I've been to see this tonight and I'm really disappointed by it. I'm a huge fan of the books and this is the film I've been waiting for all year, but it really fell below my expectations.

Now I generally take the view that film adaptations are never as good as the original books and I also accept that some bits of the book will have to be left out because of time constraints. Even so, they messed around with the story and left out important parts.

First of all, in the retiring room at Jordan College when Lyra was hidden in the wardrobe, they had Fra Pavel empty the poison into Asriel's tokay instead of the Master. In the book the Master was a good man who felt he had to do this because killing Asriel was the lesser of two evils for Lyra, so the film lost this. The section in the retiring room was much shorter and they never mentioned "a severed child?"

Then at Mrs Coulter's house they never had the party where Lyra first found out about the gobblers and ran away. In the film she instead found a top secret document in a waste paper bin with the heading "General Oblation Board" and worked it out from the initials. What?!

They never had the roping with hundreds of gyptians, where John Faa made the great speech saying that Lyra was under their protection and no one was to turn her in. Instead they just met on a single boat with far fewer gyptians. Arriving at Trollesund they never visited the witches ambassador. This meant missing out the "this girl must save the world without knowing about it" speech, which is one of the most important sections of the entire book.

One of the worst changes, however, was that Lyra went to Svalbard and tricked Iofur Raknison before going to Bolvangar. The only reason for this seemed to be so that they could have the big battle between the gyptians, tartars and witches at the end of the film. They also changed the name of Iofur Raknison for no reason. In the film he is called Ragnur something.

Worst of all though was the ending. Whereas in the book Lyra visits Asriel at Svalbard then Asriel kidnaps Roger to open the bridge to another world, this didn't even happen in the film! Asriel wasn't being held at Svalbard and the film ended with Lyra, Roger, Iorek and Lee Scoresby in Lee's balloon heading to Asriel. Whereas the book had the great ending where Asriel had opened the bridge to another world and Lyra was about to step through it with Pan, the film had no ending. It was bizarre.

I'm very frustrated. If you've not read the book then maybe you'll enjoy the film, but if you have read the book then I think you'll be quite disappointed.

:(

can't say i was impressed with it either, didn't stand out as a great film. Not enough Daniel Craig in it either :hihi:

Having read (and loved) the book series, I managed to separate the written tale from the cinema one, and enjoyed the film. I think that you really need to step away from the hangups of what is changed when something is adapted to screen, as no film has ever been exactly like the book (look at LOTR which was chopped and changed, or even the excellent Stardust which has huge liberties taken with the source material).

The film delivered the right look and the casting was spot on (in my opinion), and rattled the tale along at quite a pace without leaving out any of the important (note that word) information which will affect the later parts of the story. For non-fans of the book I can imagine it could be a bit confusing and muddled at times due to the amount of information thrown out through the running time.

Yes, things were altered, and changed around, and the ending was sudden - but you have to accept that there was no way they could put the real ending of the book wihtout the definite promise that the next film will be made (it would be just too much). If the film does well enough, then the opening moments of the next film will be that nice twist ending (at least the reference to Lord Asriel needing something Lyra has is there - although she is not aware that it is Roger).

If they had have opted to do a literal adaptation of the book, including the party, the ropings, etc, it would have needed a much longer running time (about 4 hours). I'm just pleased enough with the end result which, although it isn't perfect (Lyra's accent is almost as bad as Dick Van Dyke's for a start), at least captures some of the feel, and shows potential for the next parts of the tale - which is where the book series really picked up anyway. Also if a film adaptation had everything from the book there wouldn't be any magic for people to find should they choose to read the novels after they see the film.

In the words of teh author himself:-

The ending makes every kind of narrative sense. The National Theatre production ended the first part plumb in the middle of The Subtle Knife, and nobody minded that because in the only terms that mattered it worked brilliantly. Every film has to make changes to the story that the original book tells - not to change the outcome, but to make it fit the dimensions and the medium of film. I'm very happy with the work the filmmakers have done, and no-one wants this film to succeed more, or believes in it more firmly, than I do.

- Philip Pullman (source http://www.hisdarkmaterials.org )


Much like the Potter franchise, the first part of the tale was just the primer - the whole really gets going in part 2 (okay, with Potter it was part 3, but you get the jist). I'm certianly hoping they get the green light to complete the story (the plan is to film Subtle Knife and Amber Spyglass back to back if they get the thumbs up)

One thing is for certain, the film has convinced a few of my work-mates to go and buy the books, so they will get to delve into the full story, which can only be a good thing.

I wasn't too impressed. It was waaay too short, and as a consequence, every time a character was introduced, they immediately announced their intentions and what needed to be done to advance the story. As a consequence no tension was built up and there was no suspense. It was just a bunch of things happening, one after another.

At least TSK will be better.

Lets not forget as well that they had to change sections for the american market. not because they are too thick to get it (although they might be) but because there is a load of resistance to the film. People are accusing it of being blasphemous and a plot and the christian factions want it banned and so on

I have never read the book so went it to the film with no expectations and no knowledge of the film (waiting till today to watch film2007 on demand) I though Jonathan Ross summed the film up.