Just from the trailers alone, you know that the producers of The Golden Compass are hoping to cash in on the fantasy trend and strike gold with a new movie series that would match the success of The Lord of the Rings, Harry Potter, and The Chronicles of Narnia. However, bad buzz from critics and attacks from religious groups seems to have shattered that possibility – so is the movie still worth seeing?
I have mixed feelings about the movie. The Golden Compass is based on the first of a trilogy of books by Phillip Pullman called His Dark Materials. When a friend told me I just had to read them a few years ago, I was hesitant. I love Harry Potter as much as the next guy, but I wasn’t so sure that I really needed another young adult fantasy series in my life at my age. I gave it a shot, though, and after a bumpy start, I was hooked. The books are smart, complex, and have a richer mythology than even the Potter series (and don’t get me wrong – I love me some J.K. Rowling).
The story takes place in a universe very similar to our own, but is ruled by a spiritual energy called Dust. The people are different – souls are manifested as physical beings, or daemons, who take animal forms and are inextricably connected to their human counterparts. The story begins at Jordan College (a counterpart to Oxford University), where a little girl named Lyra (Dakota Blue Richards) discovers that local children are disappearing at the hands of mysterious men called Gobblers. Soon after her guardian, Lord Asriel (Daniel Craig) flees Oxford to the north to try to understand the mysteries of Dust, a glamorous and strange woman from a powerful order called the Magesterium, Mrs. Coulter (Nicole Kidman) arrives to whisk Lyra away. Entrusted with the mysterious titular Golden Compass, Lyra soon embarks on a quest to the North Pole, where she encounters flying witches, armored bears and the Gobblers, who have begun sinister experiments on children to unlock the secrets of Dust.
It’s a weird little story, and it’s one that works beautifully in the books and not so well on-screen. Part of the strength of the books is the rich mythology they create, which depends heavily on the philosophical notions that question organized religion and the nature of the soul (hence the attacks on the movie by some religious groups). The reason they are so successful is that the action and the creative flourishes are balanced out with the philosophical stuff, making a provoking little series that only gets better with each book. However, a lot of the headier stuff didn’t make it into the movie, so both the relationships and the characters’ motivations don’t make as much sense. On top of that, the first book mostly sets up the exciting things that happen in the next two, which is fine when you can just pick up the next one at your local library, but not as acceptable when you have to wait two or three years for them to make the sequel.
There’s a lot to praise about The Golden Compass. The special effects are stunning (and I tend to be underwhelmed by special effects), the actors are all extremely well-cast and the elements that make the books so appealing peek through the slick, Hollywood blockbuster surface from time to time. I suggest you take a crack at the books first, and if they don’t interest you, definitely don’t bother with the movie.
Read our SparkNote on His Dark Materials to find out more about The Golden Compass.
Photos: pastemagazine.com / msn.com
Check it. THe awesomest book ever is none other than the chronicles of narnia. the books are even better than the movie. The silver comppass sounds allright.
[1] Posted by: Punisher911f | December 12th, 2007 at 11:37 pmKeep it real. RESPECT.
I was hoping that “The Golden Compass” would be my answer to “The Chronicles of Narnia,” a big budget fantasy film without the Christian under tone, it doesn’t look like it will be. That aside, I am pretty sure I am still going to go see it. If not for the fact that the movie has a different perspective on religion and religious institutions, for the fact that it has talking animals and amazing special effects. Don’t get me wrong, It’s not that I didn’t like “Narnia,” it’s just that I didn’t want to be force fed the movie’s Christian ideals. Again, don’t get me wrong, I am not for evil, or Satan, or anarchy, or for that matter Bush. I’m all for pretty little flowers, teddy bears, the Sun, being nice to your fellow man, and Skittles. I just was hoping that the movie wouldn’t get so hammered by the critics, even though I know it’s because of bad directing and not the movie’s message.
[2] Posted by: theJamexican | December 17th, 2007 at 11:13 amAnyways, let me stop ranting and say I really liked your article and I am still planning on going to see the movie even if it’s not the best movie out right now.
Awesome book series, who CARES about the religious undertones…it’s FICTION!
[3] Posted by: Trumath | December 18th, 2007 at 8:55 pmTotally agree with Trumath, the books are absolutely amazing, and the religious undertones are not DEFINING religion, just showing a different type of religion, and yes, it’s fiction, so you don’t have to BELIEVE anything. Highly recommend all three books.
[4] Posted by: Trakkie | December 20th, 2007 at 9:00 pmI agree with the jamexican about it being a cool answer to the totally in your face about it Narnia. I liked this movie because it had a new type of opinion on religion, like jamexcn mentioned, but also cuz it was different than anythhing about religion Hollywood has released.
[5] Posted by: NotSoWellBoy | December 20th, 2007 at 11:15 pmI loved this movie. It was really fun to watch and I loved Nicole Kidman as the evil Mrs. Coulter.
[6] Posted by: emilirossum | January 21st, 2008 at 2:16 pmI didn’t feel that the movie was as good as the book. Kidman and Craig were great. Although, I do feel they could have done a better job with Lyra. It was a mediocre movie. I really don’t believe that it deserved to win an oscar. Pirates 3 should have won for best special effects.
[7] Posted by: Sweeney6067 | March 11th, 2008 at 3:24 pm