COMPASS & LOTR comparison - The Barrow-Downs Discussion Forum

Sauron the White · 03-16-2008, 11:34 AM

from davem

Quote:

Why did the rest of the world go mad for something the American public didn't?

First, how to you define the term "go mad for"? Boxofficemojo reports that the worldwide take on GC is $345 mil of which $70 million is from the USA and the rest ($275) being other markets. Thats about 20/80 split.

The LOTR films had the following non USA reciepts
ROTK $742 MIL
TTT $584 mil
FOTR $556 mil

GC is at $245 mil foreign receipts. That is still not half of what the lowest earning LOTR film took in outside the USA. And then consider that USA receipts ranged from 33 to 36 % of the gross.

So your description of the rest of the world going mad for GC is a bit of over selling the idea.

Quote:

Shall we have to resort to Oscar Wilde for an explanation of this?

I would never reject anyone using the great man as a source of inspiration. However, I also think that someone from the opposite viewpoint could use the standard and well worn "a fool and his money are soon parted".

davem · 03-16-2008, 11:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sauron the White

FOTR $556 mil

GC is at $245 mil foreign receipts. That is still not half of what the lowest earning LOTR film took in outside the USA. And then consider that USA receipts ranged from 33 to 36 % of the gross.

So your description of the rest of the world going mad for GC is a bit of over selling the idea.

No it isn't - you can't compare any movie to the LotR films (apart maybe from Titanic). I'm speaking generally - TGC was not a flop anywhere else in the world as far as I'm aware. In fact, it was a huge success (I think it was the third most popular film in the UK last year, after HP 5 & Bourne 3).

Quote:

I would never reject anyone using the great man as a source of inspiration. However, I also think that someone from the opposite viewpoint could use the standard and well worn "a fool and his money are soon parted".

Yes - but you're the one who keeps bringing up 'little Jonny' being out of step with the rest of the band.... Maybe the rest of the world got it wrong & the US is the little boy shouting out that 'the Emperor's got nowt on

' but... these are matters of personal taste so I don't think that applies. Outside the US TGC was a popular movie - people wanted to see it. In the US they didn't. Clearly the RotW got something out of the movie that US audiences either didn't get or didn't want.

Sauron the White · 03-16-2008, 01:29 PM

Truthfully, I don't think anyone got it right... or wrong for that matter. Like you said, its simply a matter of taste. The film underperformed in the States probably by a good 50%. If you figure that the Stateside revenues should have been about 35% of the total, you would have to double the actual revenues to get something around that figure.

I realize that you don't like them, but I do think that if they had stacked the film with more action - more epic battles ala LOTR, the film would have performed better here. And the word of mouth was not very good.

Why do some nations embrace certain things while other nations do not? Thats a serious questions for sociologists and social anthropologists. Why do the French - with their reputation for sophistication and the better things in life - go gaga for Jerry Lewis? Thats one of the great cultural mysteries.

Bethberry has a valid point about the boys not wanting to see the film. I have a six year old grandson who simply adores everything LOTR. One of his favorite things is to watch it when he spends the night and we have seen those movies more times than I can even count. He thought the first Narnia movie was good but nothing like LOTR. He liked SPIDERWICK also. I showed him the trailer for COMPASS and offered to take him but he did not want to see it. When we see the toys in the store he has never wanted them.

***Mister Underhill*** · 03-16-2008, 04:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by davem

Whatever - one assumes that if Warner decides to go ahead with sequels the sensibilities of US audiences will play a smaller part in their calculations than they did for New line - it will probably be the same story for the sequels as for the original - poor performance in the US & big box office everywhere else.

Presumably the opposite is true. Since the point of the article is that Warner would be precluded from reaping much in the way of foreign B.O. because of the sequel distribution deals New Line already made, I'd venture to say that if they did decide to forge ahead with sequels, they'd try to make them more appealing to U.S. audiences, since that would be where the money is for them. How they'd do that, I don't know.

As for the reasons for the film not doing well -- I think Bb might be on to something with the gender gap. Interesting side note -- wasn't it the head of production at Warners who was widely reported last fall as proclaiming that WB was going to stop making pictures with female leads? That wouldn't bode well for sequels either.

Anyway, I think there might've been a bit of a demographic gap, too -- "girl and her bear" maybe didn't really appeal to older audiences, especially those coveted 18-25 year old males, but the trailers didn't say "family movie" either.

I don't put any stock in the whole atheism factor. Religious protests usually serve to give a picture free publicity, and if anything only increase its box office prospects -- see Harry Potter. From where I stand, the protests seemed pretty half-hearted over here anyway.

Lalwendë · 05-11-2008, 01:41 PM

I've finally seen The Golden Compass (now we have to wait for DVDs to come out, as going to the cinema is an unattainable luxury with Ye Kraken about). I really do not understand the negative opinions to be honest. My only fault with it was that it was too short, it ought to have been an hour longer and lingered over some of the scenes more.

However I think I know why it failed to crack the US market - it doesn't fit into any of the 'markets'. It isn't a kiddies' film, all saccharin and primary colours. It isn't an all-action sword and gore fest. It isn't a serious 'issues' drama. I'm pretty certain it did much, much better over here as the books are held in such high regard and so it was able to find a way around the stereotypical demands of audiences.

It did however have a very 'English' feel to it, and I still think that the protagonist being a girl didn't help everyone appreciate it. Ho-hum, that's their loss.

And it's a shame the US audience didn't go to see it as it was a beautiful film, the characters were well done and unlike Jackson's work, the changes to the storyline were totally coherent and actually worked. The special effects and art were especially wonderful, and Nicole Kidman was deliciously evil.

I was also amused by Pullman's completely non-precious attitude towards it (as shown on the extras disc); he admitted it was nice to finally see some mega-bucks as a result of his work.

Though if you want to know what the best fantasy film is, even better than Lord of the Rings, just watch Stardust. It knocks everything into a cocked hat and if a Tolkien fan wants to see what faerie looks and feels like then they know where to look and it's not at the films of Tolkien's work! I had the distinct feeling he'd had loved it himself.

Morthoron · 05-11-2008, 02:35 PM

To be honest, as an American I did shy away from the movie based on the reviews, opting for the DVD release. *shrugs*

But then again, I never read Pullman's His Dark Materials, nor have I read any Harry Potter books. *shrugs again*

However, my seven...errr...eight year old daughter (egad, her birthday is this month!) has expressed an interest in the books and the movie. Do you think it's worthwhile for a precocious eight year old? We read together and enjoyed both The Narnia Chronicles and The Hobbit (She enjoyed LotR on film, but the books are a little over her head). Just wondering what the reading level of Pullman's books are ('young adult' is a rather vague category).

Lalwendë · 05-11-2008, 02:45 PM

I think it's a marvellous read for girls, as Lyra is a very atypical female lead character - I just love Lyra and Hermione Granger as modern day heroines. It's also very readable for a good reader, though a lot of the references to Milton, Blake etc would not be noticed - that's not an issue though as the story itself is what's important at that age, and the plot is good. The main criticisms are that Pullman loses control of what he was trying to say as the books go on, but that's an issue for the adults; the kids just want a good story and characters, and it doesn't fall down on those.

It is quite scary though - if it frightened me in places, I think it would definitely scare a child!

03-16-2008, 01:29 PM	#3
Sauron the White Ghost Prince of Cardolan Join Date: Mar 2007 Posts: 903	Truthfully, I don't think anyone got it right... or wrong for that matter. Like you said, its simply a matter of taste. The film underperformed in the States probably by a good 50%. If you figure that the Stateside revenues should have been about 35% of the total, you would have to double the actual revenues to get something around that figure. I realize that you don't like them, but I do think that if they had stacked the film with more action - more epic battles ala LOTR, the film would have performed better here. And the word of mouth was not very good. Why do some nations embrace certain things while other nations do not? Thats a serious questions for sociologists and social anthropologists. Why do the French - with their reputation for sophistication and the better things in life - go gaga for Jerry Lewis? Thats one of the great cultural mysteries. Bethberry has a valid point about the boys not wanting to see the film. I have a six year old grandson who simply adores everything LOTR. One of his favorite things is to watch it when he spends the night and we have seen those movies more times than I can even count. He thought the first Narnia movie was good but nothing like LOTR. He liked SPIDERWICK also. I showed him the trailer for COMPASS and offered to take him but he did not want to see it. When we see the toys in the store he has never wanted them. Last edited by Sauron the White; 03-16-2008 at 02:16 PM.

05-11-2008, 01:41 PM	#5
Lalwendë A Mere Boggart Join Date: Mar 2004 Location: under the bed Posts: 4,737	I've finally seen The Golden Compass (now we have to wait for DVDs to come out, as going to the cinema is an unattainable luxury with Ye Kraken about). I really do not understand the negative opinions to be honest. My only fault with it was that it was too short, it ought to have been an hour longer and lingered over some of the scenes more. However I think I know why it failed to crack the US market - it doesn't fit into any of the 'markets'. It isn't a kiddies' film, all saccharin and primary colours. It isn't an all-action sword and gore fest. It isn't a serious 'issues' drama. I'm pretty certain it did much, much better over here as the books are held in such high regard and so it was able to find a way around the stereotypical demands of audiences. It did however have a very 'English' feel to it, and I still think that the protagonist being a girl didn't help everyone appreciate it. Ho-hum, that's their loss. And it's a shame the US audience didn't go to see it as it was a beautiful film, the characters were well done and unlike Jackson's work, the changes to the storyline were totally coherent and actually worked. The special effects and art were especially wonderful, and Nicole Kidman was deliciously evil. I was also amused by Pullman's completely non-precious attitude towards it (as shown on the extras disc); he admitted it was nice to finally see some mega-bucks as a result of his work. Though if you want to know what the best fantasy film is, even better than Lord of the Rings, just watch Stardust. It knocks everything into a cocked hat and if a Tolkien fan wants to see what faerie looks and feels like then they know where to look and it's not at the films of Tolkien's work! I had the distinct feeling he'd had loved it himself. __________________ Gordon's alive!

05-11-2008, 02:35 PM	#6
Morthoron Curmudgeonly Wordwraith Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Ensconced in curmudgeonly pursuits Posts: 2,515	To be honest, as an American I did shy away from the movie based on the reviews, opting for the DVD release. shrugs But then again, I never read Pullman's His Dark Materials, nor have I read any Harry Potter books. shrugs again However, my seven...errr...eight year old daughter (egad, her birthday is this month!) has expressed an interest in the books and the movie. Do you think it's worthwhile for a precocious eight year old? We read together and enjoyed both The Narnia Chronicles and The Hobbit (She enjoyed LotR on film, but the books are a little over her head). Just wondering what the reading level of Pullman's books are ('young adult' is a rather vague category). __________________ And your little sister's immaculate virginity wings away on the bony shoulders of a young horse named George who stole surreptitiously into her geography revision.

05-11-2008, 02:45 PM	#7
Lalwendë A Mere Boggart Join Date: Mar 2004 Location: under the bed Posts: 4,737	I think it's a marvellous read for girls, as Lyra is a very atypical female lead character - I just love Lyra and Hermione Granger as modern day heroines. It's also very readable for a good reader, though a lot of the references to Milton, Blake etc would not be noticed - that's not an issue though as the story itself is what's important at that age, and the plot is good. The main criticisms are that Pullman loses control of what he was trying to say as the books go on, but that's an issue for the adults; the kids just want a good story and characters, and it doesn't fall down on those. It is quite scary though - if it frightened me in places, I think it would definitely scare a child! __________________ Gordon's alive!