Posted on 12/08/2007 11:24:02 PM PST by DesScorp
LOS ANGELES (Reuters) - "The Golden Compass," a costly fantasy starring Nicole Kidman and Daniel Craig, got off to a slow start at the North American box office and will likely fall short of opening-weekend expectations.
New Line Cinema's $180 million film sold an estimated $8.8 million worth of tickets during its first day in theaters on Friday, according to data issued on Saturday by tracking firm Box Office Mojo (www.boxofficemojo.com).
After Saturday and Sunday sales are factored in, the film will come in at No. 1 with about $28 million when the studios issue their weekend estimates on Sunday, said Paul Dergarabedian at Media By Numbers, another tracking firm.
New Line, a struggling Time Warner Inc unit hoping to launch another franchise along the lines of its blockbuster "Lord of the Rings" series, said last week it was hoping the film would open to between $30 million and $40 million.
"It's below expectations, but it's not an out-and-out debacle," said Dergarabedian.
Conspiring against the movie, he said, were such factors as a soft marketplace and unrealistic expectations for an epic fantasy filling the holiday void left by the "Narnia" and "Lord of the Rings" smashes.
A New Line executive did not return a call seeking comment.
Based on the first book in British author Philip Pullman's acclaimed children's series "His Dark Materials," writer/director Chris Weitz's film is set in an alternate world ruled by an oppressive religious authority. It features talking animals and a heroine played by youngster Dakota Blue Richards.
Even though the film downplays the religious aspect, it has been savaged by such groups as the Catholic League and the U.S. Conference of Bishops. Opponents have cited Pullman's unflattering portrayal of the church and specifically the Catholic faith.
(Excerpt) Read more at reuters.com ...
Saw a advertisement for it last evening. Looked like something I might want to go see.
Why do you believe I shouldn't?
We are definitely passing on an atheist author and atheistic messages - no matter how subtle. This guy thrives on the “god is dead” theme in his books. We prefer Christian movies like Narnia.
#1 ditto!
Well, this link pretty much sums it nicely, even if it is from WorldNetDaily (first link handy from google). Even snopes.com has an article about it.
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=58341
Pullman is an avowed atheist whose goals are to essentially destroy Christianity. I’m not even a Christian technically, but the thought of that gives me chills.
And what he tries to teach kids, with homosexual angels, and pleasures of the body!
Unbelievable.
The books this movie is based upon are anti-God and anti-religion.
Do a search on FreeRepublic and you will find several links that will provide you with in-depth information on the Author and the Movie.
Hollyweird just doesn’t get it. They think we want to see what they want us to see. The truth is, we want to see what we want to see and they have put the viewers out of the theaters. Too bad for them. Great for us. We save our money.
Yep and with all the outside competition for entertainment (internet, computer games etc) you would think they would get this, but the huge ego down here of course either never gets that or just bows when the big dollar is finally threatened but good. So glad to see the slaughter this season with all the trash they are putting out there. Shows they can’t drive the content as much as they think they can. :-)
I saw this extremely odd movie last night. It had intriguing special effects, incoherent script, an annoying random moment ending right with the obvious beginning of a sequel.
The author is some kind of raving demented off-his-meds atheist, who claims this peculiar movie and its sequels will kill organized religion.
After seeing this completely incoherent, computer graphics to the annonying hilt jibberish last night, God remains safe in the human heart.
A reasonable opening would have been $60M. They set expectations at $30M, because they knew they were in trouble. But they ended up not even making that. It's a debacle.
This is a personal question that each of us must answer for him/her self. If you think it looks interesting, then by all means you should go see it.
The reviews I've read indicate that the author of the book on which the movie was based is an ardent Atheist and desperately wants to destroy the idea of the actual existence of a Supreme Being, a Deity, of God.
I don't need or want to see such a movie and I would advise my Christian friends to avoid it as well and to tell their young children, "No, you may see it when you are of age to make discerning choices based on your own judgment but not now." The movie will almost certainly be on DVD before long and will probably be available in the discount bins at WalMart, Cosco, and Target before very long as well.
If you think you might like it (and are already leaning in the direction of Agnosticism or Atheism), then as an adult, you have the absolute right to see it (and if you are leaning toward Agnosticism or Atheism, I know this isn't what you want to hear - if I'm right about my belief in God, He gave you the Right to not believe in Him).
I think I'll pass on it. Partly because FormerACLUmember gave it such an entertaining and persuasive thumbs down. Mostly because my dollars might work against the spiritual interests of our kids.
After posting my questions, I found The Golden Compass' Spurs Controversy, which prepared me nicely for rom's link.
. . . groups such as the Catholic League for Religious and Spiritual Rights don't agree, and say while the film is notably more "watered down" than Pullman's books are, both are still highly "anti-Christian and pro-atheist."
"Our fear is the parents who don't know what's actually in these books and don't learn about it from the film may think [the books] are great stocking stuffers for their kids on Christmas morning," Kiera McCaffrey, the spokesperson for the Catholic League, told ABC News.
"Every single religious character is a terror in these books," said McCaffrey. "There isn't one who isn't. And the heroes of the book – the children – are taught that churches are all the same and that they obliterate good feelings."
thnx :)
It’s based on a book where the author has explicity said he is trying to undermine Christianity.
Now, I’m all for his right to write the book (and make a movie of it).
However, my family and I won’t spend our money to help further the author’s cause.
Until Hollywood can figure out how to make a movie without spending an obscene amount of money, it will continue to languish.
I read an article last year about Spider Man 3. Sam Raimi, the director, wanted to digitally adjust the lighting on a 5 second piece of film. It would cost $5,000.
Aliens cost approx. $18.5 million to make in 1986. The special effects were AMAZING (and convincing) and still look great 21 years later. Can anybody watch Aliens and think that those monsters looked fake? Did the queen Alien look fake? Heck no. But just watch a "blockbuster" movie these days with the incredibly expensive CGI effects (Star Wars prequels, Golden Compass, etc). They look like an overblown cartoon.
They produced the entire LOTR trilogy for about $300 million, so you can see the numbers they wanted. Judt to have made back the production and distribution costs they'd need more than $350 million before they make a dime.
Meantime they are so busy cheating Peter Jackson out of his due for LOTR that they haven't been able to get him to make 'The Hobbit', which would make a fortune.
They'd just screw the pooch on the hobbit. There's no way to insert romantic dream/love scenes into a story with no humans, and if they make the dwarves homo, they might just start a riot from the nerd patrol!
I was stunned to find that Scholastic Books, probably the largest publisher of children's’ books here in the U.S., was distributing the Pullman books free of charge to elementary schools. I, as a former elementary school librarian, took immediate offense and sent email protesting. The American Library Association, of course, sees no problem with this distribution.
You are right though. We have saved a lot of money!
The 180 million is just the production cost. I've read that the marketing budget for this film is north of 50 million. It has the makings of an epic disaster. The question is will the string of failed left-wing themed films this year cause Hollywood to reassess it's movie-making strategy or are they so clueless that they can't see the trend?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.