Friday, December 7, 2007

MOVIE REVIEW: The Golden Compass

I have not read Phillip Pullman's "His Dark Materials" series. In fact, until today - after I saw The Golden Compass - I knew literally nothing what-so-ever about the stories or their characters.

I had however, heard and read a bunch of nonsense recently from Christian groups wanting to boycott the film because of the book's supposedly anti-Christian properties. Every time this happens, I find myself often chuckling at the absurd catch 22 that the religious find themselves in. In order to boycott an artwork because they believe the ideas expressed in that artwork will lead people to evil, hell, Satan, etc., they must themselves avoid any firsthand experience of the art. Of course, when you avoid experiencing the artwork your boycotts are fueled only by rumor - and everybody with half a brain realizes this. Such is certainly the case with The Golden Compass and fortunately, the splashes being made by religious groups will serve only to bring the film a larger audience.

Before I get to the film itself, I also would like to mention that on the other side of the religious boycotts are plenty of fans, atheists and other groups crying "censorship!" This is a ridiculous and depressingly common inaccuracy which reduces the debate to a very stupid level. Censorship requires authority and the legitimized use of force - government book burning for example. A religious group calling for private citizens to boycott a film or any artwork in order to express their views is a fabulous way of expressing disagreement. In a free society, people must be free to make the films they want, free to see them, free to not see them, and yes; free to convince others not to see them as well. To everyone contributing to the hooplah surrounding this thing: Relax.


Now. About the film:

The basic structure of The Golden Compass follows a kind of underlying mythology found throughout the world. There's the youthful hero Lyra Belacqua, a tomboyish orphaned girl of 11 years old who knows little of her past or her future, but gets unwittingly swept into a larger universe. She must grow up of course, but the transformation isn't without its adventure. Lyra has a beloved and very mysterious adventurer uncle named Lord Asriel, an armored polar bear friend and protector named Iorek Byrnison, and most important of all in her world, people's souls reside in animal form outside their bodies and Lyra's is a shape-shifting little mink named Pan. There are the motherly figures, the wise-old men who act as guides - including Lyra's headmaster and a pilot/cowboy played by Sam Elliott known as Lee Scoresby - and the grand struggles not only between good and evil, freedom and control, thought and dogma, but the internal battles of a girl growing up. In a strange way, Lyra's story is more that of the ritualistic rights of passage boys undergo in their transformation to become men than the story of a girl becoming a woman (please see Joseph Campbell for that reference prior to calling me sexist).

Finally, like The Force in another ubiquitous mythology, all things in this universe are connected by a magical ether simply referred to as "Dust". And it is Dust that sparks all of the controversy...

Lord Asriel's research into the properties of Dust ruffles the feathers of The Magisterium, which as I understand it in the book is synonymous with religion and the church, but in the film is more of an authoritarian government... Not that there is much of a difference between the two... Ultimately, it is Asriel's blasphemy that sends the Magisterium into action.

One of the representatives of the Magisterium is Marisa Coulter (though we don't know that right away), who seems nice enough at first and asks Lyra to join her for an exciting adventure to the North. Lyra is excited to get away from her formal education and her orphan home - excited at the prospect of doing anything like her uncle Asriel. Just before Lyra and Ms. Coulter embark on their journey the headmaster of Lyra's school gives her a compass-like device called an Alethiometer. The golden compass will show the user "the truth" in any situation. A dozen exist, but all but the one Lyra now possesses have been confiscated by the Magisterium. The metaphor is certainly not lost here: The government (and religion) must be in control of the truth to maintain their dominance of the universe.

Another way the Magisterium is attempting to maintain control is through the creation of a sort of metaphysical surgery which separates the soul-animals of children from the children themselves - thus rendering them easily manageable and highly obedient. Many of Lyra's friends have been abducted by agents known as "Gobblers" and among her many adventures; she must rescue them as well.

As for the technical merits of the film in question, The Golden Compass has a few minor flaws from an effects perspective... In one sequence, there's a particularly obnoxious (to me) computer generated lens-flare that simply should have been left out. The acting is generally superb, as one might expect from a cast including Sirs Ian McKellen & Christopher Lee (briefly), Nicole Kidman, Daniel Craig and my personal favorite - Sam Elliott. As typecast as the man is, there will simply never be a better mustachioed cowboy in film. The film clocks in just shy of two hours, and to be honest, I could have used an extra 20 minutes or so to bolster the affect of the conclusion. Having since read the Wikipedia entries on the plot of the original novel, I certainly think the end of the first act as written by Pullman would have been a much better end to the film, but I won't go into that here.

Going in as ignorant of the source material as I was, I expected a complete film - however, The Golden Compass is merely the opening chapter to a much larger saga involving the battle between authority and free will played out on a marvelously fantastical scale. I am a bit reluctant to give a specific rating for this film as I have really only seen the first act, but if all goes well, I hope to see the rest of this story unfold. This film (and the series overall) deals with a much more serious and substantial set of intellectual issues than many of its counterparts. The underlying message of the film is fabulously pro-thought and pro-freedom, and personally, I am basking in the glorious irony that a film that takes on the issue of free-thought vs. authoritarian state/religious control - even in the watered-down, commercialized form presented here - has its metaphors played out literally in the asinine, manufactured controversy it has caused.

Looking forward to the next installment!


The Golden Compass:



THE MUSIC REVIEW: Alexandre Desplat has composed a score for The Golden Compass which may skirt the boundaries a bit too close to fantasy-genre cliches, but for me sets an excellent tone and shows a lot of nuance and compositional skill. I recently complained somewhat about Alan Silvestri's score to Beowulf which seemed to me to be holding back a lot for a film and subject matter which was excitingly over-the-top. Desplat's work for this film is in a lot of ways what I wish Silvestri had done. The orchestral scale and intensity of scoring really fit the scope of The Golden Compass and did so in such a way which reflected both the childish and adult characteristics at play on screen. That is not to say that it is entirely without some problems. For example, the opening sequence seemed to me to be a bit derivative of Howard Shore's lighthearted "Shire" cues in the Lord of the Rings - and if not that then perhaps Edvard Grieg's "Morning Mood". Those comparisons might be a bit extreme, but the opening certainly played up this extremely innocent, childish and folksy quality which really didn't exist in the context of the film at large - although what music was there, was well written. I would have liked to have heard more leitmotif development up front and the establishment of an alternate-dimension time and place - more magic. Beyond that, the cliche that bugged me might very well be a pet peeve that only applies to me, but in the first sequence of Lyra and Ms. Coulter leaving the port in her sky-ship, Desplat touches on an alternating 5th, minor 6th interval in the horns over a sustained major chord - ultimately an inversion of an augmented triad with an added major 7th which I (and you all) have heard in virtually every fantasy film score ever written. This may seem like nitpicking, but it would be quite obvious to you if I pointed it out and as far as I'm concerned could have been more creatively avoided. With all that in mind however, speaking as a composer, all of my beefs with the score smack of heavy-handed director involvement - though I would have to check out more of Desplat's scores to be sure. All in all, the score to The Golden Compass was handled very well and I look forward to hearing more from Alexandre Desplat in the future.

Wednesday, November 28, 2007

MOVIE REVIEW: Beowulf 3D

Well, well, well... I bet you wish you were me... That's right, I'm now the proud owner of a pair of (relatively) comfortable, fit, plastic-not-paper, stereoscopic, polarized glasses.

You too could enjoy a fabulous 3D experience if you go see Beowulf 3D!

If in fact you do go to see Beowulf 3D, you can expect a number of interesting things. First, unlike virtually any other "3D" movie I've ever seen, it's stereoscopic the entire movie. Considering how incredibly distracting it is to have to constantly put glasses on, then take them off, then on again - not to mention the irritating icons that pop up and interrupt the movie to tell you to do so, this is a fabulous improvement. The cool thing about a movie that's entirely in 3D is that eventually you forget about the glasses and just get into the film... until you get a spear shoved in your face! It really screws with your perception when that happens, I'm here to tell ya.

As I'm sure you know, Beowulf is the oldest surviving piece of English literature and is one of the most epic stories imaginable. Naturally, Zemeckis takes some liberties with the story, but considering it's a multi-millennia-old viking epic poem I'm really not going to get bent out of shape about that. For the uninitiated, Beowulf is a mighty warrior who travels with a small group of heroes seeking glory through great battles with monsters and demonstrations of skill. In the saga, as in the film, Beowulf has answered the call of King Hrothgar (Anthony Hopkins) to help defeat the disturbing creature called Grendel.

Grendel is a huge beast who for no apparent reason enjoys dismembering people and eating parts of their bodies - especially when good times are being enjoyed by all. It comes as no surprise when Beowulf defeats him (though why he must remove his clothes to do this is a bit of a mystery) and proves himself the worthy hero. Unfortunately - Hrothgar's kingdom is far from out of the proverbial woods. Grendel, though certainly a problem, is nothing compared to his demoness mother... as portrayed (through remarkable motion capture animation technology) by a "close enough to naked for 12 year-old Roger Ebert", Angelina Jolie. Should I be embarrassed that I'm turned on by her slithery tail and high-heeled feet? ...Nah!

This is where the plot (written by one of my personal favorites, Neil Gaiman & Roger Avary) goes on an interesting departure from the saga, but upon some reflection, the twist actually makes a lot of sense - at least if you're a guy.

There are some fine performances by Hopkins and his young wife played by Robin Wright Penn, but as per usz, the most attention grabbing work is done by a slimy, cowardly, but yet somehow not altogether bad John Malkovich as Unferth, Hrothgar's "trusted advisor". Ray Winstone is fine as Beowulf, but let's be honest, the vast majority of his lines are spent either stating his own name or shouting at people... and also grunting. A whole lot of grunting happens too.

If you want a pretty kickass action movie done up in an animation style that unabashedly stomps all over the uncanny valley line - I'd definitely recommend Beowulf 3D. And hey - who doesn't want an illusory spear in the face?!


**(Though I've only seen the 3D version, I have serious doubts that the animation would be particularly enjoyable without the stereoscopic component - the movie was designed for the glasses, so if you do go, spend the extra buck and do the 3D experience.)


I suppose this is the part where I create an arbitrary rating system isn't it? Hmm... ok, I think I've got an idea! Out of a possible 5 reels...



Beowulf:



THE MUSIC REVIEW: I'm not going to spend a ton of time on this score because honestly, it wasn't that memorable to me and it's been about 10 days now. Alan Silvestri has worked with Robert Zemeckis for a bazillion years now and they certainly seem to sync up nicely, but this wasn't Silvestri's best work. Now, there's nothing "wrong with it" per se - what emotional scenes were present were certainly appropriately handled, and as always, Silvestri's action writing is ballsy and epic. However, if you were to compare the score for Beowulf up against one of Silvestri's earlier over-the-top epics; Van Helsing, you'd find that the themes are bolder, the orchestration more outrageous and in general the whole scale more epic. In some ways, I think he treated Beowulf more seriously than the story itself really warrants. It may just be one composer's opinion, but I always say - if you're going to go over-the-top, go with gusto!

Arbitrary rating for the music (also out of 5):


Wednesday, November 21, 2007

The Oh-So-Unbiased IPCC Report Process

Step 1: IPCC Approves Outline

Government representatives and full-time scientist members of the panel first write and approve a rough idea of all the topics to be covered in the specific report to be published. Ostensibly this step is only there so that the report can have a theme, but whenever you write an outline in advance of the data you're researching, you have already committed to a series of assumptions about the data you're going to find. Imagine if I were doing a double blind study of a new cancer treatment and I'd written the outline of my findings prior to even doing the testing? Then I proceed to step two... the cherry-picking stage.

Step 2: Governments, Organizations Nominate Experts

Now that we know what we want to say this is the part where the government officials on the IPCC get to decide which scientists they will be using to make their case. Also... a great opportunity for bias to influence the overall results. We do this all the time as ordinary individuals of course, and I'm fine with that in general, but I don't have the power to force someone else to agree with me whereas the IPCC ultimately will in many ways. So... good times here as well.

Step 3: Bureaucrats pick the specific authors

So - NOW that we've already chosen the group of scientists we'd like to use to support the outline we already wrote for the report, now we should choose the specific scientists we'd like to have author the report itself.


Does anyone else not see a bit of a pattern here? Government officials - non-scientists - have an amazingly large amount of control over the way this report comes out simply by being in control of the level of diversity of opinion represented.

So... Skipping ahead a bit, we find that after one round of purely expert (peer) review - we get a 2nd Draft written by the selected authors...

Step 7: Government & Experts Review Draft

Out of curiosity - why exactly would the governments represented by the IPCC need to verify a scientific report?

Perhaps they need to make sure it conforms to their original outline... Just a thought.



Now, this goes through a few other government review steps, and that's all well and good, but then the government officials on the panel get to write the Policy Summary...

This is what (as I'm sure many have noticed) really chaps my ass. Because at this point, the politicians can monolithically make sweeping recommendations about what new laws to write, new programs to invent and new tariffs & taxes to pay for it.


So, just to review:

1. The policy makers write an outline.
2. The policy makers nominate scientists to write a report based on said outline.
3. The policy makers pick the specific scientists from their pre-selected pool to write the actual text of the sections of the report again based on said outline.
4-5. Draft 1, peer-reviewed (GOOD!)
6-7. Draft 2, government (and peer) reviewed... what!?
8-9. Final draft, government reviewed... what1?X10
10. Panel approves the report and publishes to the world.


And bonus step 11: IPCC gets to make authoritative recommendations of policy.



Anyone ever heard the term "selection bias"? For some strange reason, it keeps popping up in my mind.


Now, to be clear, I don't think the scientists are purposefully doing bad research! I think people who need backing for policy positions are put in a very easy position to generate reports and authority through selecting the people who are likely to represent their views. And just to be sure, they get to write the outline in advance.

Where did I get all this you might ask!?

Oh yes, the IPCC website itself.
http://www.ipcc.ch/ipccreports/index.htm