going postal

Welcome to the Sir Terry Pratchett Forums
Register here for the Sir Terry Pratchett forum and message boards.
Sign up
#41
Mariekni, YOU ARE MY HERO!!!!!!!!!!!! Thank you,Thank you,Thank you,Thank you,Thank you,Thank you,Thank you,Thank you,Thank you,Thank you,Thank you,Thank you,Thank you,Thank you,Thank you,Thank you,Thank you,Thank you,Thank you,Thank you,Thank you,Thank you,Thank you,Thank you,Thank you,Thank you,Thank you,Thank you,Thank you,Thank you,Thank you,Thank you,Thank you,Thank you,Thank you,Thank you,Thank you,Thank you,Thank you,Thank you,Thank you,Thank you,Thank you,Thank you,Thank you,Thank you,Thank you,Thank you,Thank you,..........
 

AM

Constable
Oct 22, 2009
80
1,650
Sweden
#43
michelanCello said:
Noooooooo-ho-ho-ho-hooooooooooooooo..... :cry: :cry: :cry: I can't open it, because I'm not in UK or Republic Ireland!!!!!!!!!!!!
I agree michelanCello, I really thought that I was going to see it now. I think I´m going to go and cry a bit...
 

CJDobs

Constable
Sep 10, 2009
67
1,650
#44
Hmmm

I've read a lot of good reviews from fans and the occasional bad . . As I previously mentioned I loved it and I believe one of the reasons for that is I don't have high book to TV expectations.

All books get mangled in TV/Film production so expecting treatment of Pratchett to be any different is folly.

LOTR a case in point - Peter Jackson knew he had to get the fans onside so FOTR was a close adapation that pleased all but the hardcore I think. Then in the following two films he went further afield and caused some eyebrow wiggling (marching the elves into Helms Deep was a bit of movie licence for dramatic effect but then to kill off Haldir? nooooooooooooooo!).

It wasnt just technology that stopped these films being made during Tolkiens life, he seemed to abhor meddling with his words and held film makers in some contempt (my source: Letters of Tolkien - great read, must buy if still onsale).

They do strange things like this in films. Another example - Forrest Gump, killing off Jenny for a movie audience was a bit cruel I thought but the Director wanted the sad overtone to overlay any outwardly happy ending. I was stunned when I first saw it as I didnt expect them to do this at all as there seemed no real reason for doing it. The wholesale changes throughout the film left the book in tatters and it was more of a 'based on the idea of' than an adaptation. At least that hasn't happened here.

I suppose my point is that the changes GP underwent were very 'minor' on the normal scale of things. I've read books after watching a film and sometimes felt the film treatment of it was better than the book (not in this case obviously) but I can't really fault GP as a great piece of family entertainment.

All the non Pratchett readers in my household loved it and I, as a long standing fan of 23 years was pleased as punch with it.

What more could I ask for? :laugh:
 
#45
CJ, you are right. We do have to give a certain amount of leeway to film makers when judging their translation of the written word to screen. Things do get swapped around, changed, and bits get cut. This is a fair expectation.

There is one point I would disagree with on. I can't by any stretch see the changes made as being minor. (What follows are general comments for all - and certainly not an attack on your opinion).

Couple of points, by no means everything.

Reacher Gilt. Gilt is charismatic, he throws lavish parties, he is the man to be seen with. He is 10 times the con man that Moist could ever be, (by Moists own admission). Everybody sees him as lovable rogue. They laugh at his jokes about robbing them blind. He is such an artist of the long con, that he tells people not to trust him and they laugh at his waggishness. He is the master of all con men. Loved by many, respected by all, and feared by some.

Sky's production reduced him to nothing more than a cheap two dimensional cartoon villain. I was expecting him to say at the end, "I would have gotten away with it if it wasn't for the meddling kids", as he was exactly like a Scooby Doo Villain.

In my mind, most of the other characters under Sky's eye didn't fare any better. Adora-Belle's transformation into gymkhana girl being a case in point. Totally unnecessary, seemingly put in to provide a little bit of sexual undertone. Or as Peter Kay might put it: "A bit of blue fer Dads". Simply no need for her to jump on the back of Boris and ride with Moist. The narrative delivered at the abandoned clacks tower could have fitted pretty much anywhere.

EDIT: Oh yes. The wizards! Mustrum Ridcully dropping his gaze? Cowed by Ventinari and Reacher Gilt? Bumbling, yes. octrane addled buffoons, definitely, (not counting the Librarian of course). But subservient to...well anyone? Not a chance. They be singing Paul McCarneys Frog song before they knew it.

One of the pivotal moments in the story, was when Moist was presented with Boris. It was the scene when his, shall we say "friendly con" of his colleagues, customers, press, and of course Adora, came to fruition. This was reduced to a something meaningless.

I think I'll stop now. Of course this is my opinion and nothing more. If people liked it. Good for them! :) In the spirt of things I will sign off thus:

Disgusted of Anhk Morpork.
 

AM

Constable
Oct 22, 2009
80
1,650
Sweden
#47
OMG! Thank you pocimop!

The first link works, I cannot believe it.

It seems that it is only the first episode though, but who cares.

Thank you. :laugh:
 

CJDobs

Constable
Sep 10, 2009
67
1,650
#48
Hi Bascule,

I agree with your book summary of the characters and further agree that the 'turning of Reacher Gilt' is at odds somewhat with the written creation.

BUT . . . . I think it worked on TV in a two part comedy drama to present him this way. I loved David Suchet in this role, I loved the melodrama of the 'Mr Whipsnade' moustache twirling villain - it fitted well with the old style b/w film flashbacks. I liked the way they played on his lack of height, particularly in the coach when he's practically sitting under Moist's armpit. :laugh:

A few other people have commented on some of the pantomime acting which after two full sittings (thanks to Sky Anytime) I'm still at odds to see. The only part of Reacher Gilt's performance that made me squirm a bit was the circus ring master style parade he headed up. The little dance he did was out of character with the TV presentation of him!

I can't knock Adora though. I liked Claire Foy so much in this role and the way it was scripted . . . I warmed to her more than I did in the book *gasp*. Maybe it's because she's not one of my personal favourites. I'd have a lot more to say if they got Granny Weatherwax wrong!


I agree about Boris - bit silly but I've already forgiven them for that as I liked the 'flowers at the clacks' moment.

And yes, Mustrum is all the bit Vetinari's equal if not senior. There should be respect there but no kowtowing. I thought Timothey West was a good 'Wizard' in his speech about the power of books, but far too serious to be Ridcully. There has to be some haroomph about him - As Joss Ackland gave it in Hogfather.

Not perfect then we agree, but a big step up and I'd say a very watchable piece from start to finish.

"THE DEARHEART BOOOOOY SQUEALED LIKE A PIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIG! . . .. "
 
#52

joemcf

Constable
Apr 12, 2010
52
1,650
Bothwell, Scotland
#53
Well, IMO its the best adaptation so far. Funy, exciting, another excellent cast and while not as funny focused more on the more thoughful elements of the book, and didn't make it farcical. David Suchet had me in stiches in almost every scene he was in, which his darkly humourous portrayal of Gilt being funny, "deliciously" dark and at some point quite frightening. Probably the bit which i liked the best was:

Spoilers

When Gilt killed the accountant. I thought that was brilliant in almost everyway. The humour, the darkness, the acting. All very good. Even though there was no blood, i found it quite disturbing, how he felt he could just walk out onto the street with a dead body and get away with it. However it was very funny as well. However, i don't know it was really a PG like the DVD is... o_O
 

kakaze

Lance-Corporal
Jun 3, 2009
488
1,775
#56
I have to say that I was deeply disappointed in the movie. :(

I understand the need to make changes to adapt a book to a movie, things that just can't be shown visually, and the need to limit the length of the movie. However, many things were changed that didn't need to be changed, I guess in an attempt to make the story more interesting.

Moist lost all of his interpersonal skills and spent most of his time confused and complaining.

Groat & Stanley were both done very well.

I liked the way the golums were done (I know some will disagree), but I was disappointed that they all seemed to have cracks in the same places. I also thought they made Mr. Pump a bit stupid.

I really, really hated Mr Gryl. He talks way too much, looks like a vampire from a cheap 1930's film, and for some reason is all wet!

I liked the way Claire Foy played Adora Belle Dearheart, but I also think it's sad they had to make her into a romantic figure; fighting him so much, then giving in and riding around on the back of Boris.

And I thought that Reacher Gilt looked like the Penguin from Batman. Why'd they make him short, fat (or fat-looking?), and unpleasant?

I must say, fantastic work on the set, particularly the buildings and clacks towers.
 
#58

Savage

New Member
Jun 8, 2010
2
1,650
#59
Hello everyone.

I know its my first post, and perhaps this isn't the best place to put it. I do have to admit that I was listening to Stephen Briggs audio book version of Going Postal just before I watched the movie, which perhaps wasn't the best thing to do. If I'm honest, I don't like what they've done.

It's not really an adaptation, the only two characters I can see who remain anything like what they were in the book are Mr Pump and Vetinari. Otherwise, everyone changes.

Moist, who became my favourite Pratchett character, has become some whining dolt who has lost his style. Adora became the feisty love interest that seems to be shoe horned in everywhere these days. Gilt similarly looses all his charm and playfulness, as well as loosing his build (he's described as being built like a beat, why would he need to stand on tip toes to look at the Patrician?).

Secondly, what happened to the sorting engine? In the books its the curse of the Post Office...

I think the character I liked the most (if you bar the whole changing into a wolf infront of everyone, and that the wolf is nothing like its description in the books) is Angua, and she never had a large role in the Lipwig cycle...
 

User Menu

Newsletter