The Golden Compass (2007)
Written by James on December 7, 2007 – 10:50 am -
Golden shower
In keeping with this reviewer’s general apathy towards the zeitgeist (I haven’t read a single Harry Potter tome, either), I must confess to allowing the Philip Pullman/Golden Compass craze to have completely passed me by.
So, in approaching the first of what will doubtless be an interminable number of adaptations, I’m glad to be able to dismiss it as a mess, without worrying about whether it does justice to the novel.
And a mess it certainly is - inexplicably, many reviewers have seemingly been able to see past its complete lack of charm, contrived ‘other-world’ sillyness and an absence of any characters with which to identify or warm to - from the central ‘plucky schoolgirl hero’ Lyra Belacqua (Dakota Blue Richards), to Machiavellian Marisa Coulter (Nicole Kidman), and even including Lord Asriel (Daniel Craig, how could you? Ah, the money, right), who’s an entirely superfluous character thus far.
Director-writer Chris Weitz (About A Boy (2002) does some bring visual flair to this adaptation of Pullman’s tale of a parallel Earth in a parallel universe, in which everyone’s soul is visible as an animal of one kind or another, and in which Lyra, guided by her ‘Alethiometer’ (don’t ask) journeys to the far North to save her best friend Roger (Ben Walker) and other kidnapped children from, ahem, ‘The Goblers’. No, really, don’t ask…
Unfortunately, the script irritates from the very first line - the all-star cast (other luminaries such as Sir Ian McKellan, Kathy Bates, Kirstin Scott-Thomas and Eva Green are singing for their suppers) is given very little of interest to say or do, and the end result manages to be both patronising and preachy in roughly equal measure.
113 mins.
Posted in US, children's, fantasy |
RSS
February 4th, 2008 at 1:47 pm
I think ‘The Golden Compass’ was an interesting film given its anti-Christian perspective. It caused a furore in the states which, unlike the moral panic around Harry Potter and its “promotion” of witchcraft, at least had some substance to it. Pullman’s books are written from a deeply atheist perspective; the author has commented that the trilogy is intended as a counterpoint to C.S.Lewis, that his intentions were to “undermine the basis of Christian belief”.
On the one hand there are Christian groups attacking the film for “preaching atheism to kids” and on the other you have secularists attacking the film for diluting the anti-religious themes of the books. Coming to the film without having read the book I thought the anti-religious themes were actually quite strong.
Usually, I don’t like fantasy movies. I don’t like the Harry Potter efforts and really don’t like the mighty ‘Lord of the Rings’ saga, but I found myself quite charmed by this one. And the polar bear fight was awesome.
You know James, not all films can be as profound or as well constructed as ‘The Bodyguard’…
February 6th, 2008 at 11:28 am
Hahahaha! Nothing to say about the film, I just loved your last line
February 8th, 2008 at 8:50 am
Thanks for the comment, Chris - while the point you make concerning its anti-Christian perspective is interesting from an aesthetic point of view, I’m afraid that this would still not convince me that it’s worth another go. I mean, did you actually listen to some of the dialogue?
I’d be more interested to know why you were ‘charmed’, exactly? Do stars of the calibre of Sir Ian McKellan, Daniel Craig and Nicole Kidman quite obviously singing for their supper allow you to rediscover your inner child, or something?
February 8th, 2008 at 2:03 pm
For what it’s worth, I’d watch Nicole Kidman if she were reciting the Wagga Wagga Yellow Pages dressed in a boiler suit and flippers. Oh yes.
February 10th, 2008 at 10:57 pm
>> did you actually listen to some of the dialogue?
Maybe for the sequel they can get Schrader to write some monologues for Daniel Craig and update his role to be more like “God’s lonely man”. The dialogue got the kids from a to b sufficiently well so that they could have fights and risky encounters and stuff. “Luke! … I’m your father!!!” isn’t exactly Shakespeare either.
>>I’d be more interested to know why you were ‘charmed’, exactly?
It had little furry animals running around speaking to the characters. It had magic and vistas and a scary “step mother” and her evil minions etc. It was charming. You know, as in “fun”.
>> Do stars of the calibre of Sir Ian McKellan, Daniel Craig and Nicole Kidman quite obviously singing for their supper allow you to rediscover your inner child, or something?
James, you know as well as I do that the film unlocking my inner child would be “Wolf Creek”.
February 12th, 2008 at 12:45 pm
Oh, have it your own way then Chris. We can’t yet risk irritating our regular contributors, even if they are just coming up with an opposing point of view to be different and dead clever.;)
Seriously, thanks for the comments…