BOTTOM LINE: A convoluted mess of a film that seems half to set up an impending trilogy and half telling a self-contained story without the running time to flesh either side out. However, the film is visually striking with some nice sequences but at the end of the day it doesn't hold together.

THE GOOD: "The Golden Compass" has been championed as the next "Lord Of The Rings" by its studio maker New Line Cinema and much effort has gone in to making this just as visually striking and epic as those films as possible. One of the things you'll notice straight away is a backstory prologue which works similiarly to the one in "The Fellowship of the Ring" where the world is setup and we understand where we're at and what's been happening. It's done quite well and manages to impart some imaginative concepts such as the idea that there are countless universes with countless "Earths" but all slightly different. Immediately we are told by the narrator that we are not in our world but hers, a place where your spirits do not reside in your body but along side you as an animal. It's kind of nice to have an animal along side you as your conscience! We are then introduced to the Magesterium, an authoritative body that tells everyone what to think and what to say. This is the source of controversy for this film as the Magesterium is a figurative representation of the Catholic Church. I'd like to see the parallels in the book, which are apparently stronger, but even in the film, it's obvious who they are, even down to the way they're dressed and the cathedral-like buildings they inhabit. We are then introduced to Lord Asriel who is on a quest to uncover 'dust', a substance which links us in with the parallel universes. The Magesterium considers this heresy and wants him charged but they cannot stop his expedition to uncover the truth. We then follow the exploits of Asriel's niece, Lyra, who is given a golden compass which when used properly allows you to see the truth in any given situation. Lots of interesting story and plot points here to make a magestical film and at times you get the feeling that director Chris Weitz tried very hard to get that on screen. Much of the imagery is fabulous. The scenes early at a university are grand, as is shots of a zepplin-like aircraft flying over cities, and the battle sequences featuring tough armed bears and Magesterium guards.

THE BAD: Perhaps the film needed to be three hours long. The amount of detail in the plot is so dense that the 2-hour running time of the film ends up making the story too convoluted. It's not until well over an hour in to the film that we finally get what the journey is! And because in the end not much screen time is spent on it, you get the feeling of being cheated out of a story. Lord Of The Rings got away with it because we all knew that there was more, and on top of that, Peter Jackson did a fabulous job to make us not feel cheated out of an ending. "The Golden Compass" on the other hand is forced and contrived by comparison in this regard. The major problem of course is that the filmmakers wanted to turn this in to a series of films so the first half of the film feels more like a set up for a trilogy rather than for an individual film and at almost every turn, we are reminded that there is 'more to come'. So when the ending that is not an ending arrives (just like in the first Lord of the Rings film) suggesting more story is to follow, you really just don't care. This disjointment between what the story is and where it's going ultimately kills the film because it doesn't reel you in. So much is set up, but also glossed over. I haven't even mentioned Nicole Kidman's angle in the story, or the witches story. Daniel Craig is tragically under-utilised in a role that seems to set up the film in one direction but never goes there (well, at least until the proposed sequel). The references to the Catholic Church are intriguing but the point gets lost among the other storylines. And an entire subplot involving an armed bear and his quest to reclaim his throne in the ice just seems out of place, at least the way it was integrated in to the story. I wanted to see more trickiness with the bad guys and how the good guys beat them, not polar bears slugging it out. And despite my early praise for the film's images, it strikes me as a little odd that they're not as grand as those in Lord of the Rings, especially considering $180 million was spent on this film as opposed to the $94 million spent on each individual Lord of the Rings film.