Northern Lights as a film 2007: The Golden Compass

[kyser_soze]

AHHH, *strokes moustache* very interesting.

Also, Nicole Kidman looks HOT as Mrs Coulter, even tho normally I'm not a fan of hers...

 

[Idaho]

It was always called that in the US. I think there was some other book or something famous in the US with that name.

 

[May Kasahara]

Yes, there's a Nora Roberts potboiler called Northern Lights. It's well cheesy.

 

[kyser_soze]

Ah, so it wasn't renamed like the Rowling book & film were because the seppoes are a bit dim then.

 

[laptop]

because the seppoes are a bit dim

TBF, not because they're dim but because they're uneducated.

The intelligent recognise the difference

 

[kyser_soze]

Uneducated, yet the US public school system spends more money per head then any other nation on the planet.

Go figure.

 

[May Kasahara]

Yes, on metal detectors.

/crude stereotype joke

 

[scumbalina]

We went out last night to see this, all excited that it was on a day early at our cinema, only to find out they'd put the wrong dates on the website

 

[Melinda]

So many thoughts and influences. I found this article by Tony Watkins who has written a guide to HDM. He declares his interests (he is a Christian) and discusses some of Pullman's more controversial ideas. Its a reasoned response.

How can ‘God’ be an angel? In Pullman’s underlying ‘creation myth’, matter became conscious of itself and generated Dust. Some of it ‘condensed’ into the first angel – a being of pure Dust. This new being was fully conscious, and when he began to see other angels condensing out of the Dust he realised what an opportunity he had. Since he came first, he could tell the subsequent angels that he was God and had created them.

The angels loved and obeyed him, but the Sophia (Wisdom), the youngest and most beautiful angel, discovered the truth about the Authority who subsequently expelled her. There was an angelic rebellion, but the Authority defeated it and imprisoned the rebels in one of the many worlds.

Then Sophia told them about the Authority’s lies to human beings (and conscious beings in other worlds), and the rebels escaped to bring enlightenment, wisdom and full consciousness to the poor creatures under the Authority’s rule.

From here: http://www.damaris.org/content/content.php?type=5&id=368

Have a read- There are a fair few bits from Dr Rowan Williams too.

 

[Chz]

Unfortunately, the movie is extremely disjointed. To be fair, the book is as well but nowhere nearly as bad as the movie. There are a lot of "What the fuck?" moments in it if you haven't read the book in the last year or so. CGI armoured polar bears make up for an awful lot though. Part of the problem is that a lot of the first book is setup for the second, and it's blatantly obvious in the movie that nothing much really happens until the sequel as well.

It's also quite bloody for a children's film. There's not much (if any) actual *blood* in it, but an awful lot of people die and a bear gets its jaw ripped off.

I'll admit I'm pretty neutral on the books. I thought they made Harry Potter look quite well-written. They're certainly not bad, so far as children's fiction goes, but I'm a bit dismayed as to how Nothern Lights became an instant classic. I'd rather read Narnia or Potter or Roald Dahl any day of the week.

 

[kyser_soze]

I thought they made Harry Potter look quite well-written.

You're in a minority of about 1 person with that view...

 

[Chz]

Somehow, I find that rather unlikely. But I *can* see where you're coming from on that. Pullman's can evoke marvellous things with his use of language in small areas - better than Rowling could ever hope to be. But his ability to string together a story is lacking. Still not bad, but a HP novel hangs together a lot better even though the individual pages aren't up to the same measure.

FWIW, I mean that in relation to Nothern Lights. He gets better. The first HP is literary drudgery of the highest order as well.

 

[Stigmata]

I enjoyed the books, but I found Pullman's plotting to be all over the place, like he'd changed his mind halfway through the series what he wanted the story to be about.

 

[Matt S]

I found the books to be really poor, but my wife absolutely loves them and thinks they are genius.

I kept quite about all that when they were making Pullman a Freeman of Oxford! Especially since he's been really really sound on local political issues, like saving Jericho Boatyard and so on.

Matt

 

[Idaho]

I enjoyed the books, but I found Pullman's plotting to be all over the place, like he'd changed his mind halfway through the series what he wanted the story to be about.

Yeah I would go along with that.

 

[fucthest8]

I'd rather read <snip> Roald Dahl any day of the week.

Now we're talking.

I only read the books really recently at the behest of my girlfriend and thoroughly enjoyed them ... except for large chunks of the last book, that just seemed completely pointless frankly. It could have been half the size and lost nothing I thought. Agree with the comments from others about the plotting being all over the place ... stll beat the fuck out of Harry Potter or Narnia though, but part of my reason for feeling that is just because it is slightly subversive, rather than the upper middle class shite that that Potter or Narnia are.

Oh and I thought that the role of Coulter was made for Kidmans icy plastic immoveable forehead. About the one job she suits.

 

[Strumpet]

Going to see this tomorrow night with minime
Can't wait.

*wonders what soj. thought of it*

 

[sojourner]

Going to see this tomorrow night with minime
Can't wait.

*wonders what soj. thought of it*

I loved it so SO much, I started a new thread about it Nah, there was something I needed to get off my chest and as it's a spoiler I had to start a new thread about it

I'd like to see what you thought about it strumps - on the spoiler thread

 

[maximilian ping]

saw it last night. it's an abject lesson in how some books just cannot be made into films. awful

 

[scifisam]

saw it last night. it's an abject lesson in how some books just cannot be made into films. awful

How come? I didn't feel that way in the slightest. Maybe that's partly because I haven't read the books for ages?

 

[Strumpet]

Loved it too!

*goes to spoiler thread*

 

[maximilian ping]

The National Theatre's version of the trilogy was bloody brilliant as well, saw both plays in one day over about seven hours

i did as well. pure class. and just goes to show that theatre can still kick cinema's arse

 

[mrs quoad]

Loved.

All I'm saying as some poncey nozzle will probably've already analysed it to bugggery with metaphors and similes and references and blah blah blah yadda yadda

Kicked ass. WHOSSHH.

 

[laptop]

All I'm saying as some poncey nozzle will probably've already analysed it to bugggery with metaphors and similes and references

Sorry, I've been busy

 

[golightly]

saw it last night. it's an abject lesson in how some books just cannot be made into films. awful

There was no reason why it could not have been made into a good film. Shame it wasn't.

 

[Melinda]

saw it last night. it's an abject lesson in how some books just cannot be made into films. awful

Agreed. It was awful.
So bitterly disappointed.

 

[mrs quoad]

Loved loved loved

This may be one of the advantages of going to the cinema once every 4 years or thereabouts

 

[laptop]

There was no reason why it could not have been made into a good film. Shame it wasn't.

Yes there is, if your criterion is that the film be of the book rather than a companion piece.

There are just too many treasured details in the books to fit into the time available before people get sore bums.

And the book is - particularly in the second and third parts? - about multi-strandedness, whereas (popular) film requires a much smaller number of protagonists.

 

[maximilian ping]

There was no reason why it could not have been made into a good film. Shame it wasn't.

true

 

[maximilian ping]

Loved loved loved

This may be one of the advantages of going to the cinema once every 4 years or thereabouts

must have been pissed/out of it/gun at head, surely