Topic: The Golden Compass (Read 27776 times)

thehollow · « **on:** 19 Nov 2007, 19:56 »

Anyone else interested to see how this is gonna turn out? I was a big fan of the His Dark Materials trilogy; I read them for the first time in like middle school and loved em, and I've reread them probably 3 times or so since, and they're just as good each time. I really hope they don't fuck this up, and I think that Pullman's approval of script and the casting means that hopefully it'll be alright. Also, Sam Elliot is exactly how I pictured Lee.

TheFuriousWombat · « **Reply #1 on:** 19 Nov 2007, 20:38 »

I'm very wary of this movie. I loved the books. A lot. I think the trilogy far surpasses Harry Potter in every way (and I do think the two are comparable). The movie looks a little worrisome, especially the CG bears and such. The book is fairly violent which, if they want to maintain the PG rating they're probably shooting for with this seemingly more kid friendly approach will, sadly, be toned down. If they hope to translate the whole trilogy to film, I fail to see how they'll continue with a PG rating. The later books get very dark, violent and, to make things even saucier, there's sex thrown into the mix. If they do continue (and I fail to see them not), they'll either have to make the films for more mature audiences (an honest translation of print to film would warrant, I think, a borderline PG-13/R rating) or, and this latter option is far more likely, they'll seriously tone down the whole atmosphere and thus compromise the fantastic story Pullman has crafted. This is all speculation, of course, but it worries me nonetheless.

MusicScribbles · « **Reply #2 on:** 19 Nov 2007, 20:40 »

This really needs to kick ass. I have to say that Daniel Craig as Asriel is a great choice. Who cares about James Bond? He made an awesome Heisenberg.

Also, this better be violent.

MusicScribbles · « **Reply #3 on:** 19 Nov 2007, 20:56 »

New faith in the movie has been given.
Curiously, from an MTV associated blog.
http://moviesblog.mtv.com/2007/11/14/golden-compass-director-chris-weitz-answers-your-questions-part-i/#more-1268

Dimmukane · « **Reply #4 on:** 19 Nov 2007, 20:58 »

They've toned down the anti-Christian part a bit, and turned the Magisterium into a sort of universal religious entity. Which I'm cool with. But yeah, I wonder how they're gonna pull of Subtle Knife and Amber Spyglass, cuz if they're trying to tone down Christianity, they're gonna have to write out Metatron and all the angels.

TheFuriousWombat · « **Reply #5 on:** 19 Nov 2007, 21:02 »

They can't remove Christian elements from the second, and particularly from the third, books without completely changing the story. It just doesn't seem at all possible considering how important these elements become to the story. Either they're going to have to rewrite everything or they'll have to be content with pissing some people off. I really hope they opt for the latter.

thehollow · « **Reply #6 on:** 19 Nov 2007, 21:35 »

Quote

I think the trilogy far surpasses Harry Potter in every way (and I do think the two are comparable).

agreed. The Harry Potter books were really poorly written, IMO, and weren't even really all that original, they just borrowed from a ton of different legends and mythologies. The HDM universe is way more unique and well-fleshed out, and the series does a way better job of appealing to younger readers while simultaneously not seeming too dumbed down for adults to enjoy.

The books were really more anti-religion than anti-christianity anyways, it's just that the magisterium resembles the catholic church since it's supposed to be similar to 19th century europe and that's what we would identify with. The next 2 are gonna be really interesting to see how they pull it off.

and I agree, I think Daniel Craig is a good choice for Asriel, as is Nicole Kidman (although isn't she supposed to be a brunette in the book? i can't quite remember) as Mrs. Coulter. I've only ever seen Eva Green in the bond movie, but hopefully she'll do pretty well. The voice-acting for the daemons/bears looks pretty solid too, Ian McKellen as Iorek, freddie highmore as Pan, and Kathy Bates as hester.

Storm Rider · « **Reply #7 on:** 19 Nov 2007, 21:37 »

Quote from: TheFuriousWombat on 19 Nov 2007, 21:02

They can't remove Christian elements from the second, and particularly from the third, books without completely changing the story. It just doesn't seem at all possible considering how important these elements become to the story. Either they're going to have to rewrite everything or they'll have to be content with pissing some people off. I really hope they opt for the latter.

I'm betting they opt for the former, unless they're hoping the controversy will sell more tickets. But to be honest, I doubt that. I think Pullman's novels were a little too 'edgy' for the movie-going public, what with all the terrible experiments done in the name of preserving the Christian theocracy and the homosexual angels. I think they they'll probably end up cutting that stuff out, story be damned. But maybe Harry Potter's gradual darkening of tone made people more acclimated to this sort of stuff in stories that are usually associated as being for children.

Still, I'm not tremendously optimistic about this.

MusicScribbles · « **Reply #8 on:** 19 Nov 2007, 21:41 »

Guys, read the Q&A. The director says that he is making The Golden Compass as well as he can from a movie perspective so that he can keep every dark element of the second and third books in the films. He wants to keep the Christianity bit, which is what the Magisterium.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magisterium

thehollow · « **Reply #9 on:** 19 Nov 2007, 23:16 »

Damn, that Q&A is really making it sound good. I'm really pumped about this now, I hope I'm not just setting myself up for disappointment.

KharBevNor · « **Reply #10 on:** 20 Nov 2007, 04:55 »

If the Christian right was shitting itself over teenage wizards, I can't wait for their reaction to a film series where the good guys include a couple of gay rebel angels.

bryanthelion · « **Reply #11 on:** 20 Nov 2007, 05:20 »

I was excited about this at first.

and after this thread....

I'm more excited!

öde · « **Reply #12 on:** 20 Nov 2007, 06:06 »

Quote from: MusicScribbles on 19 Nov 2007, 20:56

New faith in the movie has been given.
Curiously, from an MTV associated blog.
http://moviesblog.mtv.com/2007/11/14/golden-compass-director-chris-weitz-answers-your-questions-part-i/#more-1268

Yaaaaayyy!

october1983 · « **Reply #13 on:** 20 Nov 2007, 06:17 »

Quote from: thehollow on 19 Nov 2007, 21:35

Quote
I think the trilogy far surpasses Harry Potter in every way (and I do think the two are comparable).
agreed. The Harry Potter books...just borrowed from a ton of different legends and mythologies. The HDM universe is way more unique and well-fleshed out

To be fair, I don't think it's far to criticise Harry Potter for assimilating a load of myths and legends to create a story, while in the same paragraph calling HDM more "unique" - Pullman didn't even bother assimilating, he just unashamedly took Milton's Paradise Lost as the overriding and very obvious reference point for the series. However, that's not a criticism, it was a fantastic retelling of the story, and I love those books so much, especially when I reread them having read Paradise Lost - he does such interesting things with Milton's ideas. I will agree 100% on the quality of writing being significantly superior to Harry Potter, though, it's almost laughable to compare them.

And to get back onto the topic proper, I'm excited. Sure, they could seriously screw this up, but they seem to be doing all the right things so far. The casting is spot on, even Lyra looks like she'll be good. Also, the Harry Potter films' main downfall (aside from just not being great) was the reliance on a slew of untalented, badly cast child actors, whereas, especially for the second and third books, there's a lot of focus on the adults, and those roles have been filled by talented, reliable actors. As long as Lyra's good, it should hold up on the acting side.

PS. It's The Northern Lights, damnit!

TrekkieTechie · « **Reply #14 on:** 20 Nov 2007, 10:54 »

Movies-from-books always make me nervous. very few ever actually are as good as the book they're based on, and I can only think of one movie-from-book I've ever seen that was actually better than the book. The rest are terrible, terrible disappointments.

Super-disappointed that they've moved the book's finale to the second movie.

Quote from: october1983 on 20 Nov 2007, 06:17

PS. It's The Roarer, damnit!

Boro_Bandito · « **Reply #15 on:** 20 Nov 2007, 12:47 »

I have confidence in this director, I really do. Let's hoep that it's not misplaced.

thehollow · « **Reply #16 on:** 21 Nov 2007, 00:32 »

Hmm guess I need to read Paradise Lost then, I didn't realize that Pullman borrowed that heavily from it. I've been meaning to read it for some time now, my brother's an English major and keeps yelling at me to read it. I didn't really mean as much about the overall themes of the story, but more about the actual world and universe in which the story takes place. I mean, everyone's heard of wizards and ogres and dragons and whatnot, but how many other stories have Daemons and Mulefa and Armored Bears and Gallivespians and the like?

And while I'm sort of disappointed in how the movie is dealing with the ending, I'm hoping that it works out nonetheless and the other 2 movies make up for it. the director's rationale seemed relatively solid to me, so we'll see. It worked OK in the LoTR movies, so hopefully it'll be alright in this.

jimbunny · « **Reply #17 on:** 21 Nov 2007, 22:17 »

And, Kate Bush is contributing an original song to the soundtrack.

MusicScribbles · « **Reply #18 on:** 21 Nov 2007, 22:44 »

The rating is out, and it's PG-13. This will not be for small children.

Worldbeing · « **Reply #19 on:** 22 Nov 2007, 12:01 »

As the obligatory stick-in-the-mud Brit, I feel it my duty to point out that it's a crap name.
Firstly, it's not the name of the book. Not like that's stopped any movies before, but it's still bad. The name of the book it's based on is Northern Lights.
Secondly, the alethiometer (the 'golden compass' referred to in the title) simply isn't a golden compass. Golden, yes, compass no. A compass is one of two things; a mathematical instrument used for drawing circles, or a device which uses the magnetic field of the Earth to point roughly north.
The alethiometer is a device that expresses answers contained within Dust using a series of needle movements to show meanings.

Northern Lights on the other hand, has considerable relevance, since in Lyra's world it provides a glimpse of another world (the Citagazze world, I think) and is split by Lord Asriel at the book's conclusion.

Yay for pedantism!

Drill King · « **Reply #20 on:** 22 Nov 2007, 13:55 »

I haven't read these books probably since third grade. When I heard the movie was coming out I was ecstatic, then I started thinking about 'what if it sucks?'

So I did a little research, long and short I'm putting my faith on it being decent or excellent. So I'm quite excited to say the least.

Also, after hearing it'd be a movie, I reread the books, and realized a ton of things I didn't quite grasp since I read them when I was quite young, hoo boy. To be honest, they're more enjoyable when you're a bit older, they do get a rap for being a children's series of some reason(probably because the protagonist is young), any theories to why this is?

thehollow · « **Reply #21 on:** 22 Nov 2007, 13:57 »

The book was published as the Golden Compass in the US and Canada, they didn't just randomly rename the film. It was a reference to a line in Paradise Lost, so even then it wasn't simply because it was gold and compass-shaped. In fact, an early title Pullman used for the trilogy was The Golden Compasses. Everyone's aware of the fact that the alethiometer isn't a compass.

october1983 · « **Reply #22 on:** 22 Nov 2007, 16:55 »

It still somewhat irks me that they didn't rename the film to Northern Lights here, but I guess it makes sense.

And yeah, despite popular misconception, it wasn't called The Golden Compass because they thought US audiences were too dumb to understand "Northern Lights" and because there was a "Golden Compass" in it so that was nice and easy (it's come to my attention that, actually, America isn't populated solely by morons...maybe), but mainly because of a misunderstanding between Pullman and the US publishers regarding his working title for the trilogy.

MusicScribbles · « **Reply #23 on:** 22 Nov 2007, 23:06 »

I'm sorry, but that's a ridiculous reason. Anyway, Golden Compass suits it better because it gives the trilogy a theme in titles. Subtle Knife and Amber Spyglass. They all suggest intriguing items. In a way the alethiometer is a golden compass because it looks like a fucking compass. It may not be one, but it sure as hell looks like it could be one, a golden one at that. Northern Lights is an interesting name because it does make more sense as a title. It would have been nice and purposeful! Full of meaning and wonder! Golden Compass still works better as a name in the trilogy though. Norther Lights, otherwise sounds awkward and out of place. The lights are not an object of considerable ability, wielded by one of the characters. Anyway, i guess what I'm saying is, pbbbbbbbbbt.

monkandmovies13 · « **Reply #24 on:** 23 Nov 2007, 06:47 »

KATE BUSH WOOHOO

I've never read the books. But I love Kate Bush.

october1983 · « **Reply #25 on:** 23 Nov 2007, 07:22 »

Yeah, it is a ridiculous reason. And maybe The Golden Compass does make sense in the context of the trilogy, but I'm more inclined to go with Pullman's original title. That said, it's hardly a big deal that it has a different name in the US, I just kind of wish they'd renamed the film back to Northern Lights over here, just because I like it.

Lines · « **Reply #26 on:** 23 Nov 2007, 09:30 »

Quote from: october1983 on 22 Nov 2007, 16:55

And yeah, despite popular misconception, it wasn't called The Golden Compass because they thought US audiences were too dumb to understand "Northern Lights" and because there was a "Golden Compass" in it so that was nice and easy (it's come to my attention that, actually, America isn't populated solely by morons...maybe)

Um, thanks? And it's a title. It's not like it's the entire story.

I am excited about this movie. I haven't read the books, but I can't decide if I should wait to read the books until after I see the movie, because I am always less disappointed when I read books after I see movies instead of vice versa.

Jimmy the Squid · « **Reply #27 on:** 23 Nov 2007, 09:39 »

I try whenever I can to read the books after seeing the film. Otherwise when I see the films I'm always comparing and remembering things that are done better in the book or were left out etc... But if you see the films first then when you get around to reading the books there are things you haven't seen before and things are explained better and the movie remains good, the book is just better.

Scandanavian War Machine · « **Reply #28 on:** 23 Nov 2007, 10:56 »

i was really excited to see this until i discovered that it had Nicole Kidman in it. i'll still see it but man i hate Nicole Kidman.

october1983 · « **Reply #29 on:** 23 Nov 2007, 11:45 »

Quote from: Linds on 23 Nov 2007, 09:30

Um, thanks? And it's a title. It's not like it's the entire story.

You're welcome. Seriously, though, I didn't mean to come across quite so offensive. I was more poking fun at a number of British people I know (no one here) that like to take the "lol Americans are so dumb they had to change the name of the book because they didn't get it" line.

And, yeah, it's just a title, like I said earlier, I don't have a massive problem with what it's called, I'd just kind of prefer if they retained Northern Lights as a title for the film over here, at least.

KharBevNor · « **Reply #30 on:** 23 Nov 2007, 23:40 »

Quote from: october1983 on 22 Nov 2007, 16:55

It still somewhat irks me that they didn't rename the film to Northern Lights here, but I guess it makes sense.

It makes sense as in, not having to make two versions of the (obligatory) animated title sequences and credits, not to mention all the advertising. Using the same title worldwide gives them a synergistic advertising campaign, particularly online, where it's harder to target advertising geographically, and each Northern Lights advert seen by a North American would be wasted, and vice versa. Hell, simply getting a decent domain name for a film called 'The Northern Lights' would have been rather complex and expensive. Using one tital globally probably saves them at least $100,000, I would guess.

october1983 · « **Reply #31 on:** 24 Nov 2007, 06:00 »

I guess it's kind of like driving on the left hand side of the road. I know it doesn't make sense that we do it differently to the rest of the world, but damnit if there isn't a part of me that quite likes the way it is.

öde · « **Reply #32 on:** 24 Nov 2007, 06:05 »

We drive on the left so we can aim properly at highwaymen.

TheFuriousWombat · « **Reply #33 on:** 24 Nov 2007, 08:49 »

Quote from: MusicScribbles on 21 Nov 2007, 22:44

The rating is out, and it's PG-13. This will not be for small children.

Yes!! Finally my hopes for this have been seriously lifted. They might just do it justice yet. This is very good to hear.

Liz · « **Reply #34 on:** 24 Nov 2007, 20:04 »

Here is a little something that will probably make quite a few of you either sad or angry.

supersheep · « **Reply #35 on:** 24 Nov 2007, 20:29 »

It made me angry because I could not post some sort of rebuttal. What kind of faith does one have if it cannot stand up to the argument's of a kid's book?

bryanthelion · « **Reply #36 on:** 24 Nov 2007, 21:46 »

Uhh, no one complained when C.S Lewis made a book targeted toward children about HIS religous beliefs.

I just athiests are less pissy

Liz · « **Reply #37 on:** 24 Nov 2007, 21:47 »

I joined in hopes of there being a hidden wall or something that I could laugh at, but upon discovering nothing of the sort I left with haste.

I just can't believe the number of people that have joined it already.

JimmyJazz · « **Reply #38 on:** 24 Nov 2007, 22:19 »

About 31,000 people. Man that's depressing. I hope the conflict doesn't make the news or it'll start a whole big awful debate and could delay the film.

axerton · « **Reply #39 on:** 25 Nov 2007, 05:43 »

Nothing delays Hollywood. I'm betting the producers ect are praying that it does hit the news. Nothing sells like controversy and calls for banning of a movie.

Lines · « **Reply #40 on:** 25 Nov 2007, 08:11 »

People don't have problems with religious based films, but they sure do with anything to do with atheism. People need to grow up. I almost want to join and post, "What the hell, people? It's a movie."

KharBevNor · « **Reply #41 on:** 25 Nov 2007, 14:15 »

His Dark Materials trilogy isn't even anti-religion, guys. It's anti-dogmatic/anti-authoritarainism. Pullmans a secularist, not an atheist. There's quite a lot of gnostic and deist ideas in it: the Authority isn't God, he's the demiurge. Hell, even the Archbishop of Canterbury thinks it's a good book. This back-lash is a nice demonstration of the shocking lack of theological sophistication and general narrow-mindedness of many Christians. So, the book doesn't chime with your ideas? I thought you had fucking FAITH. Stop whining.

I guess I can understand why the catholics object though. They thought they'd killed all the gnostics and the arians like, fifteen centuries ago.

jimbunny · « **Reply #42 on:** 25 Nov 2007, 19:44 »

To be fair, the Archbishop of Canterbury isn't the most theologically 'orthodox' guy out there.

That said, I loved the books. I can't say that reading a plot about killing "God" encouraged me to change my beliefs about the world any more than reading The Dark is Rising sequence or The Space Trilogy encouraged me to accept Arthurian legend as fact, wonderful as it is.

If it makes you feel any better, think of all the people on Facebook who won't join that group. And will see the movie because of that group. These numbers are very large as well. We all knew this would provoke a reaction from the religious right, so let's not be surprised.

dennis · « **Reply #43 on:** 25 Nov 2007, 21:00 »

Quote from: october1983 on 22 Nov 2007, 16:55

And yeah, despite popular misconception, it wasn't called The Golden Compass because they thought US audiences were too dumb to understand "Northern Lights"

Though this was the reason that Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone was renamed to ...Sorcerer's Stone.

dennis · « **Reply #44 on:** 25 Nov 2007, 21:22 »

Quote from: KharBevNor on 25 Nov 2007, 14:15

His Dark Materials trilogy isn't even anti-religion, guys. It's anti-dogmatic/anti-authoritarainism. Pullmans a secularist, not an atheist. There's quite a lot of gnostic and deist ideas in it: the Authority isn't God, he's the demiurge. Hell, even the Archbishop of Canterbury thinks it's a good book. This back-lash is a nice demonstration of the shocking lack of theological sophistication and general narrow-mindedness of many Christians. So, the book doesn't chime with your ideas? I thought you had fucking FAITH. Stop whining.

I guess I can understand why the catholics object though. They thought they'd killed all the gnostics and the arians like, fifteen centuries ago.

Being anti-dogmatic/authoritarian is being anti-religious. All religions rely on dogma (common beliefs) and the authoritarianism of gods (or their "representatives" on earth). Authoritarianism and dogmatism goes beyond religion, though.

Also, Pullman is an atheist. He's said so. He's also a secularist.

As for the gnostic and deistic ideas, it doesn't matter that the Authority's god isn't God, per se. The point is that there isn't a god, just people who use the idea of God to enslave others.

The Archbishop of Canterbury thinks it's a good book because he likes to think that the Anglican Church isn't evil, like the Authority. Of course, it is. It's just not as good at it as the Catholic Church.

Here's a good article on Pullman and the Trilogy from the New Yorker.

KharBevNor · « **Reply #45 on:** 26 Nov 2007, 09:51 »

Quote from: dennis on 25 Nov 2007, 21:22

Being anti-dogmatic/authoritarian is being anti-religious. All religions rely on dogma (common beliefs) and the authoritarianism of gods (or their "representatives" on earth).

EH-UHRRRRR

Go back to theology school plzthx

Ocarina654 · « **Reply #46 on:** 29 Nov 2007, 15:31 »

Kind of a response to the previously posted Facebook group: http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=6457837738

I expect everyone to join

bryanthelion · « **Reply #47 on:** 01 Dec 2007, 11:49 »

just did

Johnny C · « **Reply #48 on:** 01 Dec 2007, 15:39 »

I have tried to read the first book four God damn times and I just can't bring myself to care about anything in it. The farthest I've managed to get was about forty pages in.

So I probably won't be seeing this movie!

Joseph · « **Reply #49 on:** 01 Dec 2007, 15:56 »

How old were you when you tried?

THESE FORUMS NOW CLOSED (read only)

Author Topic: The Golden Compass (Read 27776 times)

Worldbeing

monkandmovies13