“The Golden Compass”New Line CinemaDirected by Chris WeitzScreenplay by Chris Weitz, based on the novel by Philip Pullman
Starring: Dakota Blue Richards, Nicole Kidman, Daniel Craig, Eva Green, Sam Elliott and the voices of Ian McKellen, Freddie Highmore, Ian McShane and Kathy Bates
Rated PG-13/113 minutesOpens Dec. 7, 2007Two out of four stars
Like the special effects-laden action blockbusters of summer and the please-give-me-an-Oscar biopics of fall, the fantasy epic has become a holiday tradition.
Thanks, Peter Jackson. Thanks a lot.
Although Jackson did it four times and made it look easy, those following in his footsteps seem to have discovered the opposite is true. Jackson’s “King Kong” kicked “The Chronicles of Narnia’s” stiff, mediocre ass in 2005. Last year, we (meaning, me and the nine other people who saw it) had to suffer through “Eragon,” and now we get “The Golden Compass,” an empty exercise in relentless exposition and by-the-numbers storytelling.
Adapted from the first installment of Philip Pullman’s His Dark Materials series, “The Golden Compass” is presumably about a young girl’s struggle to retain her innocence (and her soul) against the conspiratorial forces of authoritarian rule.
If only we understood — or better yet, felt — what was at stake.
Director Chris Weitz — who at one point left the production, was replaced for several months and then returned once Anand Tucker quit — cannot pull any elements out of the story except what’s already on paper.
What I’d really like to see is someone like Jackson — to use the most obvious example — write a self-help book for up-and-coming filmmakers who want to direct fantasy epics. Or maybe a 12-month training session, complete with a leadership training retreat. Perhaps, then Andrew Adamson (“Narnia”), Stefan Fangmeier (“Eragon”) and Weitz would have had a bit more success.
As it is, they’ll just have to settle for a few of my handy do-it-yourself tips:
1. When trying to set up a conflict or narrative dynamic intended to drive the story forward for two hours, it helps if you explain what the hell you’re talking about.
In “The Golden Compass,” cryptic terms or entities such as “dust” and “Gyptians” are thrown around without any significant explanation or exploration whatsoever. Nor is there any real development of the things we can understand — witches, daemons and thinly-veiled figures of religious authority. For a movie in which nearly every line of dialogue is expository, you’d think the script would have, at some point, gotten around to explaining things to us.
(On a side note, Weitz rejected a script written by Oscar winner, Tony winner and “Brazil” co-writer Tom Stoppard. Not that it has anything to do with what I just said, of course. Just thought I’d mention it.)
2. When you cast high-caliber actors, such as Daniel Craig and Nicole Kidman, make sure to use them.
In this case, Craig’s heroic Lord Asriel — the dear, noble uncle of our heroine, Lyra (Dakota Blue Richards) — disappears from the movie about 25 minutes into it and never reappears. Why waste so much of your budget and Craig’s talent for such a tiny role?
Kidman, meanwhile, as the excellently named, evil Ms. Coulter, looks regal, cold, calculating and appropriately ominous — but the development of her character is such that she’s supposed to walk around looking regal, cold, calculating and appropriately ominous. So, it’s an easy trick.
3. Assume your audience is not the “Baby Einstein”/”Veggie Tales” target audience.
Really, I don’t care how cute and adorable the CGI animal sidekicks are — you really must not make these adorable little creatures say stupid, obvious things that both the audience and the characters have already figured out.
Example No. 1: If Lyra is in danger, don’t have her daemon say, “We need to get out of here!”
Example No. 2: If a clearly devilish character is trying to explain away the insidious doings of the film’s villains, don’t have her daemon say, “Liar!”
4. Do not, under any circumstance, have an animated polar bear with the noble, kingly voice of Ian McKellen say to an 11-year-old girl, “You want to ride me?”
It will only provoke laughter and discomfort.
5. When creating major action set-pieces — say, a talking Armored Bear who wants to regain his nobility by fighting his greatest nemesis — you should probably make sure it has something to do with the rest of the story. Otherwise, it’s not a set-piece anymore — it’s just gratuitous.
6. When designing talking, computer-generated animals — polar bears, for instance — it would be best if they didn’t conjure images of a certain animated mascot of a certain delicious and world-famous soft drink. It’s 2007 — let’s put a little effort into our CGI, shall we?
The best news, for all of us, is that the film ends with a cheap set-up for an inevitable sequel. So, if it weren’t enough that the film was lifeless as it is, Weitz has deprived us of even a simple payoff. Well done.