User Score
6.1

Generally favorable reviews- based on 328 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Negative: 93 out of 328
Watch On

Review this movie

  1. Your Score
    0 out of 10
    Rate this:
    • 10
    • 9
    • 8
    • 7
    • 6
    • 5
    • 4
    • 3
    • 2
    • 1
    • 0
    • 0
  1. Submit
  2. Check Spelling
  1. Jan 3, 2015
    7
    I have not read the books this story is based on, which means I am reviewing this film completely based on the story I saw on screen. Let's put it this way: I had been reading so much negative feedback about this film that I was positively surprised after watching it. The movie looked good, sounded good, and all in all, it was pretty great! The plot, the story; actors and acting. EvenI have not read the books this story is based on, which means I am reviewing this film completely based on the story I saw on screen. Let's put it this way: I had been reading so much negative feedback about this film that I was positively surprised after watching it. The movie looked good, sounded good, and all in all, it was pretty great! The plot, the story; actors and acting. Even Lyra, the "little girl who will change the course of the world forever" (yes, we have seen those before...) was annoyingly realistic with her immaturity. But as with every movie, there were some things that just didn't click, and therefore I won't give this four stars: as good as the plot of the movie was, it left me feeling as if everything wasn't told, explained, or shown well enough. Once again, perhaps those who have read the books know some facts in advance. To me, it was a bit frustrating at points. Confusing, even. And once again in a vast battlefield it is amazingly easy to launch a "surprise" attack on your enemies... wow. That never ceases to amaze me. ;) Also, Serafina Pekkala (and her daemon Kaisa) make me crack up every time! Finnish names in an otherwise English film? Not good. Not good at all! Expand
  2. Aug 8, 2014
    4
    I remember the end of the movie. I remember the credits rolling. And I specifically remember saying; "That's it?" The movie is one slow ride with no resolution, continuity, or congruity. I have never read the book. But doubtless all those book critics couldn't be that off. The movie is only amazing in one aspect; the special effects. And the cinematography. The acting is dull, as is story.I remember the end of the movie. I remember the credits rolling. And I specifically remember saying; "That's it?" The movie is one slow ride with no resolution, continuity, or congruity. I have never read the book. But doubtless all those book critics couldn't be that off. The movie is only amazing in one aspect; the special effects. And the cinematography. The acting is dull, as is story. And all the animal-human bondage I just found to be unpleasant and incoherent. So slow and faulty it'll break down midway and you'll be stuck until the end. Unless you want to jump out. That's a pretty good decision. Expand
  3. Jul 14, 2014
    4
    a very disappointing adaptation. the last time i felt dejected halfway into the movie was with tim burton's PLANET OF THE APES, before which this film feels like a total abomination. despite Dakota Blue Richards' Lyra and Nicole Kidman's Mrs. Coulter, and the visual effects, this film really is nothing. probably the fact that i read the book first and loved it made all the difference anda very disappointing adaptation. the last time i felt dejected halfway into the movie was with tim burton's PLANET OF THE APES, before which this film feels like a total abomination. despite Dakota Blue Richards' Lyra and Nicole Kidman's Mrs. Coulter, and the visual effects, this film really is nothing. probably the fact that i read the book first and loved it made all the difference and in fact, i suggest you all do the same. avoid this film if you can and read the book. the book has a proper narrative with exemplary character development and plotline, all of which this film lacks. the only thing keeping this film together is the visual effects and nothing more. Expand
  4. Jan 31, 2014
    9
    This movie was breathtaking and beautiful. It was supposed to be a trilogy but unfortunately due to the economic crisis in 2008, the sequel was eventually cancelled. Moreover, the church went against the movie for an invalid reason. Overall, it was a good movie no matter what you haters claim... just go look at its Box Office rate. Us, the fans, are gloating over the haters because thisThis movie was breathtaking and beautiful. It was supposed to be a trilogy but unfortunately due to the economic crisis in 2008, the sequel was eventually cancelled. Moreover, the church went against the movie for an invalid reason. Overall, it was a good movie no matter what you haters claim... just go look at its Box Office rate. Us, the fans, are gloating over the haters because this movie was such a success financially. Expand
  5. Oct 1, 2013
    6
    As children's escapist fantasy goes, the film is not terrible, but does have an unfinished air about it. Also suffers from occupying similar ground as the Narnia, Potter and Rings films (over saturated), extra marks for bagging Kate Bush to sing on the credits.
  6. Aug 24, 2013
    5
    The movie itself is quite impressive. However, the story is way too bizarre and complicated for a child even an adult to follow. it tries to be the next huge movie series, but doesn't fill the excitement with good characters.
  7. Jul 14, 2013
    8
    While it is not perfect, it is still a fun filled fantasy that boasts of grand visuals, a cool and interesting story, awesome music (Alexandre Desplat, again he is amazing) and great direction. I enjoyed this film, and oh, it is not anit-Christ. If the novel was, this film is not. It is a pretty and interestingly great film.
  8. Apr 25, 2013
    3
    Besides the horrible acting,the lazy writing and the stupid plot twist, the thing that bothered me most about this movie was the ending.Im not going to spoil it but its really lazy. They literally ended it saying "We are going to make a trilogy and not conclude this movie right now because we are SOOOO sure it wil be succesfull!" Well thanks God it wasn´t because this movie deserves to dieBesides the horrible acting,the lazy writing and the stupid plot twist, the thing that bothered me most about this movie was the ending.Im not going to spoil it but its really lazy. They literally ended it saying "We are going to make a trilogy and not conclude this movie right now because we are SOOOO sure it wil be succesfull!" Well thanks God it wasn´t because this movie deserves to die in silence. Expand
  9. Mar 2, 2013
    0
    The Golden Compass is pure nonsense. The movie is a pathetic piece of trash that makes no sense because of all the meaningless jargon spewing out of everyone's mouth. A laughable film from the poor acting of the girl to the idea that kids would enjoy this. The movie is nearly impossible to sit through.
  10. Feb 11, 2013
    3
    What a pathetic adaptation. The casting was good though. The bear looked ridiculous. The fight scenes were censored and the whole narrative was turned on its head. Even the ending was changed to suit children.
  11. Dec 2, 2012
    2
    boring crap that makes no sense. With scenes that probably should've been there to explain things simply not existing. The whole thing feels a bit disjointed like somebody shot a movie that was supposed to be 4 hours long, but then cut like half of it. Pointless scenes of Daniel Craig that has no effect on anything else etc. This is 5 years too late, but I still want my money back.
  12. Jun 10, 2012
    5
    I have never read the book or was any sort of a fan before I watched the film, I it certainly did not inspire me to want to read the books. In any case, "The Golden Compass" puts up a good fight trying to be a good fantasy epic, but it does not quite achieve that level or recognition. Some aspects of the film are very good, namely most of the technical aspects. Excellent production andI have never read the book or was any sort of a fan before I watched the film, I it certainly did not inspire me to want to read the books. In any case, "The Golden Compass" puts up a good fight trying to be a good fantasy epic, but it does not quite achieve that level or recognition. Some aspects of the film are very good, namely most of the technical aspects. Excellent production and costume design, along with a decent score and great visual effects provide for some of the films highlights. Unfortunately, the cinematography was totally off. It had this strange, airy quality to it, that made me feel as if I were watching a documentary or something. I cannot quite articulate it, but it definitely blocked me from being able to ever fully immerse myself into the story. It did not help how annoying the portrayal of the main character was by Dakota Blue Richards. Such an annoying kid. I've been told that she's supposed to be like that in the books too, but I just do not understand why. Who would want to read/watch such a miserable character. On the other hand, Nicole Kidman gave an amazingly appropriate, cold performance as Mrs.Coulter, which was another highlights of the film. But other than that, the film never quite tickled my interest to engage it fully, or be sad about the fact that the sequels have been cancelled. Expand
  13. Apr 13, 2012
    1
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. A terrible film. The main actress is just terrible, she's clearly just reading lines and it makes her very unlikeable. The film is too short for the contents of the book, a few big scenes are missing and the rest is rushed. Last of all the good ending of the book is omitted. Expand
  14. ALF
    Aug 28, 2011
    10
    Amazing! Roger Ebert and I agree for a change. If a film inspires people to go out and read the books (His Dark Materials) then it is has done its job. I am currently reading the books again because thanks to a group of silly devolved organizations based in the USA, the rest of the story will not be made into film despite the Golden Compass doubling its money at the box office. There isAmazing! Roger Ebert and I agree for a change. If a film inspires people to go out and read the books (His Dark Materials) then it is has done its job. I am currently reading the books again because thanks to a group of silly devolved organizations based in the USA, the rest of the story will not be made into film despite the Golden Compass doubling its money at the box office. There is always going to be the book versus the film arguments "oh, the film is not like the book." Perhaps people who say things like that should read a single chapter out loud and time themselves. When they figure out an average chapter will take around 10 - 15 minutes to read properly, then perhaps they will understand a scriptwriters job better. Yes, the film is not like the book, but it has taken the essence of the story and made the Golden Compass into something different from the usual film fare. I very much hope the cowardly filmmakers in Hollywood lift a suitable digit at the silly organizations attempting to censor what the masses can see and hear. Expand
  15. Jul 6, 2011
    8
    Prepare to enter another world of the fantasy genre as New Line Cinema (the producer of The Lord of the Rings Trilogy) presents Chris Wietz's "The Golden Compass". It revolves around Lyra Belaqua, a young girl living among scholars in Oxford's Jordan College. Her world may seem diverse, from physical embodiments of souls that take the shape of an animal, but similar with people around youPrepare to enter another world of the fantasy genre as New Line Cinema (the producer of The Lord of the Rings Trilogy) presents Chris Wietz's "The Golden Compass". It revolves around Lyra Belaqua, a young girl living among scholars in Oxford's Jordan College. Her world may seem diverse, from physical embodiments of souls that take the shape of an animal, but similar with people around you to become friends and enemies. She is thrown into a perilous adventure when she overhears a conversation of an extraordinary microscopic particle, Dust. This particle is said to unite different worlds, and is feared by many who want to destroy it forever. As Lyra is flung into the middle of this horrible struggle, she meets wondrous creatures both big and small, and villains who are not what they seem. Gobblers, that kidnap children, will turn out in the most unexpected places. And a magical compass of gold that will answer any question if one is skilled enough to read it. Lyra's adventure continues throughout these three books, and the first is about to be told. The only problem that I had with this movie was the Anti-Christian overtones of the Magisterium during the film. I'm not with the Catholic Church, but I agree that the word "Heresy" was the only reason why the second and third movies would not be adapted into screen. That's it for my problem. The casting was great and the actors were very decent. Daniel Craig was solid as Lord Asriel despite the fact that he wasn't given enough screentime. Nicole Kidman was decent as Mrs. Coulter, but her hair is very different from the book counterpart as it describes her hair as blond. Ian Mckellen was amazing as the great armoured ice bear (also known as a Pansjorborne) Iorek Byrnison, and Dakota Blue Richards was very convincing and compelling as Lyra when it comes to actresses in movie adaptations and the rest of the actors turned out good. The sets were very creative, but at most times, they were quite dark due to the Svalbard place. The CGI on the animals are very damn impressive. The daemons (just like in the book despite the fact that it was mispronounced) were very visualized and the polar bears are also visualized. The action scenes were very epic and the direction from Chris Wietz was well-paced. The Golden Compass lacks in any depth, but it is a darker, deeper, and fantastic adaptation of Phillip Pullman's greatest fantasy series. 8/10 Expand
  16. Sep 19, 2010
    3
    How do you destroy a book franchise with universal acclaim? How do you dissapoint readers by changing the books name for the film? How do you cast bad actors for important roles? You film the golden compass. The book is brilliant but the film is terrible. The kid playing Lyra is terrible,switching between cockney and posh! Make your mind up. The director goes as far as to mix the story upHow do you destroy a book franchise with universal acclaim? How do you dissapoint readers by changing the books name for the film? How do you cast bad actors for important roles? You film the golden compass. The book is brilliant but the film is terrible. The kid playing Lyra is terrible,switching between cockney and posh! Make your mind up. The director goes as far as to mix the story up with a shocking polt change. Yes,the graphics are impressive and Ian Mckellen as Iorek is a good move but please,don't bother with the movie,just read the book (And the other 2 books in the trilogy!). Expand
  17. LorriW.
    May 2, 2009
    10
    I love watching this movie with my 6 year old, she's just as amazed by it each time, it's wonderful to watch her reaction's.
  18. MorganF
    Jul 20, 2008
    6
    A great visual experience, but it failed to convey Pullmans sense of mystery. The ending was also at the wrong time, and you could tell they were rushing in some parts.
  19. DominicK
    Jun 13, 2008
    10
    The secenary and the whole movie is done perfectly.
  20. nigelm
    Jun 10, 2008
    3
    Too childish for adults, too complex for kids. Average CGI and wooden performances throughout. Yawn.
  21. CourtneyW
    Jun 3, 2008
    8
    I really liked this movie. Visually, it was stunning. The effects were wonderful and I loved watching all the animals! The only problem I had was that, not having read the books, I didn't realize it ended kind of in the middle of the story, a la Lord of the Rings. But very good movie!
  22. SamJ
    May 26, 2008
    3
    In case anyone doesnt know, phillip pullman (writer of THE NORTHERN LIGHTS!!!) {did they really need to change the name?} hates god, and this is evident in his books, as god dies in them!! but all of this has been cut out of the movie! i think the directors need to have the guts to deal with a bit of 'controversy' if theyre gonna pull off a multi-million dollar flick! Cinema is In case anyone doesnt know, phillip pullman (writer of THE NORTHERN LIGHTS!!!) {did they really need to change the name?} hates god, and this is evident in his books, as god dies in them!! but all of this has been cut out of the movie! i think the directors need to have the guts to deal with a bit of 'controversy' if theyre gonna pull off a multi-million dollar flick! Cinema is an art form, not a media and art is by no means always politically correct!!!!! i give it a 3 because some scenes in the move were in fact done quite well. but generally i didnt like it. read the books but id advise against the movie Expand
  23. JoeyK
    May 25, 2008
    6
    Decent. The visuals were great, across the board. The acting was solid. The message was good. The problem is, the movie watches like a detailed synopsis of the book, not a new portrayal of it. During the translation, they failed to turn the book into something cinematically functional. Overall, the movie is decent, regardless, but it certainly feels like an ad for a much better book.
  24. GregA
    May 25, 2008
    6
    Not realising this was part of a trilogy I was disappointed to see it end so abruptly, but at least it was plainly obvious that another installment is coming. I thought the concepts of this movie were bizarre but it made me interested and I am keen to watch the upcoming movies and see what the big deal about "dust" is all about! However it is not a tidy movie and there is too much Not realising this was part of a trilogy I was disappointed to see it end so abruptly, but at least it was plainly obvious that another installment is coming. I thought the concepts of this movie were bizarre but it made me interested and I am keen to watch the upcoming movies and see what the big deal about "dust" is all about! However it is not a tidy movie and there is too much information and stuff happening that leaves you disconnected from the film and sort of wondering what the hell was that all about? Worth a DVD look, it has interest. Expand
  25. JonK
    May 11, 2008
    8
    I personally think Kidman was perfectly cast as Ms. Coulter. The show went by quickly and was very enjoyable. I liked that the goal was to get to the truth and how knowing it changes the situation. My wife and 10-year-old also enjoyed it a lot. And, sound on the DVD was in 6.1 DTS, very good. The massive amounts of CGI slipped here and there and the dialogue did seem forced a bit but I I personally think Kidman was perfectly cast as Ms. Coulter. The show went by quickly and was very enjoyable. I liked that the goal was to get to the truth and how knowing it changes the situation. My wife and 10-year-old also enjoyed it a lot. And, sound on the DVD was in 6.1 DTS, very good. The massive amounts of CGI slipped here and there and the dialogue did seem forced a bit but I really liked it and want to see more of it as well as read the books. Expand
  26. AmberS
    May 3, 2008
    10
    This movie was incredible. Although it was made family-friendly it was still unexpected when the jaw went flying off of the enemy ice bear. Nicole Kidman was fantastic and I would recommend it.
  27. BrandonB
    May 2, 2008
    9
    A spectacular rendering of Philip Pullman's magnificent world(s); this is the closest that a movie has been able to match the imagery that the author's words created in my mind. The graphics and special effects were absolutely spectacular, to say the least, and the casting was perfect. Sadly though, the main meaning of the book was stripped down to it's bare minimum and the A spectacular rendering of Philip Pullman's magnificent world(s); this is the closest that a movie has been able to match the imagery that the author's words created in my mind. The graphics and special effects were absolutely spectacular, to say the least, and the casting was perfect. Sadly though, the main meaning of the book was stripped down to it's bare minimum and the complex story was chopped up and dumbed down. I give it 5 out of 5 stars simply for the experience of seeing what I imagined on the silver screen. I recommend this to any one who enjoys a good piece of eye candy every now and again but I must compel anyone who seriously wants the intellectual experience of this tale to READ THE BOOK FIRST. I simply can not wait for the Subtle Knife... Expand
  28. JayH.
    Apr 24, 2008
    6
    Too complex for it's own good, rather than to flow steadily, it comes off more muddled than anything else. However, the art direction and sets are wonderful, and even though the special effects are computer generated, I thought they were terrific and imaginative. Family film? I can't see most kids sitting through the whole film. It sure is pretty to look at though.
  29. LuisG.
    Feb 27, 2008
    6
    It's hard not to feel like your being sold repetiveness after harry potter takes the crown and narnia steps down as well... compass is a good film .... visually stunning ... hope thers a sequel.
  30. KevinD.
    Feb 16, 2008
    2
    While Kidman has yet to entirely dissapoint me, she came pretty darn cose in this travesty of a flim. Not so much for her acting, but her sheer involvement. It was an utter travesty in terms of dialogue, made no sense whatsoever. I've never experienced physical pain while watching a film, but I felt like I had just been attacked by a rapid bull after watching "The Golden Compass." While Kidman has yet to entirely dissapoint me, she came pretty darn cose in this travesty of a flim. Not so much for her acting, but her sheer involvement. It was an utter travesty in terms of dialogue, made no sense whatsoever. I've never experienced physical pain while watching a film, but I felt like I had just been attacked by a rapid bull after watching "The Golden Compass." Who to look out for:Dakota Blue Richards, Nicole Kidman, without these two i would've given this film a zero. Expand
  31. KenD.
    Jan 13, 2008
    3
    Another soulless, green-screen monstrosity. Wonderful source material has been eviscerated in order to film a plodding checklist of the main plot points. There is one glimpse of what could have been; at one point Mrs Coulter slaps her monkey daemon and a slow track upwards uncovers a subtle bruise on her own face. This is the only point in the entire film where something is done Another soulless, green-screen monstrosity. Wonderful source material has been eviscerated in order to film a plodding checklist of the main plot points. There is one glimpse of what could have been; at one point Mrs Coulter slaps her monkey daemon and a slow track upwards uncovers a subtle bruise on her own face. This is the only point in the entire film where something is done cinematically to convey the kind of ideas that pulse through the book. Everything else is clunky dialogue or - as seen by Lyra in the alethiometer - literal images constructed from the tacky Christmas glitter that passes for Dust. To add insult to injury the Kate Bush song that plays over the end credits is completely appalling. She, like everyone else involved, should be ashamed. Expand
  32. ChadS.
    Jan 10, 2008
    5
    Here is a paradox for you. Arguably, we want to learn more about the dust from one of these parallel universes Lord Asriel(Daniel Craig) prattles on about, but sitting through two more installments of this upstart trilogy(billed as the thinking man's "Harry Potter"), methinks is a taxing proposition, because "The Golden Compass" lays an egg, and it certainly isn't golden. For Here is a paradox for you. Arguably, we want to learn more about the dust from one of these parallel universes Lord Asriel(Daniel Craig) prattles on about, but sitting through two more installments of this upstart trilogy(billed as the thinking man's "Harry Potter"), methinks is a taxing proposition, because "The Golden Compass" lays an egg, and it certainly isn't golden. For starters, a disproportionate amount of time is spent at the university, in which the exposition is laid out to us; at one point, in seminar-like fashion from a lectern. Lyra(Dakota Blue Richards), eventually, like Bilbo Baggins, leaves behind her sheltered existence and accompanies Marisa(Nicole Kidman) to the north as her assistant. That's when "The Golden Compass" starts to pay the price for its needless dawdling. Kidman is cheated out of precious screen time as Marisa, or rather Marisa's spirit, makes us wonder what it would be like if Joan Crawford had a monkey(what makes Marisa angry reminded me of the wire hanger scene in "Mommie Dearest"). This is where the film loses its footing. There's evidence of heavy editing here. "The Golden Compass" should've established Marisa as Lyra's mentor before the girl learns the truth about her duplicitous nature. The movie never truly recovers. This filmmaker is a novice at staging action scenes, and it shows. Kidman is upstaged by a talking polar bear. That's some bear, though. Expand
  33. KelvinL
    Jan 9, 2008
    6
    My 10 year old nephew loved it but I wasn't so blown away. Whilst the sets were impressive and the cast gave the film some gravitas I couldn't help feeling disappointed at the ending. Indeed I didn't actually expect the film to end when it did, I was expecting another showdown at least. I suppose the unresolved story lines were designed to open the way for a sequel, only I My 10 year old nephew loved it but I wasn't so blown away. Whilst the sets were impressive and the cast gave the film some gravitas I couldn't help feeling disappointed at the ending. Indeed I didn't actually expect the film to end when it did, I was expecting another showdown at least. I suppose the unresolved story lines were designed to open the way for a sequel, only I don't get a sense of completion of the first film. Can I really wait till 2009 at the earliest to see the next installment? Well the film needed to be much more rounded for me but having said that no doubt I'll be viewing the sequel whenever it may come. Expand
  34. DanielS.
    Jan 8, 2008
    2
    I can only assume the people who made this movie were so mesmerized by the source material and the computer generated graphics that they didn't feel any need to craft an entertaining movie. Read the book. Skip the movie.
  35. TheECarrot
    Jan 5, 2008
    0
    This movie was a complete waste of my time. I have not read the books and if the movie is anything to go by I do not want to. One of the more stupidly memorable quotes was " I am an armored bear, I lift heavy things" (Iorek Byrnison). The kid who played Lyra was a sub standard actress who switched accents often during lines. Don't get me started about the poor casting of Kidman. This movie was a complete waste of my time. I have not read the books and if the movie is anything to go by I do not want to. One of the more stupidly memorable quotes was " I am an armored bear, I lift heavy things" (Iorek Byrnison). The kid who played Lyra was a sub standard actress who switched accents often during lines. Don't get me started about the poor casting of Kidman. Although this movie is supposed to be serious and thought provoking I spent most of it laughing at the bad acting and terrible script. The superman style flying of the witches summarizes the terrible special effects which I expected to be okay due to the technology available these days. Lastly the final battle was ridiculous with not one main good character being injured, yet every one of the bad guys was annihilated. Don't bother to see this at the movies, don't even bother hiring it on DVD. I want my money and time back! Expand
  36. CocoaF.
    Jan 5, 2008
    8
    I loved the Golden Compass, it was action filled in every scene, I loved the Golden Compass.
  37. WarrenE.
    Jan 4, 2008
    10
    I think the reason for low US gross is number one it stars a GIRL (Most male reviewers panned it and female reviewers loved it) and it requires you to think which is something of a lost art here (we keep electing crooks who are stealing us blind). I do not think the Christian Nazis are the problem as they do not go to Hollywood movies anyway. The only reason I went to see it was that the I think the reason for low US gross is number one it stars a GIRL (Most male reviewers panned it and female reviewers loved it) and it requires you to think which is something of a lost art here (we keep electing crooks who are stealing us blind). I do not think the Christian Nazis are the problem as they do not go to Hollywood movies anyway. The only reason I went to see it was that the Pope said that I should not. Until then I thought that it was just another mind numbing fantasy for children like Lord (Bored) of the Ring. I fell asleep during the first LOFR movie and have not watched any of the sequels. GC was two hours long but only seemed like an hour. I have gone back and seem it twice more. Once to catch the details I missed the first time and again to analyze the story. I hope the sequels will not have to be dumbed down even more for the US audience just to get a higher box office. Expand
  38. MaxW.
    Jan 3, 2008
    7
    A visually beautiful film, that unfortunately tried to do too much in too short a space of time. Obviously elements of the book had to be left out, otherwise the film would be too long, but the director failed to capture the suspense in the book. This left the brilliant actors very little to work with and develop their characters, despite many strong performances on their part. The ending A visually beautiful film, that unfortunately tried to do too much in too short a space of time. Obviously elements of the book had to be left out, otherwise the film would be too long, but the director failed to capture the suspense in the book. This left the brilliant actors very little to work with and develop their characters, despite many strong performances on their part. The ending was typical Hollywood, in that the sad ending in the book is completely missing. An enjoyable film, but could've have been great. Expand
  39. KenT.
    Jan 1, 2008
    9
    A wonderful film. Where did these low scores come from? Is the Bible Belt trying to suppress dissenting views?
  40. Mike
    Dec 30, 2007
    3
    Nothing special. Another movie for kids.
  41. AaronS.
    Dec 29, 2007
    9
    I really enjoyed this film, which was a fairly faithful adaptation of the book (except for the ending). Having read the books and enjoyed them, I found the movie built on my visualizations of Pullman's original creation. The armoured bears and witches were stunning, and I found Mrs Coulter and Lyra to be engaging characters in the film adaptation. I recall thinking after seeing the I really enjoyed this film, which was a fairly faithful adaptation of the book (except for the ending). Having read the books and enjoyed them, I found the movie built on my visualizations of Pullman's original creation. The armoured bears and witches were stunning, and I found Mrs Coulter and Lyra to be engaging characters in the film adaptation. I recall thinking after seeing the changed ending of Jackson's Fellowship of the Rings from the books and being shocked, but later after seeing the context of the 3 movies, I appreciated the deviation from the source material. Similarly, having the ideology of the book presented more subtly in the film probably kept it from feeling too "preachy". All in all, I hope to see a sequel. (Finally, how can people give this film a zero? Even if you found it lacking, it wasn't Daredevil or League of Extraordinary Gentlemen). Expand
  42. GeneJ.
    Dec 28, 2007
    9
    Beautifully shot and ornamented with some of the best CGI I've ever seen. I found the story line a little obscure and the church / soul metaphors a bit heavy-handed, but not objectionable. It was a delightful film that should entertain any from 12-80 yrs old. I think it has been very under-rated!
  43. KenG.
    Dec 27, 2007
    4
    As an atheist I can always go for a good anti-god, anti-religion story. But not only did I see little in here that was anti- religion, I found this also to be an often slow, sometimes incoherent, and empty story, devoid of any real sense of wonder, magic, and adventure. The film touches all the bases in a very perfuntionary way, but it just feels empty, with no real spirit or story As an atheist I can always go for a good anti-god, anti-religion story. But not only did I see little in here that was anti- religion, I found this also to be an often slow, sometimes incoherent, and empty story, devoid of any real sense of wonder, magic, and adventure. The film touches all the bases in a very perfuntionary way, but it just feels empty, with no real spirit or story telling skill do it. It has isolated moments and scenes that are effective, but it just never flows as a coherent story or adventure. Also, it takes an awlful long time getting started. One last thing, if you are going to put Daniel Craig in your movie, could you please use him. Expand
  44. NerexT.
    Dec 26, 2007
    9
    A great adaption, if you look deep the original themes are still present and it does not fail to promote an open mind and retake a look at our own world in a different perspective. The ending seems aprubt but leaves with a very good hint on not only what is to come, but also what to look into and analyze deeper until the sequel is released. All in all I can only recommend it.
  45. GeorgeG.
    Dec 25, 2007
    10
    If you didn't read the trilogy you would feel a litle lost, except that the movie is fabulous the effects the voices the cast everything..I can't wait for the second movie.
  46. MrToad
    Dec 23, 2007
    8
    I suppose my view's a bit clouded on this one, as i'm such a fan of the books, but i'll tell you what i could see. The film tries to be faithful to the books, using many scenes verbatim and actually to the point where the speed of the plot and exposition is too fast. However, the characters are strong (although Lyra's not as urchin-y as Pullman's), and the film I suppose my view's a bit clouded on this one, as i'm such a fan of the books, but i'll tell you what i could see. The film tries to be faithful to the books, using many scenes verbatim and actually to the point where the speed of the plot and exposition is too fast. However, the characters are strong (although Lyra's not as urchin-y as Pullman's), and the film retains much of the charm of the book. I only complain of the parts Chris Weitz deviates from the story at the expense of realism or plot aesthetics. Specifically, three of the best chapters in the book are removed, for no good reason. The film is even rather short, post-climax-ectomy. Expand
  47. JoshuaD.
    Dec 23, 2007
    6
    I thought this was an average fantasy film based on a brilliant book. Too many wooden performances dragged the film down (which was mostly dependent on the special effects anyway). The ending was neither as suspenseful or as satisfying as I remember the book to be which only keeps me wondering how the sequel will be dealt with.
  48. KathrynC
    Dec 14, 2007
    5
    The movie was entertaining and beautiful. The cast all did an excellent job. However, it's ironic how one of the film's themes is about soul severing, and then they went and took the soul out of the movie. The movie felt rushed and there was no character development. Also, the worst mistake the film made was that it cut out the ending. They practically gave it a happy ending The movie was entertaining and beautiful. The cast all did an excellent job. However, it's ironic how one of the film's themes is about soul severing, and then they went and took the soul out of the movie. The movie felt rushed and there was no character development. Also, the worst mistake the film made was that it cut out the ending. They practically gave it a happy ending instead of the suspenseful and emotional ending of the book. They neutered this film. Expand
  49. RyanD.
    Dec 13, 2007
    8
    I thought was pretty good, it didn't follow the story very well, but it's a movie.
  50. DanH.
    Dec 13, 2007
    8
    Unfortunately this film starts with a massive handicap: trying to live up to people's expectation. The book was brilliant, probably the best of the trilogy and very dark for a "children's" book. People expected the film to follow suit and follow Peter Jackson's Lord of the Rings with it's careful character development and deliberately slow pacing. People expected a Unfortunately this film starts with a massive handicap: trying to live up to people's expectation. The book was brilliant, probably the best of the trilogy and very dark for a "children's" book. People expected the film to follow suit and follow Peter Jackson's Lord of the Rings with it's careful character development and deliberately slow pacing. People expected a dark fable with a 12a rating that asked as many questions as the book did about religion, life, death and everything in between. What we have is film which seems to have achieved the impossible, to actually be entertaining universally. As a parent these types of films are like goldust, I have fallen asleep through so many disney/dreamworks productions recently and been ripped off by their merchandise. My 5 yr old daughter loved it and I thought even without the appropriate amount of character development and rushed scenes it encapsulated enough of the book's magic to make it one of the finest fantasy films in recent years. Ignore the critics who are all in their mid-40s, single and voice a demographic rather than a universal opinion. Expand
  51. Tanner
    Dec 13, 2007
    2
    Awful, I can't believe anyone would give this movie any credit at all. The story is obscure and while some people call the ridiculous plot intriguing, I call it boring and slow. I haven't felt this way about a movie since Larry the cable guy health inspector. I wouldn't even recommend this movie to rent. I felt as though I wasted 2 hours of my life that I can't ever get back.
  52. L.E.
    Dec 13, 2007
    3
    Very boring movie, but better than the book, which is the biggest crap, I've ever read.
  53. DustinM.
    Dec 12, 2007
    8
    This should have been a three hour movie. Deeper plot/character development and a real ending would have made this so much better.
  54. NicholasJ.
    Dec 12, 2007
    9
    Rated high for magical special effects.
  55. Jakob
    Dec 12, 2007
    1
    Bad book, bad movie. I cannot understand how people compare Golden Compass to Lord of the Rings.
  56. KristenT.
    Dec 12, 2007
    1
    Very disappointing film. The characters, the larger themes of the books are all sacrificed for plot and special effects. The editing is poor, the score is bad. What would this film have been like with a great director like Peter Jackson? Read the books which are better than Narnia or Harry Potter. Pullman created a world fascinating for children and adults. Wouldn't you love to read Very disappointing film. The characters, the larger themes of the books are all sacrificed for plot and special effects. The editing is poor, the score is bad. What would this film have been like with a great director like Peter Jackson? Read the books which are better than Narnia or Harry Potter. Pullman created a world fascinating for children and adults. Wouldn't you love to read the screen adaptation that Tom Stoppard wrote for this? Expand
  57. VeroniqueD.
    Dec 12, 2007
    2
    Simply NOT GOOD,BORING,Special effect are nothing to be amazed of. Don't waste your time and money. Go rent NARNIA, it is a peace of art compare to this.
  58. TimW.
    Dec 12, 2007
    4
    It is a children's film but so is Monsters Inc and I loved that. Slow moving with to many morals pushed into the story line, eg. the poor alcoholic bear fighting etc. etc. My directors kids loved it but I'm the one writing the review so it's a 3.5 which rounds up to a 4 since it's nearly Christmas.
  59. BenB
    Dec 12, 2007
    5
    DJ Im's point about religious backlash is quite obviously a knee jerk to the fact he likes a film that everyone else does not. How stupid is it to call Rolling Stone and Empire's view as religious backlash? I see very little in the way of religious content in either publication.Simply put, this film blows, botched with cheesy effects and less flow than k-fed.
  60. SeanR
    Dec 12, 2007
    5
    New Line fumbled by choosing a novice instead of an expert to fill in the director's chair. This is especially true given the depth and complexity of the source material.
  61. mikec
    Dec 11, 2007
    1
    I will never get those hours back that the movie seemed to drag on for. I would prefer a visit to the dentist.
  62. CoryG
    Dec 11, 2007
    10
    Absolutely outstanding in every way possible. I don't know what these other people saw...
  63. DaveF
    Dec 11, 2007
    6
    Watered-down, heavily-censored version of a dark and subtle story. Has its moments--most are eye-rolling, not heart-stopping. I was half-expecting the polar bears to whip out bottles of Coke.
  64. HisM.
    Dec 10, 2007
    1
    I was dragged by the wife, who had read the books, and enjoyed them. She apologized as we walked out for making me go. I snoozed throughout. Dreg.
  65. HollyC.
    Dec 10, 2007
    6
    I'm a big fan of the first novel in this trilogy, however I went in w/ lower expectations for the film after reading some initial reviews. I would have to agree w/ a majority of the criticisms --they should have used some of the loads of CG money and funneled it towards a better script, director, editor and score (but really, writing and direction). I was, in the end, entertained I I'm a big fan of the first novel in this trilogy, however I went in w/ lower expectations for the film after reading some initial reviews. I would have to agree w/ a majority of the criticisms --they should have used some of the loads of CG money and funneled it towards a better script, director, editor and score (but really, writing and direction). I was, in the end, entertained I guess--and it held my interest throughout most of the 2+ hrs--but it's definitely a mess as a whole. Pacing is pretty bad as is the story itself how its adapted. It's definitely going for a Lord of the Rings type adaptation, but falls way, way too short. The acting is quite good though (compared to say Narnia where the kid actors were wencingly bad) so at least that works. And the momentous Bear-Fight is awesome. But overall, without great writing (er script adaptation) and direction, there's something missing--a little too much eye candy and short on heart I guess. Expand
  66. DevynS
    Dec 10, 2007
    9
    The beginning may be a bit confusing if you have not read any of the books - it seemed a bit disjointed, like too much had been left out. About a third of the way in, it picked up and didn't seem like there were any more gaps. On an unrelated note, my friends and I unanimously decided that Iorek Byrnison is the greatest thing since sliced bread.
  67. DJIm
    Dec 10, 2007
    8
    This is a good movie. the lower ratings are irate hard core religious who object to the atheist subtext and probably didn't see the movie.
  68. brentoni
    Dec 10, 2007
    4
    They tried to condense a very long story into a 2-hour movie and then offered no closure for the audience at the end. Character relationships are barely developed and the story jumps around confusingly. With all its faults, the movie was visually impressive and the little actress who played Lyra is very likable.
  69. PaulK.
    Dec 10, 2007
    9
    I've read the trilogy and granted, it's difficult for most film adaptations to equal or even surpass the source novel, but this movie adaptation is NOT BAD as many critics and viewers are making it out to be. Granted it's been awhile since I've read the golden compass, so i can't remember the "cliffhanger" that everyone was upset about not seeing on the I've read the trilogy and granted, it's difficult for most film adaptations to equal or even surpass the source novel, but this movie adaptation is NOT BAD as many critics and viewers are making it out to be. Granted it's been awhile since I've read the golden compass, so i can't remember the "cliffhanger" that everyone was upset about not seeing on the screen...and it may feel rushed in places, but i thought the character development was really good...and the point about Daniel Craig not being in the movie "more than 10 minutes" is silly because he's a supporting character throughout the series and his role becomes more substantial in the last two books. I just hope the box office take is able to justify having the next two films made, because that is where the meat of the story lies. Collapse
  70. KevinR.
    Dec 10, 2007
    2
    I haven't read the books, but could still feel that some significant things must be missing from the original story. All bad fantasies lack one essential quality--immersiveness. The world that they create has to seem real and completely whole. LOTR accomplished this. This movie does not. The fantasy elements just seem silly and contrived (except for the daemon thing) and are pulled I haven't read the books, but could still feel that some significant things must be missing from the original story. All bad fantasies lack one essential quality--immersiveness. The world that they create has to seem real and completely whole. LOTR accomplished this. This movie does not. The fantasy elements just seem silly and contrived (except for the daemon thing) and are pulled out of the sack whenever it's convenient. Need a deus ex machina--how about an armored bear that suddenly appears out of nowhere? Or a convenient flock of rescue witches? Like the worst of the Harry Potter movies, where a hastily-remembered spell saves the day, resolutions here are never really struggled for. ALSO--what the hell is Sam Eliot doing in this movie with his absurd cowboy twang (has there ever been a more one-trick pony than this guy)? I found myself predicting his lines before he said them, and, again, I never read the books. Expand
  71. LeslieW
    Dec 10, 2007
    0
    horrible movie. my son and i almost fell asleep. it is so dark, not a sequel I want to see. seems like the movie was a let down unless you like dark, gloomy, boring films. the best thing about this movie were the end credits.
  72. RogerL
    Dec 10, 2007
    0
    Cheese, cheese, and more cheese. No story, special effects not special. Don't waste your $10.
  73. JaredM
    Dec 10, 2007
    6
    For those that have read the books, this movie tries too hard to encompass everything and thusly spends no time on creating character bonds. The story is there but the progression of the story is lacking. Too busy, not enough time spent on making me care.
  74. GC
    Dec 10, 2007
    2
    Utter trash, honestly this film is probably one of the worst teenage/kids Christmas movies of all time, fair enough its based on a book, so may have had limitations in regards to adding on of more exciting elements, but its just plain and simply sucked.
  75. FrancineB
    Dec 9, 2007
    3
    I kind of liked the bears. Felt really cheated by the ending.
  76. syzygy
    Dec 9, 2007
    3
    The latest trend is to bank on children fantasy tales. Some score well, others, like this, flop because the story is poorly transferred to the screen by directors with poor instincts and a love for boilerplate drama. There are no standout performances. To watch all this acting talent go to waste is the most amazing feature, however unintended, to this long bore of a movie.
  77. equality7-2521
    Dec 9, 2007
    10
    I loved it. The cast was first rate. I was nervous about the director on this film, but he did a fantastic job. I hope he was signed for the sequels. This movie will probably make a total of $100 million domestically. The media will try to say it was a disappointment (considering the film's budget). BUT it will more than make up for it in foreign receipts and big time on DVD where it I loved it. The cast was first rate. I was nervous about the director on this film, but he did a fantastic job. I hope he was signed for the sequels. This movie will probably make a total of $100 million domestically. The media will try to say it was a disappointment (considering the film's budget). BUT it will more than make up for it in foreign receipts and big time on DVD where it will gain in popularity by word of mouth. There WILL be a sequel. This film was awesome. I bought the novel and will read it this week.... Then I'll watch the movie again in a couple weeks. Highly recommended. Expand
  78. KennyS.
    Dec 9, 2007
    9
    The movie was visually stunning and followed the plot of the book fairly well. However the ending was nothing like in the book and leaves me hoping that they will release a version of the DVD with the ending they filmed and had originally intended.
  79. TonyS.
    Dec 9, 2007
    6
    Good, but I was expecting much more. I would have been happier if this movie had been rated (PG). This is a PG-13 movie right? I should figured something was a miss when the movie theater was flooded with kids....but I didn't. Parents just drop your kids off and pick them up when its over (cause there ain't much there for you).
  80. ShawnL
    Dec 9, 2007
    10
    A fantastic ride of adventure and excitement. Never having read the books I found the characters solid, each adding to the story, and the story exciting and engrossing. While I was a little disappointed in the ending being some what abrupt (a nice build up for part 2 I am sure) the over all movie is one that is definitely worth watching again. For everyone trying to make a religious A fantastic ride of adventure and excitement. Never having read the books I found the characters solid, each adding to the story, and the story exciting and engrossing. While I was a little disappointed in the ending being some what abrupt (a nice build up for part 2 I am sure) the over all movie is one that is definitely worth watching again. For everyone trying to make a religious controversy out of this simply remember it is a movie. You don't have to watch it or even believe it. But it beats most of the drivel that Hollywood tries to push on us so enjoy it. Expand
  81. StevenL.
    Dec 9, 2007
    4
    For those of you who loved Pullman
  82. GarrettH.
    Dec 9, 2007
    5
    What I stated after leaving the theater is. I wish we had seen no country for old men instead. This movie is nothing short of typical and utterly uninteresting. I haven't read any of the books and it's obvious to me they left out a LOT of material in this movie. I can handle a rushed scene here and there. But, just about everything in this movie is rushed. One minute she meets a What I stated after leaving the theater is. I wish we had seen no country for old men instead. This movie is nothing short of typical and utterly uninteresting. I haven't read any of the books and it's obvious to me they left out a LOT of material in this movie. I can handle a rushed scene here and there. But, just about everything in this movie is rushed. One minute she meets a bear the next she's utterly attached to said bear... wait didn't she just meet that bear like 3 minutes ago? If this movie wanted any chance at success it needed to be made as a trilogy or such from the start. As a stand alone movie it is very unfulfilling. The special effects are nothing spectacular these days. And the huge fight scene takes place at night so all you see is dark figured. Obviously it looked bad so they had to make it nighttime to compensate would be my guess. The story is far too in depth to be crammed into 2 hours. So the whole plot makes little sense. No way would a child keep up with this movie. I also don't think I would bring a non teenager to this movie. I think it is fairly violent and some of the scenes could be especially scary to a smaller child (insert gigantic bear roar here). If you are adults with no kids. Skip this movie and wait for DVD. If you have 12-15 YO kids who seem interested.. Meh I'd still skip it but they might get more out of it than you will. Expand
  83. JohnS.
    Dec 9, 2007
    9
    The storyline is rushed, which is typical with films made from books, but it still a great story. This is the type of film that Hollywood needs to make more of, it is intelligent and challenging. I wouldn't call it a "kid's movie" or a "family movie" though, which is how it is billed. Marketing mistake IMO. If you want to see an intelligent and thought provoking allegorical The storyline is rushed, which is typical with films made from books, but it still a great story. This is the type of film that Hollywood needs to make more of, it is intelligent and challenging. I wouldn't call it a "kid's movie" or a "family movie" though, which is how it is billed. Marketing mistake IMO. If you want to see an intelligent and thought provoking allegorical tale, with good actors and special effects, then this is a movie for you. Expand
  84. Daiki
    Dec 9, 2007
    4
    A complete waste of time. No life and no soul. Read the book and, if you have done so already, read it again instead of seeing this joke.
  85. MichaelT.
    Dec 9, 2007
    7
    Meh, it was a nice movie, certainly entertaining, but it could have been better... Some plotholes and rush-rush editing.... But on the whole a nice movie.
  86. LizzieB
    Dec 9, 2007
    1
    Terrible watered-down version of a book that deserved much more. Just awful.
  87. SimonB
    Dec 9, 2007
    2
    Generally pretty to look at, & Sam Elliot is fabulous as Lee Scoresby, but otherwise a disastrous interpretation of Pullman's dark & complex novel. Completely unnecessary changes (including the order of major events & cutting the real ending); clunky exposition and bland dialogue; no time to get to know any of the characters or understand the plot threads. Everyone's written as Generally pretty to look at, & Sam Elliot is fabulous as Lee Scoresby, but otherwise a disastrous interpretation of Pullman's dark & complex novel. Completely unnecessary changes (including the order of major events & cutting the real ending); clunky exposition and bland dialogue; no time to get to know any of the characters or understand the plot threads. Everyone's written as either good or evil, with no complications or depth -- even Iorek's backstory is changed to place him more squarely on the "good" side. All interesting political discussion is gone here, & the action-adventure take on the story is dull without that context. Clearly dumbed-down for U.S. mainstream audiences & watered-down to make it child-friendly. Ironic, since Pullman's books succeed precisely because they refuse to deliver a simplistic or easily-packaged story. What a disappointment. Expand
  88. SuzannaW.
    Dec 9, 2007
    10
    I loved this movie. I think some critics as well as the public are missing the adventurous plot and courage of a young girl seeking the "truth" and saving the children. It has all the parts of great plot with hero's, talking animals, beautiful destinations, superb acting and an ending leaving you wanting more. The film drew me in and I hope there will be a sequel. I certainly want to I loved this movie. I think some critics as well as the public are missing the adventurous plot and courage of a young girl seeking the "truth" and saving the children. It has all the parts of great plot with hero's, talking animals, beautiful destinations, superb acting and an ending leaving you wanting more. The film drew me in and I hope there will be a sequel. I certainly want to see more! Expand
  89. RobertT.
    Dec 9, 2007
    9
    An awesome depiction of an alternate steampunk universe.
  90. HerbK
    Dec 9, 2007
    0
    Utter trash. Everything about the movie felt tacked on and laborious. I was just plain bored as I was watching it. The books were such a rich statement about free-will, and the nature of authority, and could easily have been read and enjoyed as adults. This movie has none of that power. Everything felt watered, down and over-simplified. They don't mention the Church, or God, or Utter trash. Everything about the movie felt tacked on and laborious. I was just plain bored as I was watching it. The books were such a rich statement about free-will, and the nature of authority, and could easily have been read and enjoyed as adults. This movie has none of that power. Everything felt watered, down and over-simplified. They don't mention the Church, or God, or Original Sin a single time in the entire film. Everything is reduced to "Authority" or "Magisterium." It is a poor adaptation of an excellent story. Expand
  91. TomP.
    Dec 9, 2007
    4
    Terrible. Boring in parts - generic action sequences, relies heavily on CGI and impressive soundtrack to cover up the weak acting.Many changes made to book, character development sacrificed to CGI.
  92. LasseS.
    Dec 9, 2007
    10
    How Chris Weitz managed to bring dramatic tension and build-up to such a short movie is beyond me. But I loved every minute of it, save for at few scenes that were just a bit too short. I will be seeing this in the cinemas for the third time too.
  93. MattP
    Dec 9, 2007
    3
    Good acting. Good CGI. Good Source Material. Complete lack of quality scripting or any notable direction. 30 seconds scenes where various characters just tell you what has happened/is happening/ is soon to happen. Descends into a series of set-up scenes followed immediately by their respective conclusion scenes. No ending to speak of, just a muddle of confusing answers to questions no-one Good acting. Good CGI. Good Source Material. Complete lack of quality scripting or any notable direction. 30 seconds scenes where various characters just tell you what has happened/is happening/ is soon to happen. Descends into a series of set-up scenes followed immediately by their respective conclusion scenes. No ending to speak of, just a muddle of confusing answers to questions no-one asked. Succeeds only in leaving the viewer asking WHAT anyone is doing, let alone why they might be doing it. Poor movie for a good book. Expand
  94. JeffS
    Dec 9, 2007
    9
    I have been waiting for this movie to come out since the moment I saw the first teaser. I was not disappointed. With my children at my side we, watched, and enjoyed. This was one of the first movies I have seen that the children erupted in applause as the credits came to roll. Not the adults, not the Harry Potter or Star Wars geeks that stand in line for days, the CHILDREN! The story I have been waiting for this movie to come out since the moment I saw the first teaser. I was not disappointed. With my children at my side we, watched, and enjoyed. This was one of the first movies I have seen that the children erupted in applause as the credits came to roll. Not the adults, not the Harry Potter or Star Wars geeks that stand in line for days, the CHILDREN! The story touched them. I was not aware of the books before I saw the title in the credits, and was only slightly aware that the Christian Expand
  95. DT
    Dec 9, 2007
    5
    I think this is a movie with a lot of potential but sadly, New Line was afraid of controversy and thus you have instead a flick that bounces around from subject to subject with no explanation. I would very much be interested in seeing an unedited version of this movie should one come out on the market. As this is now, however, it's a lot of misused acting and good CG and not enough I think this is a movie with a lot of potential but sadly, New Line was afraid of controversy and thus you have instead a flick that bounces around from subject to subject with no explanation. I would very much be interested in seeing an unedited version of this movie should one come out on the market. As this is now, however, it's a lot of misused acting and good CG and not enough exposition to tie it all together. A shame really, as I would love to get excited for another fantasy epic in theatres....but this won't be it. Expand
  96. steve104
    Dec 9, 2007
    3
    Big, beautiful, and boring. Kidman is totally miscast.
  97. MickD.
    Dec 9, 2007
    8
    As an adaptation of the brilliant novels it's not very good, but it's a great kids fantasy film nonetheless.
  98. KevO
    Dec 9, 2007
    8
    I liked it, the acting was good but I wish it was longer. That's just a limitation of the medium used though.
  99. JB.
    Dec 9, 2007
    2
    Terrible, terrible, terrible. I went to see No Country for Old Men, but apparently you have to be 18 to get into R-rated movies now, which is why I saw this. This is not the next CoN or LoTR...for god's sake stay away!
  100. JustinP.
    Dec 9, 2007
    3
    I don´t know if The Golden Compass will go down as one of the biggest bombs in cinematic history, but it certainly deserves to. Seldom has so much effort and money been invested in creating a movie so thoroughly unengaging. It seems the entire movie should be plastered with little notes on the screen saying "Courtesy of Lord of the Rings" or "Inspired by Harry Potter" and the list I don´t know if The Golden Compass will go down as one of the biggest bombs in cinematic history, but it certainly deserves to. Seldom has so much effort and money been invested in creating a movie so thoroughly unengaging. It seems the entire movie should be plastered with little notes on the screen saying "Courtesy of Lord of the Rings" or "Inspired by Harry Potter" and the list goes on. Its desperate reaching to cash in on the success of those series is pathetic. The question one asks throughout the film is "OK, and why is that interesting, and why should I care?" None of the characters are intriguing or likable. The plot is fragmented and episodic and lacks any tension. The effects are impressive, but seem sadly wasted on a movie that, above all, is just really, really boring. And the end is the most shameless plea (which should be denied) for a sequel(s) in movie history. Please, spare us. Expand
Metascore
51

Mixed or average reviews - based on 33 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 10 out of 33
  2. Negative: 3 out of 33
  1. 63
    One key missing element: the world in which this story takes place never feels unique. We aren't drawn into it the way we were with Middle Earth or Hogwarts. In fact, with all the airships flying around, there are times when it feels like an extension of Stardust.
  2. A "soft" epic, a film touching on childhood fantasies with sturdy, unwavering characters driven to evil or good. More "Harry Potter," in other words, than "Beowulf."
  3. Reviewed by: Todd McCarthy
    50
    Impressively rendered but oddly uninviting adventure.