"The Golden Compass" (2007) - Movie Review

“The Golden Compass” puts firm foot for its foundation of franchises to produce the further sequels of the three novels of Phillip Pullman. This adapting the first one, “Northern Lights” (or “The Golden Compass” in US), carefully stays within its realm of starting the things than going deep inside it. The downright fantasy genre is not a particular choice of my taste but I need to accept that like summer block buster action or any other, it has its territory to excel. I like imagination blending with realism as in with “Bridge to Terabithia” or “Pan’s Labyrinth”. With that thought, “The Golden Compass” is fairly interesting and keeps you occupied.

It was good to see a kid, who immediately learns and not alone is at the mercy of its saviour. Lyra (Dakota Blue Richards) brought up by his Uncle Lord Asriel (Daniel Craig), is smart, courageous and also does not overflow her childish face far too long. Everything happens in a parallel universe and a gentle facet but a characteristic of an authoritarian government called the Magisterium. Asriel’s belief over traveling to other universe and research over it threatens the Magisterium and mainly their main player, Coulter (Nicole Kidman). It is not an explanation of the problems but the other aspects of it become the mission for Lyra.

The idea of having a daemon representing the soul and spirit of any individual is in the right word “cool”. It is not a pet but it can be. But having some one as trustful as you are and as free will as you are, yet another entity is lusciously inventive. Of course it is a part of you and whatever we think over our head, the supposedly “good” and “evil” side of ours having sword fights over decision, and to bring it outside as a physical being has both the uber factor and also the philosophical dimension. Is not it so appropriate for Craig to have a cheetah (or a hybrid of cheetah and tiger or whatever, some cat) as his daemon? But you need a violent monkey/chimp for Nicole Kidman to make her fit the villain.

The part which really knocked me out is the showdown fight between Lyra’s monstrous bear friend Iyorek Byrnison (Ian McKellen’s voice) and his nemesis Ragnar (Ian McShane’s voice) is simply punching. The expectation is already known but the execution (literally) is a killer visual and timing. That marks the high point of the film apart from which it is a very usual journey for its genre. Director Chris Weitz with his brother Paul has come out previously with “American Pie” (he was uncredited though) to “About a Boy” and now this, a solo venture. And something radically different for the genre he has been working on. It is something surprising how one can adapt well enough to the genre he is shifting upon.

We do not very well know about Lyra as that I believe will form the sequels to explore on its way to the further story. Similarly there are other characters which show signs of development in future. This had an effect on me having a void when they speak. The script hence makes it a point to talk over rescue details and the goals to attain it rather than pondering the back ground. It desperately wants to form a basis but also an adventure/action journey to make it a movie of its own. I would not praise it but I appreciate for keeping me looking at the screen with things happening.

And now with the controversies over the “religious” aspects of the book and hence its affiliation over the film, this movie does not have any representation or reference to any religion whatsoever. It just shows a government for reasons not concretely known wants to stop the universe travel. But it is mentioned in Wiki that the three books have some content over it. The fear of the people objecting the film is that the encouragement kids might get to read the book through the film and become an “atheist”. I do not understand why any one might want to object a film based on some child who would “think” on his/her own and opt a choice (at an age of knowing things for what it is). I believe that’s the role of every parent and hence would talk about it objectively. But is it not the representation of us, the human beings as the thinkers? I have all respect for all the religion and anything which is going to hurt the sentimentality need to be considered but one cannot force some one to think or limit the conscience. Why does it mean so much if some one becomes an atheist or theist or whatever they want to be? If some one does some terrible thing blaming/basing over their beliefs, it is still the person who is responsible for its consequences than the belief. By objecting the film, they exactly prove the author’s depiction of the Magesterium.