IGX

ZZZZZZZZzzzzzzzzzzz-snrk- Wha? Oh, right.

Like the "Harry Potter" films, this is a movie adaptation of a fantasy series with a rabid fan following. Like HP, it's gorgeous. Sets, costumes, good actors (Christopher Lee, Derek Jacobi, Ralph Fiennes, Ian MacKellan make unexpected appearances).

That's where the similarity ends. The HP films are actually quite good, and the writers and directors have done an excellent job of condensing sprawling stories into a movie format.

GC doesn't do the job. If you haven't read the books (I have) then it would be totally incompre-fucking-hensible. And there's too much CGI, which isn't always convincing.

Plodding in parts, then suddenly you hear about shit happening and say "They did what? When?"

Bah.

I thought the CGI made the film worth seeing once, and Ian McKellan voicing the bear was a good choice. But otherwise, it has the same problems as Narnia - the themes and the underlying mythology veered all over the place, there wasn't a whole lot of forward momentum, and the child actors playing the leads were sometimes in over their heads.

Also, I like Sam Elliot, but he phoned in his role for this one.

I saw it for $2 at a 2nd run theater, and had a decent time. YMMV.

Abandoned by Wolves wrote:I thought the CGI made the film worth seeing once, and Ian McKellan voicing the bear was a good choice. But otherwise, it has the same problems as Narnia - the themes and the underlying mythology veered all over the place

IMO the problems with "Narnia" lie with Lewis.

Pullman's "His Dark Materials" is fine until about halfway through the third book when the wheels come off. I find it fairly consistent and well-thought out. But that did NOT make it into the film.

I saw this on video, my opinion was that it suffered for extremely poor editing.