Newgrounds.com — Everything, By Everyone.

Also the author hates the chronicles of narnia books, his books are like the anti-Narnia.

Because the Narnia trilogy is pro-Christianity.....

At 12/7/07 07:21 PM, HaveUbeenFooFighting wrote:

Also the author hates the chronicles of narnia books, his books are like the anti-Narnia.

Because the Narnia trilogy is pro-Christianity.....

I have no problem with Narnia's pro-Christianity, butsadly, the Narnia trilogy is also pro-racism and pro-sexism.

I don't excactly care...

I might see the movie, but I haven't read the book yet, so I have to read the book before I see the movie...

why?!

"The Golden Compass" can lick my golden ass.

At 12/7/07 07:29 PM, TheAmateurAnimator wrote: I have no problem with Narnia's pro-Christianity, butsadly, the Narnia trilogy is also pro-racism and pro-sexism.

wow that's really fucking weak.

At 12/7/07 07:30 PM, CuteAndFuzzy wrote: This book is just as real as the bible.

which are both more real than your intelligence :D

At 12/7/07 07:38 PM, Thread-Killer wrote:

that's really fucking weak.

At 12/7/07 07:30 PM, CuteAndFuzzy wrote: This book is just as real as the bible.

which are both more real than your intelligence :D

maybe the golden compass is, but im not sure the bible is smarter however, mainly because its full of shit so cold, its enough to make retards out of geniuses

At 12/7/07 04:55 PM, Strength wrote: You just want something to criticize and complain about.

What's so wrong about that?

I just saw it with my girlfriend like a half hour ago, and it's NOT a rip-off of LOTR, but it's very like some other movies.

At 12/7/07 07:29 PM, TheAmateurAnimator wrote: I have no problem with Narnia's pro-Christianity, butsadly, the Narnia trilogy is also pro-racism and pro-sexism.

Its not realy a trilogy, there is like 8 books right?

At 12/7/07 09:02 PM, Zoraxe7 wrote:

At 12/7/07 07:29 PM, TheAmateurAnimator wrote: I have no problem with Narnia's pro-Christianity, butsadly, the Narnia trilogy is also pro-racism and pro-sexism.

Its not realy a trilogy, there is like 8 books right?

Octilogy.

I read all 3 of the books, the second one people compare it to greatest work since lotr.
Nowhere close reallly.
Lord of rings is too epic.

At 12/7/07 09:06 PM, Xurch wrote: I read all 3 of the books, the second one people compare it to greatest work since lotr.
Nowhere close reallly.
Lord of rings is too epic.

True...true... Lord of the rings is the beter.

Well you can just tell by looking at the trailer thats its gonna be shit.

For a start you can already see cgi quality worse than the Nintendo64.
Secondly they have that guy from james bond saying "you cant do that", You can just smell shit from a mile of.

Well to start with th reason it looks similar would be because the costumes special effects etc. were done by Wetaworkshop same people who did stuff for lotr.

The book series was very interesting most people come to the conclusion that he kills god with his books, but I think that comes from the fact those people have a belief of some sort if you don't or if you detach religious thinking from it you will get a different message and even then most literature is generally made for your own interpretation.

At 12/7/07 10:08 PM, Vrael wrote: The book series was very interesting most people come to the conclusion that he kills god with his books, but I think that comes from the fact those people have a belief of some sort if you don't or if you detach religious thinking from it you will get a different message and even then most literature is generally made for your own interpretation.

How much room for interpretation is there when the author has stated that is what his books are about?

At 12/7/07 11:11 PM, Thread-Killer wrote: How much room for interpretation is there when the author has stated that is what his books are about?

The author of the book said his whole purpose in life is to kill god in children's minds, and he tried doing so in a very sick way...

As long as they cut the crap in the movies they it will be worth a rental in my book (I hardly ever go to the movie theaters)

Oh yeah, cause every fantasy movie made from a trilogy of books is OBVIOUSLY copying Lord of the Rings.

Yeah, it's all stolen, seriously.

At 12/7/07 05:11 PM, LightandDark wrote:

The American publishers changed it to "The Golden Compass", but I don't know the reason.

It's because the majority of the American public are fucking ignorant.

At 12/8/07 11:13 AM, LordSkeletor wrote:

At 12/7/07 05:11 PM, LightandDark wrote:

The American publishers changed it to "The Golden Compass", but I don't know the reason.

It's because the majority of the American public are fucking ignorant.

True, im an American and many are stupid.

At 12/7/07 05:11 PM, LightandDark wrote:

At 12/7/07 05:02 PM, Officer wrote: The actual book is called The Northern Lights.

It's both.

The American publishers changed it to "The Golden Compass", but I don't know the reason.

You see, now i have a reason to go see this movie, i thought it was just some random pulled out of someone's arse kinda crap, but i did love the northen lights and the following books of the trilogy, now why did they go have to use the stupid american name?

At 12/8/07 11:11 AM, N-Antichrist wrote: Yeah, it's all stolen, seriously.

Im not saying that, Im saying that it is using the sucsess of lord of the rings to advertise the golden compass. At least more so than most movies.

I heard it was about someone building an army to destroy God.

good luck with that.

This type of cinema doesn't interest me. I certainly wouldn't pay to see it and I'd probably turn it off if it came on TV. It's probably down to the abuse of special effects which gets on my nerves. I'm not against special effects or anything, but I think that when they're used in every second of the film, they lose their 'special' status.

At 12/8/07 11:13 AM, LordSkeletor wrote:

The American publishers changed it to "The Golden Compass", but I don't know the reason.

It's something like this: When Phillip Pullman tried to get it published in America under the title "The Golden Compass" (the original title), they didn't seem interested. So he tried to get it published in the UK under the title "Northern Lights" hoping it would be more interesting for them. They agreed to publish it, by which time the Americans had decided they liked the book so it was published as "The Golden Compass" in America and "Northern Lights" in the UK.

Also, why the fucking fuck is it called "The Golden Compass?"

If this film going to accompany 'The Silver Dagger' and the 'The Bronze Telescope'?

At 12/8/07 11:58 AM, yurgenburgen wrote: This type of cinema doesn't interest me. I certainly wouldn't pay to see it and I'd probably turn it off if it came on TV. It's probably down to the abuse of special effects which gets on my nerves. I'm not against special effects or anything, but I think that when they're used in every second of the film, they lose their 'special' status.

So you would rather have movies use shit animatronics every second of the movie.

I haven't read the books but from what I've seen it looks pretty good.

At 12/8/07 12:09 PM, IrishChrisman wrote: So you would rather have movies use shit animatronics every second of the movie.

Hey, BladeRunner had great visual effects, and they hardly even had rudimentary CGI back then.

At 12/8/07 12:09 PM, IrishChrisman wrote: So you would rather have movies use shit animatronics every second of the movie.

No. I'd rather filmmakers avoided using gimmicks and fake stuff to try 'wow' the audience. I'm not denying that the special effects used in modern films are great to look at, but that's all they are there for. I saw "Lord of the Rings 3" and I must say the effects were fantastic, but once the film was over, I didn't care about it any more. It didn't make me think about the film on the way home, whereas films with lower budgets and minimal effects like "The Idiots", "Gummo", and "4" occupy my mind quite often, having seen them multiple times.

Filmmakers need to stop relying on expensive trickery to acquire interest in their material. Do more than just entertain us, make us remember and think about what we're seeing long after the credits screen has ended. Make us question it. But of course, most people aren't capable of watching a screen and thinking for themselves at the same time, so it doesn't surprise me that filmmakers just throw some fancy shit together for the money.

I know this is an old thread but I would just like to say that the Golden Compass did not do as well as expected and a sequil in my opinion is unlikly.

In other news, Peter Jackson has agreed to do two 'The Hobbit' movies, all is well as it should be in the universe.