Ask questions to The Digital Bits team (Bill Hunt, Jeff Kleist et.al.)

[MerrickG]

Originally Posted by Jeff Kleist

Well, those two shots are drastically different distances. Get up to the same distance and you'll see it. I can see it pretty easily between the two anyway. Yes, he looked old in 1987

Yeah, its true that Stewart certainly looks OLDER, but I'd say for a guy who is almost 70(!!!) years old he has aged remarkably well.

[MerrickG]

Rumors are that Jackson is looking to Neill Blomkamp to take over directing duties for the Hobbit.

Is this a good move? I have a hard time believing the studio would allow a rookie like Blomkamp to take over such an important film in such an important franchise unless Peter Jackson was basically mentoring him the whole time.

I did like what he did with District 9, the Hobbit is whole new ballgame.

[Jeff Kleist]

Jackson HAS been mentoring him, and he's already had a well directed hit, that's all that matters. He was originally going to be given Halo before that died

[Vincent Pereira]

Let's not forget that Jackson had never directed a big hit before tackling THE LORD OF THE RINGS trilogy. In fact his previous film- THE FRIGHTENERS- was a flat-out flop financially and critically.

Vincent

[Jeff Kleist]

Probably the shorthand is that I don't see any indication that either Jackson or Del Toro would be concerned with him taking over. While I'd prefer PJ or Del Toro (I honestly can't choose wich. Del Toro Mirkwood was just too lucious a dream), it's a non-issue

[Uxi]

Without looking at pics, Stewart has aged damned good (not noticibly to me). I just had my Excalibur HDDVD in there (when is there going to be a BD release?)

[PeterTHX]

Originally Posted by Uxi

Without looking at pics, Stewart has aged damned good (not noticibly to me). I just had my Excalibur HDDVD in there (when is there going to be a BD release?)

When Stewart was 50 he looked 60...
...and now that he's 70 he looks 60.

[MerrickG]

Originally Posted by Vincent Pereira

Let's not forget that Jackson had never directed a big hit before tackling THE LORD OF THE RINGS trilogy. In fact his previous film- THE FRIGHTENERS- was a flat-out flop financially and critically.

Vincent

Yeah. You are right about that. I'd still love to see the meeting in which PJ was able to convince New Line to give the films a (very cheap for all 3) $300M budget, which would have RUINED NL if they had failed.

Too bad New Line didn't know what to do after the success of LotR.

[Jeff Kleist]

Yeah. You are right about that. I'd still love to see the meeting in which PJ was able to convince New Line to give the films a (very cheap for all 3) $300M budget, which would have RUINED NL if they had failed.

While I don't know what New Line's contribution was, if it was even half the budget I'd be suprised. They had a whole network of people like Alliance in Canada and Entertainment in Film in the UK who would co-produce with them.

The problem with the Golden Compass was that the books were HUGE in Europe, and the fact that virtually no one here ever read them combined with a smear campaign by the religious right kept the movie from making much here. WB saw the movie as a loser and a magnet for bad press and didn't want to pony up enough seed money to get the back to back sequel shoot underway and the whole thing died off. Too bad, there's a 45 minute longer cut somewhere with the proper ending (which was being held over for the sequel, it was shot, but I don't think the FX were finished)

[Objectivity]

Originally Posted by Jeff Kleist

The problem with the Golden Compass was that the books were HUGE in Europe, and the fact that virtually no one here ever read them combined with a smear campaign by the religious right kept the movie from making much here. WB saw the movie as a loser and a magnet for bad press and didn't want to pony up enough seed money to get the back to back sequel shoot underway and the whole thing died off. Too bad, there's a 45 minute longer cut somewhere with the proper ending (which was being held over for the sequel, it was shot, but I don't think the FX were finished)

I don't know if you can call quoting the author's own words a smear campaign, but I guess that's the current best practice for spin control when a client has previously expressed interesting opinions that are now inconvenient.

To me the biggest problem with Golden Compass is the result of the second half of your post. It didn't end, it just stopped. "They" chose to not include the proper ending (or any ending at all for that matter) and then wondered why word of mouth was so bad. Maybe if they had tried to tell a good stand-alone story, the box office would have justified sequels.

There are right ways and wrong ways to shift source material. LOTR did it to good effect, so did Branagh's Henry V. Golden Compass made changes that resulted in an end product that didn't feel like a completed movie.

The audience may be dumb, but it isn't stupid.

[Rblu-Dblu]

Originally Posted by Objectivity

I don't know if you can call quoting the author's own words a smear campaign, but I guess that's the current best practice for spin control when a client has previously expressed interesting opinions that are now inconvenient.

To me the biggest problem with Golden Compass is the result of the second half of your post. It didn't end, it just stopped. "They" chose to not include the proper ending (or any ending at all for that matter) and then wondered why word of mouth was so bad. Maybe if they had tried to tell a good stand-alone story, the box office would have justified sequels.

There are right ways and wrong ways to shift source material. LOTR did it to good effect, so did Branagh's Henry V. Golden Compass made changes that resulted in an end product that didn't feel like a completed movie.

The audience may be dumb, but it isn't stupid.

I agree, everyone knows if you're going for a trilogy the 2nd movie is your cliffhanger because you know theres a 3rd. You have to get the people to accept the first movie before you know for a fact you're making a 2nd. They just assumed everyone was going to love this movie.

[Jeff Kleist]

Originally Posted by Objectivity

I don't know if you can call quoting the author's own words a smear campaign, but I guess that's the current best practice for spin control when a client has previously expressed interesting opinions that are now inconvenient.

The claims and smears that were being made were well beyond Pullman's opinions. That the books would poison young minds. The Catholic League that spearheaded this is a well known extremist organization and lobbying front group that is currently running interference in the pedophile scandals.

They also were the same ones who assaulted Kevin Smith's Dogma, a movie that if anything CELEBRATED their faith (google "Catholic league dogma smith" for lots of good links). Their fearless leader is also prominently featured in the South Park Episode "Red Hot Catholic Love"

http://www.southparkstudios.com/episodes/103969

So I think that at least helps establish that like the Parent's Television Council who spends a lot of time sending robo-faxes to the FCC from a handful of people who click the send button a lot, they're mostly a front group that raises funds for their pet causes through creating controversy and playing the victim instead of engaging in meaningful discussion.

In closing, because I don't want this to turn into a political debate, if you didn't like the movie, thought it could have been better, or just heard it was a work of Satan, pick up the books or borrow them from your library. They're a great read, andthat way you can formulate an informed opinion that is your very own.


This snopes piece offers a decent summary, but is by no means complete

http://www.snopes.com/politics/religion/compass.asp

To me the biggest problem with Golden Compass is the result of the second half of your post. It didn't end, it just stopped. "They" chose to not include the proper ending (or any ending at all for that matter) and then wondered why word of mouth was so bad. Maybe if they had tried to tell a good stand-alone story, the box office would have justified sequels

Well, for that one you can blame New Line for making Chris Weiz chop it to pieces. They did try to give it less of a cliffhanger because if you read the books it's even worse if they went forward Like I said, there's 50 minutes sitting on the cutting room floor for this movie, and I pray they haven't gone down the memory hole with the integration of the New Line archives into WB's, so that someday when another attempt is made to adapt His Dark Materials that we can finally see what he really tried to make. Hilariously the only way to see what there is of the ending is to spend 30 hours beating the terrible video game (or look on youtube)

Make no mistake, the foreign box office was over $300 million and the movie absolutely made a good profit. The foreign distributors were all on board, but they needed WB's money to make it happen.

Speaking of Golden Compass, anyone know if Entertainment in Video's version has been repressed region free yet? I'd love to get a copy without DNR

[SpaceDog]

Originally Posted by Jeff Kleist

Make no mistake, the foreign box office was over $300 million and the movie absolutely made a good profit. The foreign distributors were all on board, but they needed WB's money to make it happen.[/b]

It's too bad that can't get a sequel going on it's own. It's also too bad when people attack a movie rather than doing the adult thing and choosing not to see it if it offends them/doesn't appeal to them.

[MerrickG]

Hey Jeff,

Here are some proposed specs for the new Alien Quad set listed at this website
http://www.dvduell.de/artikel/erste-...y-blu-ray-box/

Do these seem accurate. Im a little confused because it seems to me that these are more or less what we already have on the current Alien Quad set.

[Uxi]

Golden Compass was mis-sold, at least for North America. The trailer I saw hinted like it would be like LotR... or Chronicles of Narnia... instead, it was more of a political drama with CGI talking animals and a horrid ending.

Blame whoever, New Line or whatever, but the boycott or whatever didn't have any effect on it.

[PeterTHX]

Originally Posted by Uxi

Golden Compass was mis-sold, at least for North America. The trailer I saw hinted like it would be like LotR... or Chronicles of Narnia... instead, it was more of a political drama with CGI talking animals and a horrid ending.

Blame whoever, New Line or whatever, but the boycott or whatever didn't have any effect on it.

As they say on them internets: THIS.

I'm Catholic and I don't pay attention to what the church tells me to watch or not (and mind you, this was one group, not the Church itself).

50% on Rotten Tomatoes "Top Critics". The film was just no good. The Church didn't kill it: word of mouth did.

[HeavyHitter]

Originally Posted by PeterTHX

The film was just no good. The Church didn't kill it: word of mouth did.

Agreed.

[HeavyHitter]

Originally Posted by Jeff Kleist

The claims and smears that were being made were well beyond Pullman's opinions. That the books would poison young minds. The Catholic League that spearheaded this is a well known extremist organization and lobbying front group that is currently running interference in the pedophile scandals.

They also were the same ones who assaulted Kevin Smith's Dogma, a movie that if anything CELEBRATED their faith (google "Catholic league dogma smith" for lots of good links). Their fearless leader is also prominently featured in the South Park Episode "Red Hot Catholic Love"

http://www.southparkstudios.com/episodes/103969

So I think that at least helps establish that like the Parent's Television Council who spends a lot of time sending robo-faxes to the FCC from a handful of people who click the send button a lot, they're mostly a front group that raises funds for their pet causes through creating controversy and playing the victim instead of engaging in meaningful discussion.

In closing, because I don't want this to turn into a political debate, if you didn't like the movie, thought it could have been better, or just heard it was a work of Satan, pick up the books or borrow them from your library.

Bold emphasis mine, but you sure opened that can of worms. lol

[frank_t]

Originally Posted by PeterTHX

As they say on them internets: THIS.

I'm Catholic and I don't pay attention to what the church tells me to watch or not (and mind you, this was one group, not the Church itself).

50% on Rotten Tomatoes "Top Critics". The film was just no good. The Church didn't kill it: word of mouth did.

yep - agree with you.

have to say as a catholic, there was not a single word mentioned about it at church any weekend.

i caught part of the movie and just didn't find it all that entertaining. had the same problem with Narnia - not a bad movie (either of them).

interestingly, after LOTR, I really don't find any movie in the fantasy genre all that interesting any more. LOTR set the bar so high, and on repeated viewings (just watched all three again last couple weeks), it still holds up so damn well.

[Mr_Bester]

Originally Posted by PeterTHX

As they say on them internets: THIS.

I'm Catholic and I don't pay attention to what the church tells me to watch or not (and mind you, this was one group, not the Church itself).

50% on Rotten Tomatoes "Top Critics". The film was just no good. The Church didn't kill it: word of mouth did.

Unfortunately, the word of mouth that got around here was the anti-christian stuff. I mentioned to my sister in law that we were netflixing it to watch with my daughter and she flipped telling me that we shouldn't let my 8yr old daughter watch something that attacks christianity like this movie does. She never saw it, never read the books. That sounds more like church word of mouth than bad movie word of mouth. As for 50% on rt, look up twilight...I didn't think it was a great movie or a terrible movie, but I didn't disregard it because of the religious elements, many in this country obviously did.