang talky.
But then they cut the ending.
Aaaaaaahhhhhh! The whole point of the movie, and they cut the ending!
I will say that, as someone who has *not* read the books (but has heard a number of people say just what you did), the ending did not seem an artificial “cut.” Indeed, I would have assumed that was where the book ended — a lull after a big trial but with plenty of challenges ahead, to be faced doughtily.
I would guess (uninformedly) that it was cut for length (though possibly because someone felt the ending, as in the book, didn’t end things on a tone that either fit or that would encourage another installment). If for length, I could have done with four or five fewer discussions of The Folks In Charge Want To Remove Your Free Will Because They Want What’s Good For You (including at least two or three times from the ironically named Ms. Coulter) — as that was very nicely established early on and didn’t need to be repeated to the point of distraction. Either that, or take the next step into a deeper discussion of the theme (what *are* the limits of free will vs regimentation; when *do* the authorities have a legitimate basis for regulating individuals or society; to what extent *should* children be guided and protected, even at the expense of some of their freedom).
If I were to quibble even more unncessarily, I’d note that the original Latin pronunciation of “daemon” (and its Greek antecedent), as a divine messenger and/or attendent spirit/genius was with a long “I” rather than long “E” — while I doubt it would have deflected any of the Christian Right objections to have used the older pronunciation, it would have (for purposes of the movie) reduced any confusion about how the term “deeeeemon” was being used for the externalized souls of the humans in the film. (Blame the classicist in me.)
That said, still cool, and I still plan to get the books.
Doyce opines.
…I think “length” would have been the stated reason but “not opening up a big can of worms” would be the undercurrent. I don’t want to say anything more; don’t let anyone spoil it for you, as I think you might be particularly happy with the conundrum that comes out of it.
I want to comment on your free will comments, but I’m a non-spoiler when possible, so I won’t. Nyaa.
Weitz (the writer-director) describes the rationale behind the changes to the ending (short story: the final three chapters will filmed, but were more confusing/disturbing as an ending for test audiences).
Well, the film has more than made back its production costs, albeit not spectacularly (though only in Hollywood would $270MM revenues vs. $180MM in costs not be considered a spectacular profit). No word yet on the likelihood of sequels.