The Golden Compass

I am among those who have not read the book and I found it to be initially confusing and boring but the film picks up after Lyra is taken into Mrs. Coultier's lavish house. The pace picks up but it may seem a little too rushed. The ending was sort of continuous, requiring a sequel. I would have liked to see the second movie but unfortunately, there is a rumour that it may not happen which is quite a pity because I thought 'The Golden Compass' was going somewhere. It is not the best movie of its kind but I thought it was not so bad either. The special effects are good. The characters are lively. I loved the daemons. It's got quite a stellar cast but only Nicole Kidman gets enough screen time to be noticed. Gorgeous, glamorous and deceitful, could not picture anyone else for the part of Mrs. Coultier. (I am almost sure that the rest were promised a lengthier role in the sequels). Daniel Craig only has about 15 minutes but he makes the best of it. Sam Elliot is funny. Dakota Blue Richards is a confident young actress and she carries off Lyra well. Overall I enjoyed the world that was created in this movie and the characters. Too bad that it's left incomplete.

I went in cynical about this, especially after the travesty that was the Narnia film, but i was quickly converted: it's great fun. A really entertaining and immersive film that intelligently builds a fantastical world that the uninitiated can marvel and thrill in. I have to say i haven't read the books so can't comment on a book to film comparison.

On the cast, I don't know how it works in the book but the adults are barely in this. Nicole has the most significant work and Sam Elliott, while a late arrival, is a great presence once he's around. However Daniel Craig and Eva Green are barely in it and Christopher Lee has one blink-and-you'll miss him scene. That said the casting is excellent. Green is suitably witchy and Craig makes an impact in his one/two dialogue scenes early on which, along with a couple of wordless inserts of his storyline, put him enough into your mind to wonder about him. He feels set up for a more significant role in future instalments. Elliott is great. That sonorous voice sneaking out from underneath that bushy moustache feels exactly right for Lee Scorsby.

Kidman is perfect. There's something indelibly creepy about her rigid manner that works for the elegant but sinister Mrs Coulter. Meanwhile Simon McBurney is magnificently slimy and loathsome as the magisterium main face. You know he's a villain from the moment he enters frame.

Dakota Blue Richards is a great find as Lara. While the first two Potter films and Lion, the Witch & the Wardrobe were significantly hampered by the incredibly mannered, unrealistic, wooden acting of the young leads (most of the Potter cast got better, time will tell on Narnia) Richards is a winner from the outset. Precocious and feisty without seeming too forced she is generally believable whether is her rebellion or her loyalty. This is just as well as the film is really entirely on her shoulders. It will work or not for people based on whether you like her. She's in virtually every scene and has a lot of different emotions to get across as well as having to have significant interaction with CGI creations like her spirit animal Pan (the ubiquitous Freddie Highmore) and the polar bear played by Ian McKellen. She has a couple of slightly actorly moments but does incredibly well for a first timer under this kind of pressure.

Of the voice-only cast McKellen is a perfect choice for the honourable polar bear while Highmore is either getting less annoying or it's just beneficial not being able to see him, as he is nicely understated as Pan. My only note on this casting would be once or twice I couldn't tell is Lyra or Pan was speaking in their interaction as in quiet moments Highmore and Richards' voices are remarkably similar!

The effects are good but not great. I had worried they'd be as weak as Narnia and they aren't. The world is beautifully created and always feels real, whether Scorsby's flying ship or the blimp thing from the trailer, or stunning Arctic landscapes and big cities. The smaller creatures are also brilliantly rendered, Pan in particular. Some of the bigger creatures are less perfect. The polar bears have a cartoony unreal feel but in a fantasy setting with battle armour and stuff they work well enough. Certainly better than Aslan in Narnia. However the leopard creature with Daniel Craig doesn't look right at all.

As for the film itself it really zips along quickly. The uninitiated (like me) may occasionally lose track of what's going on early on as strange terms and names are thrown back and forth but it soon settles down and makes sense. Rather than frustrating me that I might be missing key elements of what this world was about I felt happy going with it and was left thinking I'll watch it again when it's released just to be sure I didn't miss anything. It's a relief to see a fantasy film that brings it in at almost exactly two hours and has a cracking momentum, as opposed to the seemingly endless drag of Lord of the Rings, Harry Potter and Narnia. Don't get me wrong taking time can work. I really liked Fellowship of the Ring but the pace of the Potters really tests my patience. Golden Compass moves so fast before you know it it's over and it leaves you wanting more. Indeed at the end of this film I could say it had succeeded in doing something the Potter franchise has never done: it left me desperate to see the next one.

However what really made me like this film more than those others is the tone and some of the things they do in it. There are moments in this, that i won't spoil for those like me who didn't know the plot, that really surprised me that they'd do in a family film.

A big fight scene between polar bears and the end battle are suitably exciting and i found myself really invested. I cared about the characters. Whereas in Narnia they hadn't done enough to make you care about Aslan's fate (criminal given how effectively the book and the 80s BBC TV serial managed it) this really has you on the edge of your seat for the good guys.

Overall I really liked Golden Compass and would give it an 8/10 – compared to LOTR 10/10, 9/10, 7/10 for the series, Potter 5/10, 6/10, 8/10, 7/10, 7/10 for the series and Narnia 4/10. I will be watching this again when it comes out (something I never did for Potter or Narnia) and am looking forward to the next instalment. I hope Daniel Craig and Eva Green get bigger roles in the next film, but all round a great start to a potential franchise that I had middling hopes for.

For some strange reason, a theater in the middle of the cornfield in Indiana had a sneak preview of the Golden Compass, and being a fan of the books I decided to take advantage of it. I wasn't sure what I was getting into, as there seems to be a rather large glut of Harry Potter and Lord of the Rings wannabes crowding theaters now and in the near future. This version of the Golden Compass beautifully brings the books to life and was very pleasing to watch with rather nice visuals. The acting is quite good, especially from the young lead, and the animation makes one wonder what they can't do with computers these days. The only true complaint I have about this movie is that it is difficult to understand and follow if one is not familiar with the books. Some scenes at the beginning seems disconnected, but after the halfway point the story comes together. The Golden Compass series is rather dark in its nature, and I'm glad that the movie didn't pull any punches with the supernatural combat (which is awesome, specifically when the witches and bears do battle). Some liberty is taken with the story as expected, and many church references are renamed, but the quality of the story never suffers. I recommend the movie and I look forward to seeing the rest of the trilogy completed.

The film looked good but I felt that the film had been dumbed down to make it suitable for all. A lot of people leaving the cinema had the same opinion. If the film had been longer then it could've contained more of the book and included more of the theological aspects. I think the books were so good because they expected a depth of understanding from the reader and presented ideas about the soul, etc. in an intelligent way. The reader was expected to think, something the film doesn't! The film seemed really cheesy, rather like the Chronicles of Narnia. I was hoping for something with a bit more depth, like Lord of the Rings. The cast was good and the locations all looked as I'd imagined they would. Young children will probably enjoy this and it may encourage them to read the novels.

Some great scenes, some fascinating artwork, and, although in rather short supply, some enchanting acting performances such as from Eva Green who portrayed a witch, or from Sam Elliot who was superb, or from young Dakota Blue Richards who was indeed good, and Nicole Kidman, who always is impressive though this time maybe was not at her best.

I enjoyed the film, yes, but... something was missing and I just can not put my finger on it. The film seems to rush through the story, not flow with the story. The end comes to soon, and yet no conclusions are drawn so that a sequel will obviously follow. However, whether I would bother watching it when it does come, I really am not sure.

A nice little film... but by no means brilliant.