Great books incase your wondering. Not much else to say unless someone's actually read them

Never heard of it.

crosman, uve posted several messages like this. if u haven't heard of it, why bother to let everyone know??

ive personally read all 3 books (northern lights, subtle knife, amber spyglass). northern lights is just like golden compass but i think i got my hands on the british version and thats wat it was called over there. it was actually a pretty good series but i prob read it a bit young (10 years old), so the emotional stuff at the end of spyglass kinda got to me (no spoilers ) i liked the religious fantasy and a bit of philosophy pullman weaved into an amazing story. D

it's nice to know good literature is still apreciated. The whole thing is so deep, and yes daemons are awsome, i spent countless weeks trying to figure out what mine would be, to no avail. I have a life, i swear. The stuff at the end put me into a state of depression for a week as well. The philosophy that he put in there is naturally how i think, and so it conected with me really well. I also hear that New Line is making a movie out of them, which was schedueled for release early 2005. Guess thats not happening, anyway, they still have a religeous minefield to pick their way through

I LOVE His Dark Materials! The trilogy quickly became among my favourite books. The Golden Compass is, by far, the most complex and deep one (I think the trilogy sort of stumbles in the third book), but you have to give it to Pullman for creating such a fresh and original mythology. I wouldn't compare him to Tolkien, or Lewis, but Pullman's imagination is definitely much more fine-tuned than, say, Neil Jordan, or J.K. Rowling, who just take ideas from existing mythologies, and cram them all together to create their own. Philip Pullman's world in His Dark Materials is fascinating. Daemons, armoured, talking bears, the Church ruling the world with an iron fist, the different names for everything (Anbaric instead of electric, chocolatl instead of hot chocolate, etc...), and also the subtleties: There are no airplanes, only zeppelins; and that sort of thing. Pullman's world is so rich, deep and fascinating... it's what makes these books so enjoyable.

Yes, New Line (the producers of The Lord of the Rings) were planning on making a movie out of the books, but are going through a lot of trouble: The director who signed on at first signed off when he realized just how big a project it is. Then, New Line started getting in trouble with the Church, who wanted all references to the Church removed from the movies. Anyone who has read the books would know that without the Church, there's no story, as the Church is what drives the story throughout the entire trilogy. And now that there are these religion problems, New Line is having trouble finding a director who wouldn't mind directing the story with all the changes. For now, IMDb changed the date to 2006, but I don't think The Golden Compass will be made by then. Maybe 2007. We'll see.

In any case, for any fan of fantasy, His Dark Materials is a real treat, and I highly highly recommend it.

its funny, because, i thought that the third one was the best, but this may be have something to do with the fact that i can relate to it. I also heard that before Chris wietz (sp?) signed on as director, they had a screen writer called tom Stoppard. Chris prefered to write his own scripts and so Tom was ditched. Chris quit and now they dont have anyone. I don't think i would compare him to tolkien and lewis either, but that is simply because it can't really be compared. They're all so different. I myself actually prefered Pullman because of the originality. There is so much detail paid attention to, and there is an enormous annalasys to be done

Well, if you're talking about detail, you can't ditch Tolkien. For crying out loud, Tolkien had to add APPENDICES to his books in order to explain all of the ideas he thought of that he didn't manage to put into the book. Philip Pullman created an interesting world that these three (there's a 4th book too) books take place in, but Tolkien created an entire MYTHOLOGY, with a history, and a bible (The Silmarillion), and everything. It wasn't just a map and some creatures for Tolkien, it was an entire mythology, and is probably the most complex thing put in writing besides the Bible.

Tolkien will always be over Pullman in my book, but at least Pullman is far more original and goes into far more detail than other contemporary fantasy writers (like... J.K. Rowling).

sorry, i need to re-word it. Pullman's attention to detail is moreso in the story, whereas tolkien's is in the setting and history. Yes i agree that tolkien had more detail, and im sorry for any confusion caused. The thing that bugs me about tolkien was simply that he didn't seem to want to write a story, but rather a history, which distracted him from the story at hand. However, i don't think that they can really be compared because Tolkien's world is the main focus of his books, while Pullman's themes and story is the main focus of his. I find it incredible that tolkien found time to make all this up, and its really impressive. I simply value the story and themes more than a complex history to everything that ever happend. And yes, they are both way more imaginative than j.k rowling. Of course, Pullman was simply a thief of better author's writing, because everything came from somewhere, and then he just compiled it all together with his exceptional character development and plot lines. This character development may also be a reason i like pullman better. It's still all a matter of taste though, because of their differences. Each has their own strengths and weaknesses.

it seems a lot of people say that, however, most of the people i know liked the last one the best. Maybe it's because the people i know are sort of an anti-religeous cult. (not intened to offend anyone, note that this isn't a reference to myself, but to others that i know)

I actually thought the first one was more anti-religious than the third one, in the sense that in the first one, the elements in the story say so close to our own world, you can clearly see the parallels between the two. By the third book, Pullman's already created a very deep and complex fantasy. And while the third book IS the most anti-religious, it is anti-the religion in the book, and not anti-our own religion.

true most certainly. Althoug, now that i think of it, none of it really is anti-religeous unless it is percieved to be that way. I don't think that there is an actual direct and specific reference to the church in our world. Also, if you think about it, the stuff that is against god isn't against god as we know him (or her, or it or whatever you happen to think of god as). It's talking about the cruel and sensless things that have been done to people in the past, in god's name. So really, he's just pointing out that people on earth to cruel and stupid things, because they think that that's what god wants them to do. Of course there is that bit about god wanting to intervene with human life, and that being bad, i think that pullman was really trying to make us aware of what happened so that we don't wind up doing it again.

I've only read Subtle Knife but it's great. Like the ending.

I've read them they're all really great books and it wold be cool to have a daemon