Having read the books I was looking forward to this film if only to see how such a complex and intriguing children's story (yes, publishing hype aside, it is a children's story), would be handled by those without an imagination of their own.
I am disappointed but not at all surprised.
The Golden Compass is awful.
***
I'll offer my comments in a (hopefully) organised fashion;
1) Special Effects (CGI to most people though of course it's more than that)
I've mentioned this first because CGI is a pre-requisite for modern fantasy movies, and, sadly, too often the barometer of a movie's worth. Okay - personal daemons, armoured bears, flying witches and Zeppelins can't be realised without it - and it's all very well done, as one would expect in a day and age in which there's a pseudo-Cray in every household.
2) Art Direction
Art-deco, art-nouveau, whatever it is - sets, costumes, lighting - I loved it. In the book Lyra's world is tantalisingly like the one we know - and yet so different and for me that was the magic. So, except for the OTT skylines (and the Master's manservant, Hunt, who looked like a mannequin from Moss Bros), they got it about right for me.
But, as Confucius might have said; "Film punter not live on art direction alone."
So on we go...
3) Script & Direction
The books are nebulous enough, and this movie does nothing to help. I found the first half-hour utterly confusing and I already know the story. It seemed thrown together by film students. Examples;
'The Gobblers' insidious activity (a principal thread in the book) is introduced clumsily, and almost as an after-thought.
The daemons (surely Pullman's most original and endearing creation) come across as nothing but cute pets (sic). (If you've read the book you'll understand the irony.)
The supposedly all-powerful and authoritarian 'Magisterium' (the book's thinly-veiled Church, and hub of the antagonism) has all the menace of a Darby-and-Joan club outing to Brighton. Dear oh dear.
By the way, I read the books only recently to see what all the fuss was about. I found TNL absolutely intriguing, TSK very 'Janet and John - Book One', and TAS - well, an uphill struggle. (The gradient was not intellectual, but rather that the story had become contrived and drawn out to the point where I found it difficult to maintain interest.) That said, the overall story is fascinating, especially in the way it slowly develops the importance of the bond between human and daemon, the concept of parallel worlds, and the political machinations of the Magisterium. In TGC there is none of this. Asriel declares the existence of parallel worlds in the first few minutes, AND that he's going to try to travel to one of them! What the ! The director has simply dumped the whole concept on the table, and said, "There. This is what's going on, okay? Right, let's get on with the action." Terrible.
As for the staggeringly flat ending - does the director have ANY idea about storytelling?
4) Acting & Direction
I've left acting till last because it's here that Compass falls flat on its very expensive face. The adults aside (though Tom Courtenay was embarrassingly flat), the acting is appalling. I don't mean a bit iffy. I don't mean bad. I mean APPALLING. I have, no word of a lie, seen more pathos in infant school nativity plays.
Dakota Richards is wooden throughout, to the point where I breathed a sigh of relief whenever she WASN'T in a scene. I ask you, what the hell happened to the tearaway, roof-hopping, lying, mud-slinging tomboy of the novels? I found Lyra's duplicitous character a joy to read and it made me root for her; but the movie Lyra, Goldilocks hair and all, is a far cry from the rapscallion of the book. And the other child actors fare no better being devoid of emotion, intonation, and any semblance of 'presence'.
And the dialect! Argh! Lyra's accent in the book tagged her immediately as a street urchin. In the movie, however, this dialect is delivered so badly that I shuddered every time I heard the word 'ent' (and I'm not even from Oxford, or anywhere near). Okay, I know the director is American, but Dakota Richards is English (and from the South, to boot), and they surely had resources to draw upon not least the author. So how on earth did they contrive to get the dialogue sooooooo wrong?
Now, I'm not shooting the messengers here the producers are to blame for casting kids who were simply not up to it; and the director is to blame for not reading the novel before making the film. Events in the book that are fuelled by emotion are rendered in the film with the timidity of a game of tiddlywinks, and that's a travesty.
5) Conclusion
I give The Golden Compass 3/10 because;
c) it was a change to see an 'interesting' children's book screened, after years of Harry Potter tedium.
b) of the daemons (for what they were) - changing form, dying etc.
a) Iorek Byrnisson's and Lee Scoresby's characterisations breathed some life into an otherwise very dull affair.
Flat, I think I called it? Yes. As a millpond.
***
To close, I heard that TGC was up for Best Art Direction? Well, I hope it wins in THIS category alone if only to emphasise how badly every other department fared.
Mick (UK).
PS I read on IMDb that PP was asked his opinion of the short-listed Lyras, and preferred Dakota Richards. Like I said - the producers are to blame. ;o)
I am disappointed but not at all surprised.
The Golden Compass is awful.
***
I'll offer my comments in a (hopefully) organised fashion;
1) Special Effects (CGI to most people though of course it's more than that)
I've mentioned this first because CGI is a pre-requisite for modern fantasy movies, and, sadly, too often the barometer of a movie's worth. Okay - personal daemons, armoured bears, flying witches and Zeppelins can't be realised without it - and it's all very well done, as one would expect in a day and age in which there's a pseudo-Cray in every household.
2) Art Direction
Art-deco, art-nouveau, whatever it is - sets, costumes, lighting - I loved it. In the book Lyra's world is tantalisingly like the one we know - and yet so different and for me that was the magic. So, except for the OTT skylines (and the Master's manservant, Hunt, who looked like a mannequin from Moss Bros), they got it about right for me.
But, as Confucius might have said; "Film punter not live on art direction alone."
So on we go...
3) Script & Direction
The books are nebulous enough, and this movie does nothing to help. I found the first half-hour utterly confusing and I already know the story. It seemed thrown together by film students. Examples;
'The Gobblers' insidious activity (a principal thread in the book) is introduced clumsily, and almost as an after-thought.
The daemons (surely Pullman's most original and endearing creation) come across as nothing but cute pets (sic). (If you've read the book you'll understand the irony.)
The supposedly all-powerful and authoritarian 'Magisterium' (the book's thinly-veiled Church, and hub of the antagonism) has all the menace of a Darby-and-Joan club outing to Brighton. Dear oh dear.
By the way, I read the books only recently to see what all the fuss was about. I found TNL absolutely intriguing, TSK very 'Janet and John - Book One', and TAS - well, an uphill struggle. (The gradient was not intellectual, but rather that the story had become contrived and drawn out to the point where I found it difficult to maintain interest.) That said, the overall story is fascinating, especially in the way it slowly develops the importance of the bond between human and daemon, the concept of parallel worlds, and the political machinations of the Magisterium. In TGC there is none of this. Asriel declares the existence of parallel worlds in the first few minutes, AND that he's going to try to travel to one of them! What the ! The director has simply dumped the whole concept on the table, and said, "There. This is what's going on, okay? Right, let's get on with the action." Terrible.
As for the staggeringly flat ending - does the director have ANY idea about storytelling?
4) Acting & Direction
I've left acting till last because it's here that Compass falls flat on its very expensive face. The adults aside (though Tom Courtenay was embarrassingly flat), the acting is appalling. I don't mean a bit iffy. I don't mean bad. I mean APPALLING. I have, no word of a lie, seen more pathos in infant school nativity plays.
Dakota Richards is wooden throughout, to the point where I breathed a sigh of relief whenever she WASN'T in a scene. I ask you, what the hell happened to the tearaway, roof-hopping, lying, mud-slinging tomboy of the novels? I found Lyra's duplicitous character a joy to read and it made me root for her; but the movie Lyra, Goldilocks hair and all, is a far cry from the rapscallion of the book. And the other child actors fare no better being devoid of emotion, intonation, and any semblance of 'presence'.
And the dialect! Argh! Lyra's accent in the book tagged her immediately as a street urchin. In the movie, however, this dialect is delivered so badly that I shuddered every time I heard the word 'ent' (and I'm not even from Oxford, or anywhere near). Okay, I know the director is American, but Dakota Richards is English (and from the South, to boot), and they surely had resources to draw upon not least the author. So how on earth did they contrive to get the dialogue sooooooo wrong?
Now, I'm not shooting the messengers here the producers are to blame for casting kids who were simply not up to it; and the director is to blame for not reading the novel before making the film. Events in the book that are fuelled by emotion are rendered in the film with the timidity of a game of tiddlywinks, and that's a travesty.
5) Conclusion
I give The Golden Compass 3/10 because;
c) it was a change to see an 'interesting' children's book screened, after years of Harry Potter tedium.
b) of the daemons (for what they were) - changing form, dying etc.
a) Iorek Byrnisson's and Lee Scoresby's characterisations breathed some life into an otherwise very dull affair.
Flat, I think I called it? Yes. As a millpond.
***
To close, I heard that TGC was up for Best Art Direction? Well, I hope it wins in THIS category alone if only to emphasise how badly every other department fared.
Mick (UK).
PS I read on IMDb that PP was asked his opinion of the short-listed Lyras, and preferred Dakota Richards. Like I said - the producers are to blame. ;o)
Tell Your Friends