Dec 16, 2007, 01:27 AM
Local time: Dec 16, 2007, 01:27 AM
|
#1 of 33
|
This movie didin't have the same budget as the LOTR trilogy, and I think people have come to expect that degree of epic quality from every fantasy film released since. It's unfortunate, because the film isn't bad. It's just a VERY typical film adaptation of a book. In terms of the reviews, it's a lose-lose. If the film was an hour longer and included more exposition and character development, it'd get panned because it was too long and slow-paced.
The faster pace of the film may have been a little bit off, but just about every major plot element was hit.
I thought it was a perfectly acceptable, and particularly beautiful, rendition of the book. The casting was great (Lyra, Scoresby and Coulter especially), the visuals were top-notch and as a whole package, it's a good movie.
Like I said, you can't go into movies based on books and expect everything to be there.
Jam it back in, in the dark.
<@a_lurker> I like zeal better than guru.
<@a_lurker> There, I said it, I'm not taking it back.
|
Guru