His dark materials

A

Angie223

New member
Did anyone like these books. I thought they were brilliant. I enjoyed them more than Harry Potter when I was growing up. So why are they not getting the movies of them out there? They did one, dumbed down version. I liked it ok.

Why do you think the first movie didn't do so well. It's a good story imo. Is it the actors, or the way the movie was written.
 
They captured the setting, art design and characters well. For some reason, they did a weak job of telling the story. I didn't think it was a bad film, just a bit hacked up and simplified in some ways.

It didn't too bad in terms of money worldwide but I can't see them taking risks with the series.
 
Yes I agree. They did it like that becuase they were afraid of the reaction. I was disapointed. I liked the film, but wouldn't want to watch it again. It was nothing special.

They could have taken a lot more risks. To be honest I doubt many people who hadn't read the books would have understood the story at all.

Becuase it is about religon in a negitive way, people are so against it.
 
Read half the first book as we were doing it in english. I thought it was brilliant. The movie was awful. I thought it was great casting for Nicole Kidman. Whenever i read a book, i play it out in my head like a movie with actors and Nicole Kidman was one of the few i had in mind so i wasn't suprised when i came across a trailer and saw her in it.
 
I went to see it with someone who'd read the books (I have too) and three people who hadn't. The two of us who'd read the book were frustrated at how much they'd butchered it, and those who hadn't read the books had no clue what was going on.

Someone told me that the studios sold off everything but the US rights to marketing, and so the studios made pretty much zilch from the film as it did well in Europe/Asia, and bombed in America. I have no idea if that's true or not.
 
I thought the film did a fair job of transferring the book to screen. They obviously couldn't put everything on the page on the screen. It's a shame they didn't make the sequels, but I honestly think the final book would have been virtually unfilmable, if they wanted to do it any justice.
 
I just couldn't get into the books, read the first one and had a stab at the second but I lost interest. I was supposed to like Lyra but I didn't, I hated her.

The movie was showing when I was on an airplane but I couldn't bring myself to watch it.
 
I really enjoyed reading the books and although I thought the film wasn't excellent, it was certainly worthy of having the other two films made. It also won an Oscar if I remember correctly for best special effects. I think it's too late now to make the other two films.
 
Loved the books and didn't mind the film as i took it as a film for children so it was fine.

It would make a wicked series on tv i reckon, then they would get all the detail in.
 
The books are an amazing piece of storytelling in my opinion, but I always worried that any studio that tried to do a movie version would end up not having the balls to include all the themes of the church in any adaptation. As far as casting goes I thought the movie was pretty much spot on, it just didn't tell the whole story that it should have done.
 
Thats the problem though, introducing those issues would not have saved the film in any way. Theres a huge problem of the characters not being able to carry a film in my opinion, the books just don't translate.
 
Well the story, design, effects, casting etc. were all there but sadly it was directed like a piece of crap by Chris Weitz!!

Of course, there was a lot of studio interference during production. They made them cut the last 15 minutes out of the film because they felt it was too 'bleak' an ending (it involves Lord Asriel (Daniel Craig's character) and the killing of Lyra's friend to open the doorway to 'our' reality). Because they cut that they had to change the order of earlier sequences so the second half of the film just feels disjointed.

Also, the Catholic Church were dead against the series being adapted for a big audience and they may have had more influence than was previously thought over how badly The Golden Compass performed.
 
Maybe they'll include the cut scenes if the ever release a special directors cut? I saw the film b4 I read t he books, so I wasnt so much dissapointed, as curious. Kidman was marvelous, as indeed were most characterisations. Its hard to cram all of the books into one film, you need a good 3 hours worth (like the LOTR directors cuts). And yep, the catholic church is indeed a powerful worldwide org, so Im sure they had an influence, in some indirect way! I read somewhere that it did everywhere except the states.
 
I just don't see how 15 minutes more would help the film, it dragged on and on and was just lifeless to begin wtih. I just don't think there was anything to salvage. The basic mythology was not sold in a credible way. If you can't sell the world you can't sell the story. I saw the film before I read the books, and so I can see why it just didn't work.
 
The director's cut won't happen anytime soon because there are so many effects shots that would need completing, costing millions. It sounRAB to me like it will never see the light of day, which is a real travesty.

If you read the book you realise what a surefire movie hit it could and should have been. If it wasn't for a big ice locations needed for the North I bet a brilliant TV version of the book could be mounted.
 
Back
Top