According to Boxofficemojo, it’s made $146,000,000 so far with a $180,000,000 budget. Not that bad.
I can’t see this happening. Not until the Jackson/New Line lawsuit is settled and that could be a while. A long stinkin’ while. [pats dogeared copy of The Hobbit and sighs]
Well, I gave it a C+. But still, that was damning with faint praise, and there is NO ONE I know or have read that thinks that the Golden Compass is not *far and away *the best book of the 3.
Look, the plot is disjointed, confusing and somewhat depressing. Books 2 + 3 get worse. Even worse than that is that the 1st book is set in a very interesting universe, with Steam-tech Victorian airships, armored bears and Daemons. None of those cool things (IIRC) are in the other two.
I could give a rats-ass about the religous theme, or lack there-of.
Equipoise- you liked “the casting (especially Nicole Kidman), the art direction/set decoration, the special effects, the costumes, the atmosphere.” No Kidman, no costumes, no atmosphere in books 2&3. 
You probably turned off all media to avoid Christmas carols and specials, which is why you missed this:
http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5hkuaB7l-Jr9A2pNhbvKbnjEAXVIQD8TK2D4G2
I loved the movie. I really hope the other books will be made into movies. And I think I may read the books soon.
Loved the books, didn’t like the movie. Saying that I probably would go to see the sequels just to see what they do with them. I agree that the amount of money that the film has made having only been out a month is hardly making it a bomb, I see it making a very healthy profit in the long run.
It’s no Lord of the Rings though.
Two cents from a conservative Catholic who has little use for Philip Pullman.
“The Golden Compass” certainly isn’t a flop in the “Heaven’s Gate” sense. It’s made around $60 million here, more abroad, and will probably do decently on video. So, the studio certainly isn’t taking a bath on this movie. My guess is, it will probably even turn a small profit at some point. Many films that are widely perceived as flops do.
But “The Golden Compass” was supposed to be the start of a highly profitable franchise, not a single movie. And by that standard, its performance was mighty poor. Sequels could only do worse, not better. Add to that the fact that there’d be practically no merchandising, and the movie looks like a major disappointment (not a bomb, just a disappointment).
“The Golden Compass” was the least controversial of the Dark Materials trilogy. I think it’s a good bet that most kids who saw it didn’t grasp the underlying anti-religious message (just as millions of kids who saw “The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe” had no idea Aslan was supposed to be Jesus). Unless the next two movie adaptations completely abandon Pullman’s plots, they’d be FAR more difficult to sell to the movie-going public.
So, if business and profit were the only considerations, New Line should say, “Sigh… nice effort, but there’s no franchise here. No more movies.” But Hollywood likes to thumb its nose at Christians every now and then, so they might green light a sequel with a MUCH smaller budget.
I hope they get made, just because I hate when series end before they are properly resolved. I did like the film, especially visually and conceptually, although I wouldn’t put it in any top ten list. I haven’t read the books yet but I plan to. This may color my feelings one way or another. The one thing I don’t understand though is why it cost $180 friggin million dollars. For that much money I expect something like Pirates, which filmed for years with a cast and crew of thousands in exotic locales with huge elaborate set pieces and custom built ships…
This probably would have been better off as a trilogy of miniseries on the sci-fi channel or something, then it wouldn’t have been censored or edited so tightly, could have had decent effects with a more reasonable budget, and would have higher chances of being completed.
The fact that the failure of TGC is probably a factor in forcing New Line to see reason in this regard is one point in its favor, at least.
Perhaps the problem lies with too many fantasy films being made. Did we really need another film whose plotline concluded with yet another great battle, where all seemed lost, until an army of allies appeared at the last minute in order to save the day? Didn’t the LOTR trilogy corner the market on this device?
You can’t have too many good fantasy films. TGC just failed by not being good.
I had high hopes for this flick, having enjoyed the books. And I’ve have loved to see it succeed, and confound its foes among the religious right. But it was a lousy movie, for many of the reasons outlined in this and other threads.
If New Line is smart, they’ll pour their resources behind PJ and the Hobbit flicks. Which will mean no sequels of TGC.
I’d much rather have Hobbits than more TGC, especially with PJ at the helm (or at least on the bridge).
Actually, it is that bad. The film is just about at the end of its theatrical run and since the rule of thumb is that a film has to gross twice its budget just to break even, TGC is a flop. Unfortunately.
I’m a big fan of the books and think the main problem with the film is that it needed a bout an hour more to develop the complex themes, characters, and storyline that made the books so great. As others have said, there was so much great about the film, it was just too rushed.
I’d like to see the sequels made, but I’m not hopeful that they will be.
Come to think of it, wasn’t A Series of Unfortunate Events supposed to be the beginning of a franchise for its studio? Thirteen books to work with, IIRC, but the first movie was a flop - or, more importantly for Hollywood’s purposes at least, perceived as one - and thus we’re still waiting for a second movie. And will likely continue to do so.
Another conservative Catholic here, but although I dislike a lot of Pullamn’s views, I quite liked the first two books in the series. I would have liked to see how they’d do The Subtle Knife, but I was pretty disappointed with TGC. I really can’t imagine making a good film of The Amber Spyglass at all. It’s not as coherent as the other two.
I think Elendil’s Heir hit on the problem way back in post #2. The pre-release hype made it sound like The Golden Compass was going to be the next Lord Of The Rings. It’s clear that New Line had high hopes for this movie. However, when the newspaper critics saw it, they were pretty lukewarm. Most said something like this: “It’s not bad. The CGI effects are pretty. But it’s rather grim and humorless, and overall it’s really nothing special.”
In the end, even if the movie does OK, New Line will probably be disappointed because they were hoping for a SUPER MEGA SMASH HIT. The fact that the next two books are, by all accounts, even grimmer and darker than the first won’t do anything to change their minds.
I kinda liked the Series of Unfortunate Events books, but as for the movie, let’s face reality: It sucked. Badly. Jim Carrey was the only thing that saved that movie from being unwatchable dreck. (I usually don’t like Carrey, but occasionally he’ll click with me. I enjoyed his version of The Riddler in that one Batman movie, for example.)
The hype ALSO cast it in the tradition of The Chronicles of Narnia. I bet Mr. Pulliam loved that.
I have the books but haven’t yet read them. I also want to see the movie but haven’t yet. (I still have Enchanted to see- and that’s first priority if I get the chance). I don’t want to see the movie flop- I also would like to see the other two made, I want a diverse & robust array of spiritually-themed films out there- but there are other movies I want to see more.
So I hope the HDM trilogy gets made and do OK, and I hope all seven NARNIA films get made & kicks HDM’s tail. G
And remind me again why we in the US should care how we look to the Europeans?
No, also the sets, etc were wonderful.
The biggest problem, as someone alluded to up-thread, is that the first book is far and away the best and most accessible of the series, especially for movie-making purposes. Frankly, I don’t understand how or why Hollywood ever considered making films 2 and 3. Books 2 and 3 aren’t very good, and that is coming from someone who probably shares 95% of Pullman’s anti-religious world view.