Hello there! Please sign in or create a new account.
Click on the tab to open the menu ›

What About The Director’s Cut?

Most of the Golden Compass reviews that rated the movie negatively remarked that it was a shallow effort suffering from a terribly confusing plot.

In The Times, critic James Christopher complained that:

[The Golden Compass] works like an Ouija board. It can reveal all sorts of hidden truths, but it 's hopeless when it comes to directions. You need proper charts, a year’s supply of baked beans, and Sir Ernest Shackleton if you’ve got any hope of finding the plot. Unless you have read the books, you will have little idea of what’s going on.

What led to this confusing movie? A lot of people were eager to point the finger at director Chris Weitz. As Kyle Smith stated in The New York Post:

Chris Weitz [..] has been swamped by the task of condensing a densely imaginative 430-page book. It's as if, given the task of setting up a display of animals that would fit in his living room, he went to the city zoo and cut off a 6-inch portion of every beast, then tossed the bloody chunks in a pile.

The truth is that Chris Weitz' is not to blame when it comes to the editing of The Golden Compass, as he had no hand in the final cut.

As a matter of fact, Chris' cut was radically different from the final product; and was much more likely to please the critics, as was observed by New York Magazine.

For one, Weitz' cut followed the order of the books , i.e:


  1. Lyra is captured by samoyed hunters and taken to Bolvanger
  2. Lyra escapes from Bolvanger
  3. Lyra heads off to Svalbard
  4. Lyra falls out of Lee's balloon
  5. Lyra is captured by panserbjørne and taken to Ragnar
  6. Ragnar is killed by Iofur
  7. Lyra goes to Asriel
  8. Lyra finds Roger missing and goes after Asriel
  9. Lyra and Iorek part at the ice bridge

…instead of the final cut, which goes…

  1. Lyra is captured by samoyed hunters and taken to Ragnar
  2. Ragnar is killed by Iofur
  3. Lyra goes to Bolvanger
  4. Lyra and Iorek part at the ice bridge
  5. Lyra escapes from Bolvanger
  6. Lyra heads off to Svalbard

His cut also allowed for more character development; it included such elements as the love story between Serafina Pekkala and Farder Coram, as was reported earlier by Jennifer Vineyard of MTV.

For examples of Weitz' work, see the following clips taken from the Golden compass video game. As the video game had to be completed a few weeks before the premiere they used footage from Chris' original cut.

Watch the director's cut scenes.

Comments (65) — Add Yours

I stick my thumb to the Democrats and Republicans: vote Chris Weitz for 2008.

But surprisingly I still love the movie even in its current state. If they had released the director’s cut as the theatrical release on Dec 7th, I would never have left the theatre…

# Posted by namster on 0:58, 9 January 2008

namster's avatar

The directors cut would have appealed to adults and fans - a far better result, I feel.  As adults did not feel the movie was much good (from reviews and so forth), they did not take their kids anyway, and so box office figures suffered.

# Posted by ArcT on 1:14, 9 January 2008

ArcT's avatar

This confirms what I feared all long that the meddling with the film was New Lines Decsion, and not Chris its such a shame that New Line felt that they had to mess with Weitz version of the film. This film could have been a masterpiece so sad

# Posted by TowerDragon on 1:36, 9 January 2008

TowerDragon's avatar

Ahhh, I want. Want want want. I really hope that’s the version we get on the DVD release. It would probably help bolster the next two movies if people could see it as it was meant to be. :\

# Posted by rainbowdarling on 1:37, 9 January 2008

rainbowdarling's avatar

So, will two ‘cuts’ of the film be put out on DVD, a theatrical cut and a director’s cut—a la the Lord of the Rings films?

Would just love to be able to not only see the scenes from above that did not appear in the theatrical cut, but to see them put together where it follows the book (read trilogy after seeing GC movie).

# Posted by Ian in OH on 1:40, 9 January 2008

> “Ahhh, I want. Want want want. I really hope that’s the version we get on the DVD release. It would probably help bolster the next two movies if people could see it as it was meant to be. :\”

rainbowdarling, YOU’RE READING MY MIND! Ah. Curse the doctors for convincing me to discard my aluminum foil hat…

A director’s cut DVD would be the smartest task their company could ever undertake. They should begin at once.

# Posted by namster on 1:48, 9 January 2008

namster's avatar

I would buy both versions, hands down. I could see a lot of sense in releasing a theatrical (because I can’t wait that long!) and then a director’s cut DVD version. Sitting side by side on my small DVD shelf…how lovely they would be.

I have multiple copies of the books so it would only stand to have multiple copies of the movie! lol

# Posted by Phit on 6:19, 9 January 2008

Phit's avatar

But take this into consideration folks: the release of a “true” director’s cut is still dependent on where New Line is going with the sequels for they want a lot of deleted stuff at the end to be the beginning of TSK.  So in other words, yes I’d love a true Director’s cut!  However this would mean they’re not going to make the sequels.  Catch 22.  Grumbling in uneasy patience.

Say, has anyone heard from Weitz.  I’d love to hear what he’s thinking!!!

# Posted by consciousparticles on 6:39, 9 January 2008

consciousparticles's avatar

The smartest commercial thing NLC could do as soon as the run in theaters is complete IMHO is to:
1) Release the DVD of the Cinema print
2) Release a premium priced directors cut that runs to point 6 or 7 CW’s original cut
3) Recognize that TSK is a much cheaper shoot than GC as there are far fewer deamon effects and it takes place in worlds that look like our own.
4) Start TSK with points 7,8,9 of CW’s cut as planned
5) Aim to release TSK Q3 or early Q4 this year to capitalize on GW’s non-us success.

I wonder if this is the thinking at NLC?

# Posted by mattouter on 9:58, 9 January 2008

It would not necessasrily mean that we’re not getting TSK! If they’re making TSK, it’s easy. Don’t include the end scenes but put everything else back in. E voila, Director’s Cut. And then we still get to see the film as it was (more or less) meant.

# Posted by rainbowdarling on 12:56, 9 January 2008

rainbowdarling's avatar

In past decades, director’s cuts such as Weitz’s would be lost to posterity—one of the examples being David Lynch’s “Dune”.

Nowadays, we’re much luckier—as New Line will certainly release the director’s cut on home video, opening up the film to a whole another audience, similar to what recently happened to Ridley Scott’s “Kingdom of Heaven”. That film was reviled in its theatrical version—making less than TGC, both in the US and abroad—and yet the DC is now a minor classic, thanks to DVD and Blu-ray.

The latter format would, additionally, allow the quality of the experience to match (and often outweigh) that of the theatrical screening.

The important thing is to greenlight the sequel now. Then, with its staggered release, the film can strengthen its international fanbase and regain its following in the US, making TSK a much more viable option.

(Just saw the film for the second time today, and while it’s a great ride as it is, I’m yearning for the real cut buried within the footage!)

# Posted by Seretur on 15:00, 9 January 2008

I second that!

# Posted by mattouter on 16:29, 9 January 2008

nevertheless it is very sad and for me personally out of all reason, that new line felt that they had to cut the movie the way they did.

to me it seems as if this wasn’t really planed, regarding the trailer and the cut-scenes in the games, and as if the decision to chop this movie below 2 hours was made short time before the start.

i really wonder what reasons new line had to do this.

this came to my mind, and i really really hope this is nonsense, but does any of you think, that the church could have put pressure on new line, to cut out every philosophical, perhaps agnostic or atheist part.

anyway, lets hope for the director’s cut to be more satisfying. (i didn’t dislike the movie in cinema, but it really wasn’t the real deal at all)

p.s.: i also want to state, that it’s not only sad for us, the fans of HDM, but especially for chris weitz, and any other director who doesn’t have the final cut on his movie, and whose vision is cut to pieces by the studios.(like ridley scott’s blade runner or the above-mentioned kingdom of heaven)

# Posted by rainiac on 18:08, 9 January 2008

I am a great fan of the books and I was disapointed with the film. Its flaws has all been pointed out by more articulate people, so I will not repeat them. I will not be buying the theatrical cut on DVD.

If there is a Director’s cut and it makes good the promise of a good re-telling of the book, I will buy it.

# Posted by spuwdsda on 19:45, 9 January 2008

I hope they release a director’s cut DVD! I would totally buy it! The film is quite choppy as it is now. And I’m sure Weitz’s original cut was much better!

# Posted by swanheart on 20:04, 9 January 2008

> i also want to state, that it’s not only sad for us, the fans of HDM, but especially for chris weitz, and any other director who doesn’t have the final cut on his movie, and whose vision is cut to pieces by the studios.(like ridley scott’s blade runner or the above-mentioned kingdom of heaven)

I second that, rainiac. Creative freedom is the greatest gift of modern culture, whether in performance art or media art.

On a related note, I don’t know what’s more grating: having a feature-length voice-over by Harrison Ford’s inner monologue (“My name’s Drecker. I’m'a Blade Runner!”), or having more than 30% of the original cut deleted prior to theatrical release. Personally I’d be more ticked off with Harrison Ford’s voice-over.

# Posted by namster on 22:32, 9 January 2008

namster's avatar

i don’t really care much about reviews, or indeed reviewers. damn self-appointed intellectuals actually debating upon semantics and assumptions on what they believe is the correct path for any movie to follow. Their worse than the damn magisterium. Wait till all three are releasef (hopefully they will be) and then they can dump criticisms on the timing and plot development. i mean, i read heaps of them (reviews for all movies), especially from roger ebert of the suntimes, but after viewing any movie, i’ve never let any review sway my opinion. I thought the movie was fantastically condensed and I can only imagine it would be a 6 hour marathon if all threads of the plot were addressed with “justice”.
A directors cut of the movie would be spectacular, and i’m sure would boost dvd sales greatly, only adding to the posibility of new line making the others.

BY THE WAY, roger ebert gave it a 4 out of 4. quite rare.

darn critics, i’d strangle their damn bats, rats, or pigeons, whatever reviewers would have for daemons with my bare hands.

# Posted by jai on 23:40, 9 January 2008

jai: a critic’s daemon would be a peacock,  i think, because that’s what a critic is for the most part - a peacock. 

speaking of mr. ebert - i browsed through a book of his titled, “your movie sucks”.  astonishingly, i agreed with most of the movies he rated worst (i only found two that i disagreed with)  .  but a lot of the movies he gave 0-2 stars actually made a lot of money; they were movies the american audience actually went out of its way to see. 

while not as spectacular as a lot of us had hoped, i still have faith in this movie.  this is just the surface.  the real movie is quietly and morosely sitting on a shelf somewhere.  besides, it could have been much, much worse.  what’s out right now, had it been in the hands of people who were alien to and unfeeling for the books, could have produced this one as their original or could have bludgeoned it in a different way (michael bay *cough* transformers *cough*).  and that is what i think can be considered completely and utterly horrible.

hah, director’s cut.  i’ll be waiting.

# Posted by Pikipiki on 0:48, 10 January 2008

Excellent point, conscious particles.

What infuriates me is that NLC was orginially markenting “The Golden Compass” as another ‘Lord of the Rings”; yet didn’t give potential viewers credit for being able to sit through a 3 hour film. LOTR got progressively longer with each film, yet the trilogy as a whole was hugely sucesful. What the hell? Was it because NL saw this film as having more of a ‘juvenile’ audience base? (Thus conveniantly forgetting that millions of childeren read their way through a 700 page installment in the Harry Potter series {Order of the Phoenix} and still bought and read the following 2 instalations). When I attended an advanced screeing of “The Golden Compass”, I would say that at least 3/4 of the audiance were adults who had eityher come alone or with other adults.

Sorry for the long rant. Here’s hoping we see 2 more films and a hell fo a lot less meddling by corpotrate headquarters.

# Posted by CS on 4:04, 10 January 2008

CS's avatar

Well CS, I don’t think New Line really knew what they were doing when they marketed TGC.  It’s thematic contents are a lot more complex than the Harry Potter series and, as a result of this confusion, freaked and started hacking and restructuring the film.

All in all though, I still maintain that TGC is a really good film and despite its flaws, there’s a lot to like about it as a whole.  New Line owes its director and us the true fans not only a true cut of the film but worthy sequels as well.

$300 million and counting…..

# Posted by consciousparticles on 7:26, 10 January 2008

consciousparticles's avatar

I have a question for the author of this article.

How much of this article is based on fact, rather than speculation?

I know it was always assumed that the stuidio tinkered in post and even removed Weitz from the project entirely (as reported by various sources who worked on the project). But do we now know this as fact?

Weitz always maintained that the 2 hour running time was his choice, as was the removal of the ending. Hence, the chronology of the film needed to be changed to alter the progression of excitement. Again, if it was Weitz’s decision to remove the ending, then it was probably his decision to also mix it all around?

Let’s have facts rather than speculation. If you know this article to be fact, then that’s really interesting, but be careful what you report as fact, for fear of being sued!! :-)

# Posted by jayuk83 on 10:58, 10 January 2008

It’s all fact. With a project of this scale it is understandable that a studio would like to have control over the final product instead of simply letting the director make all the calls.

However, in this case it seems that the ‘original’ cut might have pleased more critics and fans.

# Posted by Ryan on 13:41, 10 January 2008

Ryan's avatar

Lord A.
Not only would it have been more pleasing - but it may well have improved the US BO.

BTW do you have feeling for the state of play at NLC? How about CW, have you heard from him, or requested an interview? I’d be very interested to hear what they have to say. Presumably the foreign backers (to whom they sold the non-us rights) will be quite happy to finance the sequel, having made a good return on their initial investment.

# Posted by mattouter on 17:34, 10 January 2008

How weird that the new comment put itself in at #1 spot. O.o

# Posted by rainbowdarling on 18:35, 10 January 2008

rainbowdarling's avatar

Lord Asriel’s right.

Approx. the day after the film’s release, Chris Weitz gives an interview saying how he’s keen on releasing a director’s cut with approximately 40 minutes worth of deleted material—this is practically THE DAY after the film’s release, it’s like he’s begging us to understand his plight. The word “director’s cut” implies that the cuts were not his to make, and the timing of the interview is suspect, and therefore we can safely deduce that in his previous interviews (in which he claims responsibility for the aforementioned cuts) he couldn’t tell us the whole truth.

Furthermore, New Line’s response to the test audience reaction is well known. They showed the approx. 2:45-3:00min cut to a test audience. Afterwards, the film was severly cut down to 1:50min. Between the test audience and New Line Cinema, it is extremely doubtful that Chris Weitz had any say in this matter.

And given New Line’s initial restrictions on the content of The Golden Compass script last year, these cuts are entirely consistent with their behaviour for the past year.

No one here is absolving Chris Weitz from all of the blame, obviously, but he should only take blame for mistakes that were his, and he should have to take blame for anything else.

# Posted by namster on 18:35, 10 January 2008

namster's avatar

> CORRECTION: I don’t know the exact length of the cut that New Line showed to the test audiences, but we are certain that it was much longer than the theatrical release and we are fairly confident that it was similar to the length of the original cut—if not being THE original cut itself.

# Posted by namster on 18:39, 10 January 2008

namster's avatar

@mattouter: Yes

@rainbowdarling: That was a bug, it has now been fixed :)

@namster: Editors decided to cut certain parts of the film even before the test screening.

# Posted by Ryan on 20:55, 10 January 2008

Ryan's avatar

This is off subject, but i really want to ask this. Does anyone know where I can read TGC movie script?

# Posted by BigFan1 on 23:01, 10 January 2008

For now you can’t.

# Posted by Ryan on 5:34, 11 January 2008

Ryan's avatar

I came to the books only AFTER seeing the film but did not find the film in the least bit confusing.  My wife, who is normally not a fan of the genre, found the film quite enjoyable and hopes the series will continue.  Reviewers who were confused must be dullards one and all.

As to changes from the book, I’ve grown to expect movie adaptions to compress characters and re-arrange scenes.  Ending the movie in a different place from the book, perhaps the greatest deviation from the novel, is quite understandable if one looks toward a film adaptation of “The Subtle Knife”.  I seriously doubt the producers would be content with someone of Daniel Craig’s drawing power being left out of the middle film.  From an actor’s perspective, I’m sure Mr. Craig would prefer not to have his character omitted either. 

As I said earlier, viewing the film piqued my interest and lead me to the novels.  Was it a perfect adaptation?  No.  But I cannot understand the lukewarm critical reception either.

# Posted by Jkerouac59 on 16:35, 11 January 2008

Cheers to that last statement Kerouac - I really enjoy the movie. Need to go see it again otherwise Titanic still reigns as most-seen-in-theater movie for me. But it’s like Lyra in the Retiring Room…god you need more information once you realize there’s more to know and be seen! It may be mostly sitting around sipping brantwijn but some interesting stuff goes on there!

# Posted by Phit on 20:58, 11 January 2008

Phit's avatar

I’ll have some more of the 1898 tokay!

# Posted by Ryan on 21:31, 11 January 2008

Ryan's avatar

You guys must be kidding.
The movie is pathetic

The movie butchered the whole book.

Every concept was made a mockery of, the acting was poor and each scene weak.

Daemons seldom speak to a stranger. (Why does Pan say hello to Lee Scoresby?)

All intelligent scenes are cut for some stupid reason (that is the directors fault if you ask me)
Lyra discovering the GOB and Ms.C’s part in it with her wit with Mrs.C’s guests.

Why does all the big plot twists seem to happen with *no* anticipation? Hi I’m a witch who had it on with Coram
Mother Coulter
What happened to pikkala’s goose
Scene of freeing the daemons

Important characters cut Tony Makarios and Ratter why not see them die?
Does the cold kill the children who escape Bolvangar? It seems so as there is no reference to consequences separation of Daemon and human except the emotional strain of being cut.

Why cut the final cliff hanger.

Why have inconsistant story with the escape from bolvanger

Gyptians are water gypsies not pirates.
What happened to the canals

Witches fry on pine.

What happened to flame hurlers

what happened to all the scenes that show Lyra as a real child

Why is Lyra is daft that she cant pick up on all the hints that she is a prodigy?

Why isn’t Lyra the silvertongue she is supposed to be

Why is Coulter so emotional. She is a passive aggressive person in the book.

What happened to the characters with depth and complication like the master who attempts to kil Asriel

why is the Magisterium the only people to blame

why are the answers to the key questions of the whole first book narrated to the audience within the first three minutes of the movie.

All the moral and ethical complications cut out.

Why is Lyra’s winter clothes so fashionable not practical (tights and tartan skirt in -20degree c weather?)

Why doesn’t any fan just admit that it was a poor movie totally ridiculous and had scarcely any respectable input for His Dark Materials.

# Posted by Templeth on 14:00, 12 January 2008

bad spelling sorry

# Posted by Templeth on 14:01, 12 January 2008

Well, Templeth, that’s your opinion but not everyone feels that way.

Not to mention there is absolutely no way we’d have all the details from the book show up in the movie. Expecting that is completely unreasonable.

# Posted by rainbowdarling on 14:44, 12 January 2008

rainbowdarling's avatar

You’re quite right it is moot to expect a complete reproduction of the book.

Truth is the book is fantastic and the movie although attempting to recapture the magic, surprise, anticipation, questionable morals and ethics, intelligence and in-depth characters was a very hard task, the movie has failed in all regard.

That is my opinion and I believe it is pretty close to the truth.

Lets illustrate our opinions like this. I state air is made of water and in your opinion air is made of mud. And we have an argument proposing our opinions. No matter what our opinions the truth can not be changed. Air is air. And if we want to get technical about it and talk of chemistry we boil it down and realize one opinion is closer to the truth.

Don’t let the excitement of a great story vague out what poppycock crap was presented in the cinema.

Even the directors cut (although the chronological order of events are more precise and not as confusing) gives no bar of redemption for such a bad production. The scenes I just watched are weak.

I suppose Chris Weitz interpreted the Golden Compass to be more akin to Pokemon and the glorious mindlessness that portrays, not an semi-epic story aimed at mature teenagers. Come on I loved the book too. I enjoyed the movie as a waste of time and a light hearted visual extraodinaire that gave me the same sensation as eating an A4 sized acid tab. Mind numbing and good looking and although I may not realize the experience left me with a sense of a little less intelligence and a plummet of well-being. I can not believe I endured it.

# Posted by Templeth on 23:12, 12 January 2008

You’re just begging to be taken seriously, which is a courtesy I will not indulge you.  “Pokemon?????”  Please….

# Posted by consciousparticles on 23:54, 12 January 2008

consciousparticles's avatar

templeth, how dare you say that your opinion is closer to the “truth” than any other’s one. truth is always subjective, so maybe your opinion is only closer to “your truth”.
and honestly, in my humble opinion conciousparticles is absolutely right.

# Posted by rainiac on 0:41, 13 January 2008

As much as I enjoy debate, I refuse to engage in it with someone who will not value my opinion as the same as theirs.

Your opinion is that the movie is crap, and I can respect that. Mine differs and by stating yours the way you have in the comparison of air is water versus air is mud, you have essentially stated that yours is closer to the truth. In your view, of course this will be the case, but that does not make mine or anyone else who did enjoy the movie for what it *was* any less entitled to feel that way. Their opinions are not worth less.

Anyway, I’m going to agree to disagree on this point and still insist that in its full form it will probably prove to be a better adaptation than it proved to be in the cinema. Is it perfect? No. Nobody is claiming that. Is it horrible trash which deserves to be thrown out? No. It is not.

# Posted by rainbowdarling on 1:10, 13 January 2008

rainbowdarling's avatar

Conscious, have you read the book?

I am serious but I suppose I am preaching in the wrong place.

yet this is a forum where people are expected to speak their opinion, and I am surprised that no one has showed a nuance of agreement with me.

Daemon’s aren’t just treasured pets as they seem to be in the movie as for the rhythm and intelligence of each scene it is similar to a pokemon movie. I am serious and I am surprised that people here are making a die hard save for what was a really poor production.

Yes it was visually stunning and the story was interesting, but the presentation of the concepts were so poor. If this movie was all the “His Dark Materials” had to stand on it is a flop in its own right.

Sorry no hype or advertising has swayed my judgement, nor a childish glee, anticipation nor excitement because frankly I have been exposed to that and this movie didn’t give *anything* back.

Ha.. It also spoiled plot lines of the consecutive books.

# Posted by Templeth on 1:33, 13 January 2008

Well I’ll agree to disagree. I read my posts and I suppose I was on an arrogant rant. Sorry if I offended I wasn’t meaning to make it personal.

I was rather unpleased by the movie. I hope I haven’t spoiled the experience for others (which I probably have).

I’ll close my argument with this:

I believe the book is by far superior. Philip Pullman, kutos to you. I tip my hat at your genius.

I wouldn’t recommend the movie, in fact I would recommend to steer away as to not taint any literary experience of any of the series.

I strongly believe Pullman’s tail was never to be portrayed like this, as it was an atheists work that DOES construct argument against organised religious movements. And proposes much intellectual and moral debate.

It was great to see things come to visual life.

Cheers and thanks for the discussion.

# Posted by Templeth on 1:49, 13 January 2008

Yes, Templeth, I have read the books- multiple times!  I by no means think the film is perfect, but to just write it off like there’s nothing redeeming about it is just wrong, in my humble opinion.  I will admit that after seeing it a couple of more times, I enjoyed it more as I was baffled by some of the changes made by Weitz et al the first time around.  But hey, it’s a movie.  Furthermore, it’ an adaptation which does not and should not mean that it’s a replacement of the book.  The book(s) are king and nothing will subvert them as the superior medium for Pullman’s imagination.  So yeah, TGC the book is better than the film in that respect- always will be.  Yet, the film had a charm and an energy lacking in many other fantasy film adaptations as of late.  I’d like to think that Pullman’s vision had an influence on those aspects of the film version.

It was by no means horrible.  But I tend to think that those that are saying that on this site , though thy have every right to do so (this is an internet forum after all!) are looking to be provocative and argumentative behind the guise and safety of their computers.

And Templeth, always post a “spoiler” warning even if you hated the movie.  It’s not fair to those people that have yet to read the books.

# Posted by consciousparticles on 9:52, 13 January 2008

consciousparticles's avatar

I have watched the movie three times and though I was still disappointed the first 2, I really loved it and enjoyed it the 3rd. And I know that I’ve said here before that a Director’s Cut wouldn’t make up for the loss but I now think it will. If they plan on doing something like the Kingdom of Heaven Director’s Cut, if that’s what a “director’s cut” is, then by all means, yes, make it happen!

# Posted by Cows N' Roses on 12:37, 13 January 2008

....putting on another $15M last week.
Bringing the total to something like $316M all told….:-)
It has still to open in Japan. FYI Eragon took $15M in Japan during its run so I would expect GC to make in excess of $330M :-)


# Posted by mattouter on 9:41, 14 January 2008


In Storyboard with soundtrack and (what sounds like) original cast.
Looks wonderful and you get to see Cittàgazze….

# Posted by mattouter on 17:10, 14 January 2008

That is Anand Tucker’s storyboard, so it’s pretty much irrelevant in respect to Chris Weitz’ director’s cut.

# Posted by Marijn on 18:04, 14 January 2008

Marijn's avatar

Well that’s interesting. It seems that CW’s approach took a lot from Anand.
From the design of Lord A’s device for opening to the bridge, the sets for Lord A’s prison and the vocal styling the actress’s uses when voicing Lyra.
You could almost go through the elements of the cut scenes that are out in pre-release trailers and the video game inserts and substitute them into this storyboard.
BTW how do you know that this is Anand’s work rather than CW’s? And have you been in contact with either CW or NLC since the film’s release?


# Posted by mattouter on 12:04, 15 January 2008

NL told us that it was Anand’s preproduction work, but you’re quite right on a lot of it being similar. I halfway want to chalk that up to Tucker being there for most of preproduction/the same crew being on board the whole time (except composer, he was changed) and then halfway want to say “well hold on…maybe it’s a lie and this is CW’s!”

The actress voicing Lyra I’d say is coincidence of the Oxford accent/Oxford accent attempt.

# Posted by Phit on 20:13, 15 January 2008

Phit's avatar

Thanks for this Phit. Yes I had forgotten how involved Anand was with the production - working to CW’s screenplay of course.
BTW did anyone see this press release from NLC..” box office revenue has been nothing less than astonishing overseas”.


I guess this bodes well for TSK movie.
I wonder how the politics at NLC works in this regard? Oh to be serving the tea and biscuits when Rob, Mike, Steve, Rolph and Toby meet. LoL!

# Posted by mattouter on 9:38, 16 January 2008

...also the figure of 315M that the press release mentions would rank GC the 12th best worldwide gross of 2007 (out of 420 odd releases)

# Posted by mattouter on 13:44, 16 January 2008

Lets just hope that New Line understands that the market of people that love these books and are willing to pay to see Pullman’s Story on the silver screen far out weight the Christian Fundementists over here in the states. lets just hope that New Line makes good on the promise that they see HDM as a global property and not just domestic one.

# Posted by TowerDragon on 7:21, 17 January 2008

TowerDragon's avatar

So, what was the film’s running time before the studio started hacking away at it, how much footage are we actually talking about?

# Posted by Giles on 3:37, 24 January 2008

I just read post #25

# Posted by Giles on 3:44, 24 January 2008

...the changes were severe and really pointless.  i bleed for weitz and his team.

so basically, bob shaye’s take on tgc was Lyra making a circuitous journey from svalbard to bolvanger to svalbard again…what???!!!

# Posted by Pikipiki on 6:27, 25 January 2008


# Posted by angelandsereno1 on 17:21, 25 January 2008

angelandsereno1's avatar

I agree with post 54. Throughout the changes, no one bothered to notice that all the geography had been disregarded. In the theatrical cut, Lyra lands at Trollesund which is on the coast of Noroway (as stated clearly by Serafina Pekkala). Then Lyra is captured by the Samoyed hunters. THEN, SOMEHOW she ends up being taken to Svalbard which is an island hundreds of miles north of Noroway. And the hunters were always on land so no one can say they flew there. THEN after all the Ragnar/Iorek business is finished, Lyra ends up at Bolvangar which is known to be BACK in Noroway. Then Scoresby supposedly flies with Lyra to her father Asriel who is supposedly in Svalbard with the bears. Huh!?!?
I think this proves the ridiculousness of the theatrical cut (in addition to the choppy editing, lack of the real ending, and lack of an emotional resolution of course). Anyone agree?

# Posted by lyra 3389 on 2:29, 31 March 2008

i havent seen the movie yat, so this is really depressing me- how could Lyra and Iorek part at the bridge, then go to Svalbard to conquer? Either i’m hillusinating or the editor had never read te books

# Posted by insidewillperry on 17:18, 15 April 2008

insidewillperry's avatar

everything was all mixed up in in the wrong place.  It was really rished becasue they allways want to make money and not tell the whole story.  I think the directors would be great and they could still make TSK.  But they really messed it up and every one i talked to who hasn’t read the books said they had no clue what was going on.  I know that they can’t put everything in but at least they can go in the right order insted of skipping arround.  you have to get use to how they make movies based on books so now i realize that you can neverexpect the movie to be very good.

# Posted by missy on 22:40, 14 May 2008

missy's avatar

i think that the movie were horrible compared to the book.

# Posted by deathlyfat on 23:19, 10 January 2009

DIRECTOR’S CUT??  C’mon, Warner Brothers… GIVE IT UP!  Just because you absorbed New Line doesn’t give you the right to bury their material.

# Posted by Average Jane on 7:27, 20 April 2009

Hey guys! Where’s the Director’s cut? All the link above died !?!?!

# Posted by Aryl.Evol.I on 7:35, 18 June 2009

We have a minor database error, I think - I’ll draw it to the attention of the techies and we’ll hopefully get it sorted for you :)

# Posted by ArcT on 13:27, 7 July 2009

ArcT's avatar

Fixed :)

# Posted by Ryan on 10:48, 8 July 2009

Ryan's avatar

It’s difficult to stay clear of voicing my opinion about the movie but focus on the value of a director’s cut, but here’s a try.

- A director’s cut is anyway a ‘different version’, so whether is good or bad can be judged then. That is positive no matter what
- I hope a director’s cut (DC) would focus on bringing the now loose strands together, being more explanatory than the movie is
- I believe the changing of the story’s chronology does not hurt the story’s core message. Meshing them around can be smart for an uniitiated audience
- A DC should not necessarily have the ending of the book. Imho, TSK has too little content to fill a full movie, and TAS and TGC too much. Creating different cuts between the parts can be healthy.

I do hope also TSK/TAS are being made into movies, but have little hope.

# Posted by Trickle on 11:53, 3 August 2009

I agree with Average Jane. Give us the directors cut!!!!

# Posted by Mrs_Heather_Asriel on 11:02, 24 September 2009

Mrs_Heather_Asriel's avatar

Post a Comment

Comments have been disabled. Sorry about that!

Spread the word


About Us

We strive to bring you the latest news and information, and we are constantly developing innovative ways of (Read more…)

A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: file_get_contents(/var/www/server): failed to open stream: No such file or directory

Filename: common/footer.php

Line Number: 30

| 0.1197 | 49 days 4:03 | 37