movie review: The Golden Compass

[serenissima]

Friday night aristeros and I went out to the movies with some new friends. We had intended to watch "I Am Legend;" but all the showtimes for that were sold out until the 10:40pm showing, and he and I weren't happy about the prospect of leaving the theater after midnight. Our friends waited for the late showing, but at my suggestion the two of us opted instead to watch "The Golden Compass." We regretted the decision.

This was possibly the worst movie adaptation of a book that I have ever had the displeasure to witness. I can't think of a worse one right now. In general, the movie tried to include as many people, shiny gizmos, and mysterious assertions from the book as possible, without including enough exposition to justify their presence and link them together in a meaningful way. Thus we got something like: "Here's a girl named Lyra, her soul is a furry animal that changes shape! Here's Nicole Kidman, she's evil! Here's a Golden Compass! Lyra knows how to interpret its strange symbols, even though she's only been looking at it for 30 seconds! Here's the king of the Gyptians, introduced with dramatic musical fanfare! Here's a witch, she can fly! Here's a talking polar bear, he fights!" There were just too many things crammed in and not enough story.

Specific things I disliked:

The witches should have been dropped entirely from the movie. It seemed their only functions were to assist in the fight towards the end and to mention a cryptic prophecy concerning Lyra. And there was absolutely no reason to mention the witch queen's previous relationship, since the subject was never brought up again. "Hey, can you guess who my lover was? It's all right if you can't, because it has nothing to do with what is going on!"

As I mentioned, Lyra learned how to use the Compass far too fast. I think they should have tried to indicate that she played and practiced with it many times before she could get meaningful information from it.

There was no explanation of who or what Gyptians were.

Getting the bear's backstory was much too quick and simple. What proud warrior would spill the story of how he became an indentured servant to any passerby who asked?

When somebody gets his jaw ripped off, there should be some blood involved.

Why didn't the bears help in the fight at the end, instead of the witches? Hadn't Iorek just established his leadership of them?

I don't understand why the children's daemons could not defend themselves: for example, when the monkey attacked Pantalaimon, he was in the shape of a wildcat, which was about the same size as the monkey and should have been able to fight it off. Yet he seemed helpless.

Again concerning Pantalaimon, when he and Lyra were in the machine that was supposed to separate them, the only barrier between the two was a metal grating. The holes in the grating looked small enough for him to crawl through if he assumed the shape of a moth. Why didn't he?

Nobody explained what was so horrible about separating a person from his daemon, or what the effect was.

Supposedly, nobody can see the special glowing Dust. Yet when a person dies, apparently his daemon *pffts* into glowing sparkles. Are daemons composed of Dust? Does noone make the connection?

Too many convenient rescues in the nick of time.

Please don't beat me over the head with the news that the conflict is all about FREE WILL in giant block letters! I was taken aback when they actually went and said it explicitly! How blind and deaf do they think I am?

And then to contrast the movie with the book:

In the book, Serafina Pekkala's daemon arrived at the Gyptians' transport well ahead of the witch herself. In the movie, we never even see him.

In the movie, Iorek recovered his original armor. In the book, Iorek had new armor which he made himself. This is significant as it relates to the next point.

The movie does not expand on the usurper bear king's obsession with being human, the effects on bear society, and the contrast with Iorek.

The movie does not show what happened to the children and daemons who had been separated from each other. This is a missed opportunity to illustrate the depravity of the bad guys. Also, the movie never mentions that most of the staff at the "Experimental Station" had had this procedure done to them, and the effects thereof.

Worst of all, the movie ends before the climax of the book! I can only conclude that the ending of the book isn't happy enough for the filmmakers.

As for the whole anti-Church thing... yeah, the bad guys bore more than a passing resemblance, but nothing that I would think approached defamation -- the story is too far-fetched for anyone to take that seriously, I would hope.

Comments

[amberlorien.livejournal.com]

*skipped your spoilers just in case*

I never read the book but I usually feel the same way about the Harry Potter movies, most esp the third one which was my favorite story and the worst of the movie adaptations, imo. They didn't include some very important things in that movie. The last one I also felt was crammed with a new director trying to fit in everything. The books are so damn long most of them should just be 4 hour movies.

[eredien]

Congrats on your engagement and impending marriage! I don't read LJ for a year or so and miss all the good stuff.

[copperwolf.livejournal.com]

Thanks! And, same to you :)