Chris Weitz, director of The Golden Compass and the next Twilight movie, at Comic-Con:
Not really surprising, but interesting nonetheless...
Not really surprising, but interesting nonetheless...
"Golden Compass" director speaks about own film: thunk-whack-POW!
- Thread starter Gaith
- Start date
The studio screwed the pooch rather thoroughly on this one. Screwing with the integrity of the story in an self-evidently futile attempt to placate the mouth-frothers, or getting the Harry Potter audience confused with the LOTR audience, so that trying to be something to everyone it wound up being nothing to nobody. Or selling overseas profits and thus managing to make no money off a film that clocked in at nearly 400K worldwide. I hadn't heard they recut it as well; I wonder if Weitz would have ended it the way it should have.
Fictitiously yours, Trent Roman
Fictitiously yours, Trent Roman
When I saw Golden Compass, I said afterward that it died in the editing room, and people looked at me funny. Most folks automatically blame the director, and have no idea how important editing can be.
They actually shot the real ending to the book, but the studio thought it was too depressing, so they moved scenes around and tacked on that awful sappy crap. They also made a lot of micro-cuts within individual scenes, that gave it a bad, "made for tv" feel.
They actually shot the real ending to the book, but the studio thought it was too depressing, so they moved scenes around and tacked on that awful sappy crap. They also made a lot of micro-cuts within individual scenes, that gave it a bad, "made for tv" feel.
I wonder where the decision on the scene where Lyra and Iorek bring Billy back to the Gyptian camp came from. IMO, that was the worst failure of the film. That section ought to have been the sort of horror that stays with you growing up, until one day when you're in your twenties and you and your friends all have a big confessional and admit it scared the crap out of you.
Instead they completely downplayed the meaning of the loss of Billy's dæmon.
Instead they completely downplayed the meaning of the loss of Billy's dæmon.
Last edited:
I did rather enjoy the film, probably because I haven't read the books. But I'd heard that the studio had messed with it. And of course all the bible-thumpers protesting it (usually a sure sign of a good film in my book).
Was really dissapointed that there wasn't a Directors Cut, or at least deleted scenes on the dvd.
Was really dissapointed that there wasn't a Directors Cut, or at least deleted scenes on the dvd.
Luckily, I saw the movie before I read the books. So i was able to enjoy both. I would love to see them try to adapt the other books, but I bet it will never happen.
"Subtle Knife", one can probably get away with substituting the spiritual elements for supernatural ones. But the climax of the series is the siege of Heaven; how do you do that in a story which has been castrated of its religious aspects?
To be fair, the film did well in most markets. A lot of the international distributors focused their marketing campaign on that very point, putting it forward as a children- and family-friendly film in the Harry Potter vein.
Fictitiously yours, Trent Roman
^^ Forgetting the religious aspects, the book takes a complete left turn from the previous one as well, it would be a very different movie and it would be interesting to see what the reactions would be.
My experience is similar. I read the Golden Compass about 3-4 years before the movie came out but kinda started giving up on it when the drunk bear comes onto the scene. Tried jumping a few pages ahead and somehow finished it but didn't really understand what was going on except that they were sacrificing the children's daemons in order to either send the children over to the other world or form a bridge to that world or something.
This might be sacrilege but the movie kinda "tied up" the ending for me in a better way than some of what I read in the book. Nothing really against Phillip Pullman's skills as a writer - I think he writes very well. It was just that the plot became less and less appealing as I read the book. (It occasionally happens to me even when I'm reading books by skilled writers - Stephen Donaldson's Covenant series comes to my mind - I put down that first book as way too icky for me very quickly into it).
I'd hate to start off with the movie, because I think the production design is all wrong. In the dvd extras, they mention that they decided not to go too Victorian-era on Lyra's world to avoid being lumped in with increasingly cliched 19th-century-themed steampunk. That, and they probably figured their shinier, more colorful and fantastic approach would please the kiddies more.
But from a story perspective, that's a terrible move. Lyra is impressed by our world in The Subtle Knife, but I don't think the film Lyra would be to nearly the same degree. Besides, since the Church runs her world, it should be grimy and technologically stunted. Not even a dazzling director's cut - which I do still hope for - would remedy this fundamentall error.
But from a story perspective, that's a terrible move. Lyra is impressed by our world in The Subtle Knife, but I don't think the film Lyra would be to nearly the same degree. Besides, since the Church runs her world, it should be grimy and technologically stunted. Not even a dazzling director's cut - which I do still hope for - would remedy this fundamentall error.
^ The blimp was cool, though. I loved the blimp.
I, too, was disappointed by the film, especially considering I thought the casting was very good. I was disappointed about the religious content toned down (which, of course, is ridiculous considering the direction of the following two novels) and I hate the ending with a passion. I can only hope someday we'll see the film properly edited but there are, unfortunately, some problems that editing can't fix.
I didn't like the movie, but I didn't think it was any worse than the book, really.
Pullman is very good at building a fascinating fictional world, but at the heart of the novel is a character, Lyra, a selfish, amoral, cruel girl whom I found extremely difficult to like. She's also a very passive protagonist: things happen around her, and she has very little direct influence on them. I was hoping that she would eventually get eaten by a bear, but no such luck.
Pullman is very good at building a fascinating fictional world, but at the heart of the novel is a character, Lyra, a selfish, amoral, cruel girl whom I found extremely difficult to like. She's also a very passive protagonist: things happen around her, and she has very little direct influence on them. I was hoping that she would eventually get eaten by a bear, but no such luck.
Funny you say that about Lyra. One of my biggest problems with the two sequels is Will. I hate every aspect of the character, wherease I love Lyra.
still can't believe that Transformers didn't get the VFX Oscar and it went to a fuckin' talkin' polar bear.