The Golden Compass

So the first thing to note is that I have not read The Golden Compass. While it's a series I have had some interest in, it wasn't the fantasy series that I was into as a kid. I know some background on the series and the author that I have some thoughts on. I might discuss that a little bit, but I do want to focus on the elements that I do know a lot about, and that would be my viewing experience of this film as well as my troubled anticipation of the HBO series coming out later this year.

The Golden Compass was the first book in a series known as His Dark Materials, written by Phillip Pullman. In doing a little bit of research on the series and Pullman himself, I find him very interesting as a person and the motivation for His Dark Materials to be really interesting. It's got high fantasy elements but then elements of physics, theology, and philosophy is thrown into it with the series being compared to Paradise Lost. Pullman is highly critical of religion and even took aim at C.S. Lewis, calling The Chronicles of Narnia religious propaganda.

Unfortunately, that has made His Dark Materials both a really interesting yet kind of annoying series. On one hand, it is a really interesting perspective and I love it when authors take elements of philosophy and theology and throw it into the fiction/fantasy work, I think it adds a level of complexity.

On the other hand, I've never been a fan of the idea that His Dark Materials was written in part to create a counter argument to The Chronicles of Narnia. It's one thing to write a series based off of religion or your philosophy, its another to write in total retaliation to other people's work.

However, I find the concept of the story really interesting. Just because someone might have a particular thought on religion doesn't discount them in my mind. Stephen King has plenty of things to say about religion but I still love his work.

On top of that, whether its been through this particular film or just what I've heard of the series, this kind of fantasy does interest me. I'll talk about it more when I talk about the aesthetic, but I did want to preface this review with the fact that there is some biases I hold towards this series. However, I am intrigued by the series and will be checking out the HBO series when it comes out later this year.

The other element that I should mention is that no matter what my thoughts on the series are, that doesn't really change the execution of this movie... because this movie is a bit of a mess.

In an exposition dump in the first 2 minutes of the film, the setting is established as a parallel dimension where people's souls live on the outside of their bodies in the form of an animal. This dimension looks like ours except for some differences like steam-punk-like fantasy mechanisms, witches, Ice Bears, and a race of people called Gyptians.

Despite being an exposition dump, there are a lot of questions you'll have during this movie that will never be answered. Just so you're aware.

But the movie mainly centers around a young girl named Lyra (played by Dakota Richard Blue), whose Uncle, Lord Asriel (played by Daniel Craig), is on the cusp of a discovery of the origins of something called dust, an element that would disrupt the world order of the governing Magisterium (probably the biggest allegory for the Catholic Church in cinematic history).

While Asriel goes on what is clearly the more interesting story here, to go north and find the source of the dust and travel across dimensions (because nobody would ever want to see that story), his brat of a niece Lyra is wisked off on her own adventure through a series of circumstances.

First she's lured into the company of the mysteriously devilish Mrs. Coulter (played by the stunning Nicole Kidman), then she's given a Golden Compass in which she is told it helps people find the truth and that Mrs. Coulter should never know she has it, then she gets thrown into a larger adventure about saving some children and she odysseys from place to place, kind of aimlessly until the end where she flies off into a sequel we'll never get to see.

Are parts of it interesting? Yes. For sure. The visuals and the world they build out is actually pretty impressive. One thing I should give this movie credit for is going through a lot of places, introducing a lot of elements to the world, and making me curious. The movie is also really good at no context exposition dumps.

The first 30 seconds of the movie is Eva Green (who adds absolutely nothing to this film by the way, but she's Eva Green, she's got a cool voice and she looks badass) explaining how this takes place in an alternate dimension where people's souls live outside their body in the form of an animal.

There's a lot more she says with no explanation, like what Gyptians are, what armored bears are or how they're different, and some of it is explained, but the animals is a good example.

That raises a lot of questions, that they never really explain. When a person dies the animal vanishes but what happens if the animal dies? What does a certain animal tell you about a person? What does having a monkey tell you about Mrs. Coulter? Why doesn't her monkey talk and Lyra's daemon does? Do Daemons have alternate personalities than their owner? Are there monkeys in this world who are not daemons? Why does Kathy Bates voice Sam Elliot's daemon and what does that say about him?

Not all of these questions are super relevant but I hope you get what I'm going at. If you have quite a bit of mythology to explain, just rushing through the plot as fast as you can and hoping that the audience is catching on as you go doesn't make for a very interesting story because you don't know the rules.

That fits into another issue, the pacing.

The movie clips by very fast that we're not really allowed to get to know the majority of the characters and the characters we do get to know very well, which is essentially just Lyra, aren't that likable.

Take Lyra and Lorek Byrnison for example. One we get to know from the get go. She's the stereotypical tomboy who hates being called a lady and is ready to fight the system. But in multiple scenes she just comes off as a brat and since she's the main character, we get to see this asshole the entire movie. And it would be one thing if that was a character flaw that she needs to work through, to gain compassion. But no, she's just an asshole but she's the main character so they just kind of accept it as her personality.

Now take Lorek Byrnison. We meet him around the half way point and because he's so late in the game, they have to spend cram in his entire backstory and his motivation for joining Lyra in a matter of a couple minutes. Unfortunately, a lot of the characters fall into this category. Sam Elliot, Eva Green, Daniel Craig, all the Gyptians, they're backstory gets crammed into very few scenes and at the end of the day, they're just people in cool costumes following around a bratty young girl just because she's the one who can read the mcguffin, the Golden Compass.

Another point on pacing is how this movie doesn't follow the classic structure of a film and it turns out awkward. Breaking traditional structure is okay, but it makes certain parts of the film seem uneven.

So the beginning starts with Mrs. Coulter taking Lyra away on a trip, treating her nicely, and as an adult I'm realizing that she's most definitely being held hostage and seems more like the B story to a more interesting A story with Lord Asriel, but whatever, that wasn't the story.

The problem is, at the 15 minute mark which is when the hero is supposed to be heading off on their mission, that happens. Lyra leaves with Mrs. Coulter but doesn't totally understand why.

At the thirty minute mark she realizes Mrs. Coulter's cruelty and runs away. Now, you could say this is the point where Lyra realizes her quest where a usual movie would, but she's just running away. She's not going to help any children which kind of becomes the main plot, she's not going to find dust which was probably going to be the plot for the movie franchise, she's just running away.

And that's the main problem, the objective of the movie is split between this larger objective of dust and taking down the magisterium, and the smaller but probably more actionable objective is saving the children. Yes they are somewhat related, but one was an objective that wasn't going to be solved in one movie, dust and taking down the magisterium, and the other wasn't paid enough attention to.

It's the classic DC blunder, trying to make a franchise before you make a good movie.

The last issue I wanna bring up is the fact that the villain is not clearly defined in this movie. Mrs. Coulter is set up as a bad guy in the beginning but after Lyra escapes, Mrs. Coulter shows up once to slap the shit out of a monkey (hilarious) and then she shows up at the end where she's revealed to be bad... but not that bad.

The main villain is supposed to be the magisterium, at least the overarching bad guy for what would have been the movie franchise.

The problem is, and hear me out here, there's nothing to indicate to the characters that the magisterium is that bad of a government. They make them out to be like the evil Empire from Star Wars, but lets take a look at the bad things the magisterium does in this movie.

They send a guy to assassinate Daniel Craig, fair but it goes by so quick and is downplayed so much that it's hard to even say that guy was representing the magisterium, and even if he did does that mean the entire organization is evil?

Mrs. Coulter was mean. Yes... but so? Lyra was being a dick!

The one argument in the story is that they kidnap children to separate them from their daemons which they even try to play off as a kindness to save them from dust (which we never really get an idea of what it is to begin with in this movie).

Now listen, I know that Derek Jacobi, Nicole Kidman, and the great late Christopher Lee are the villains in this film, it's obvious

They threw Saurman in this movie for absolutely no reason, but he's very villainy.

But in the logic of the movie, for the majority of the film, there is no indication that the Magisterium is this downright evil force. For example, in The Hunger Games which came out a year after this, the main focus of the movie and the crux of why the Capital is evil is the games where they pit children against each other for sport... pretty obviously they're evil. The Magisterium kidnaps children sure but it's never really made clear why. If they're evil, they're kind of stupid evil.

I won't jump to too many conclusions because I haven't read the book, but if this movie was criticized for being hyper critical of the catholic church, I'm also not gonna play dumb and say that the Magisterium isn't the metaphor its trying to be and it feels like the perception Pullman had of the church constituted to him as evil, but I don't think that's going to translate 100% to everyone else's sentiments.

Honestly, this movie makes me want to read the book and check out the HBO series because of the world that this takes place in. It's got these really interesting fantasy elements, interesting characters that I'm sure they spend more than 2 minutes explaining, and they actually have time to develop their character arcs.

As a movie, it's visually beautiful. I love the visuals, the fantasy elements, and some aspects of the story. I think it's a really creative and innovative world that oddly makes me want to explore it more. But the movie is a bit of a mess. The pacing is way off, the characters are either underdeveloped or unlikable, and the movie can't decide on the exact plot or message its trying to convey. Now I did read that the movie was edited to take out some of the more anti-religion parts. I'm sure that was a pain in the ass. I think while this movie was really a trainwreck, it does make me more interested in the direction the HBO series will go. Will they lean into the fantasy elements? Will it lean into the criticism of religion? Will it find an in between? I don't know.

I might revisit this source material down the road and some of my thoughts might change. But until then, I can say The Golden Compass is a bit of a mess, but if you're looking for some good visuals and don't care too much about the story or the mixed up messages, it might be something to check out. Otherwise, wait for the HBO series.

But what did you think of The Golden Compass? How does it compare to the books? Are the books worth reading? Why? Comment and Discuss below! You can also send me your thoughts on Twitter @MovieSymposium as well as send me your requests for films I should review in the future. If you follow me on Twitter, you can get updates on future movie news and reviews coming out of this blog.

Thanks for reading!