I went to see The Golden Compass yesterday. I went in with lowered expectations, thanks to the sighing reviews I'd read beforehand, but I think even if I hadn't read those reviews I still would have thought it was okay. Granted, it could have been a lot better, and it certainly didn't match up to the poetry of the Lord of the Rings movies, but - it wasn't bad.
The biggest thing that was (literally) lost in the translation from book to film was the last three chapters. I can see why those chapters were left out: in those chapters, protagonist Lyra, having saved her kidnapped friend Roger, brings him with her when she goes to rescue her father, unwittingly fulfilling a prophecy that ends with Roger dead. That's... kind of a bummer. Considering the demographic the film - as a Hollywood family fantasy film - is targeting, I'm not surprised at all that those chapters were cut. The way the film ends, with Lyra and Roger together on their way to rescue her father, is much more likely to garner positive word-of-mouth.
Marketing purposes aside, though, personally I don't have a problem with this lopping off the final chapters.
(I only really feel sorry for those schmucks who haven't read the books. Can't you see it? "Ohhh, Roger was so cute with Lyra! Let's go see the second movie when it comes out!" ... *two minutes into the second movie* wa Waaa WAAAAAAA.)
As for why I don't have a problem with this excision: the movie sets up Roger's rescue as the central quest. By the end of the movie, the quest is fulfilled, and the rescue of Lord Asriel is the cliffhanger. Is it as good a cliffhanger as the one provided in the book? No, but it is a cliffhanger, and a pretty good one at that. If I hadn't read the book, I would have thought it a sufficient one, and the movie, as a whole, relatively satisfying.
What prevents it from greatness, though, is that it doesn't quite divorce itself from the book. The pacing is odd throughout the movie: moments that are important in the movie are given short shrift. An example is the Billy Costa scene. It is what the movie turns on: this is when Lyra discovers what is being done to the kidnapped children, and what will be done to Roger if she doesn't rescue him first. In the book this is an important section, but in the book's larger context it's not as much. By the movie's structure, however, this should be a whammer of a scene. But the scene barely registers, and most of it is spent on Lyra poking around an eerie house, taking eons before she discovers Billy. And when she does, the scene snaps up her reaction and moves on. ...what?
Other moments that are not important drag on and on. An example of this is the introduction of Lee Scoresby. He's not important in the context of the movie (actually, he's not that important in the book either), but the scene where he's acquainted with Lyra gives the sense that he is important, simply because it's long. But then, as the movie goes on, it's revealed that he's... really not that important. You see how confusing that is?
If you've read the book, some of the weird pacing problems will make sense, but I think the film will end up confusing a lot of people, simply because it's neither here nor there. The pacing doesn't work to the "Rescue Roger" throughline of the movie; it's almost funny how Lyra has to keep telling people (and by extension the audience) that she's on a quest to rescue Roger. If the throughline is working, it shouldn't need to be said. As it is, it feels too much like the scriptwriters knew that the movie was too sprawling and had too many (movie-wise) pointless digressions, and so felt the need to prod us every now and then.
It's a pity. I really wanted to love this film, but I really only like it now.
0 comments:
Post a Comment