Terry Pratchett's Going Postal

[CrazyFoxMachine]

Anyone see this - ?

I watched it this morning and it was very good - very very good. Richard Coyle, Charles Dance, David Suchet, Andrew Sachs - what's not to love?

It was very glossy and there was a brilliant cameo from Pratchett - glorious.

Of course it was on the absurdly obscure Sky One so people shall have to rely on NAUGHTY METHODS (or Sky's digital player) to watch it. I, for one, recommend it. It was a bit of groovy.

[Kowalsky (formerly JudgeGumpty)]

Only 20 mins in but what I see so far is looking very entertaining indeed

[Dandontdare]

ah - I thought this was a rather tasteless thread about Alzheimer's as I'd not heard of this book. Oops!

[Albion]

I enjoyed this. Best of the three they have done.
Good casting and Andrew Sachs was excellent.

[soggy]

I agree, very well done. Better than the book in fact

[Professor Bear]

Alongside The Truth, Going Postal is one of the more accessible Pratchetts, and well worth checking out if you can make it past the snobs in the bookstore looking down their noses, you dirty, fantasy book-buying plebeian, you.  A Pratchett?  You disgust me.

Better than the book in fact

This comment is officially funnier than the show.  By which I mean I actually laughed at it.

It's a comedy drama that isn't dramatic or funny, it just sort of exists.  I might have been happy with that kind of thing before I discovered cheap dvd box sets of mid 90s Sci Fi Channel subsistence telly and the wonders of copyright infringement via the web, but nowadays, fantasy needs something other than lip-service to the originating genre to be any good, and the adaptation of Going Postal took everything - absolutely everything - that was notable, clever, subversive, or insightful about the novel and replaces it with something substantively less.
Moist going from the adaptable and quick-witted snake oil salesman in the novel, addicted as much to the con as the rewards it yields to a greedy, petulent whiner in the tv show is the main drawback as it makes him unsympathetic - he doesn't have any motivation beyond self-preservation and Richard "I'm playing off the fame of my surname as it belongs to studs" Coyle doesn't have enough presence to just like him for being a chancer.  He's basically just a slimy bastard and the only reason we care about him more than David Suchet's mad-eyed klacksman is because Suchet plays it like a panto dame and while we might admire that as a performance, it doesn't often lend itself to empathy as the character seems too unreal to become emotionally invested in.  Charles Dance plays Vetinari close to the source material, but even then the script loses the character's dry wit and the unshakable impression that the sly old bastard has known all along exactly what you were planning.

[Roger Godpleton]

if you can make it past the snobs in the bookstore looking down their noses, you dirty, fantasy book-buying plebeian, you.  A Pratchett?  You disgust me.

You make it sound like this isn't the correct response.

[Professor Bear]

Not from signatories of the sex offender's register, no.

[puggdogg]

I've got the movie on my computer which I've copied to my PS3. I haven't watched it yet though. I'll be doing that tomorrow night. I love Pratchett's books. I'm reading them all in order. I've recently finished Eric which isn't very far into the series, I know. I'm currently reading Nation which is my first non-Discworld Pratchett book. I've enjoyed all the movies and cartoons I've seen so far based on his work but they don't quite transfer the style across very much. I think it's because of his writing style which is very clever and witty in the descriptions and not so much in the dialogue.

P.S. I love his books so much that I chose Pratchett for my daughters middle name. Her first name is Heloise which I got from the Phantom comics. 

[Professor Bear]

They share some recurring background characters whose development as the series progresses can be viewed as a kind of story arc, but a lot of the books stand alone and don't need to be read in any particular order.  Pyramids, the Truth, Going Postal, Maurice and His Educated Rodents, Moving Pictures, Small Gods, Maskerade and last Hero can be read in any order, even though some characters from other books make appearances.
Most recurring characters like the witches, City Watch or Tiffany Aching are practically self-contained 'series within a series' and I'd recommend the City Watch books to get Pratchett at his best, though the Tiffany Aching stuff is probably the best place for newbies to start.

[puggdogg]

I've heard or read where a lot of people have said that most of the books can be read out of order. I like reading them in order because sometimes there are little things that cross over but I also enjoy seeing how the series has developed. Terry's writing changes a bit, especially when you look at say the Colour of Magic and Guards! Guards! While I'm currently reading Nation I can see a huge difference. But that probably has some part in it being of a different thing all together. I have a bunch of DW books but as far as the chronological order goes, it ends with Eric. The rest of the books are random stories set later on. 

[Kowalsky (formerly JudgeGumpty)]

It started brightly enough, detailed sets, quite lavish costumes and with the stories premise you felt like being connected to this world when introduced to the loveable rogue Moist von Lipwig.
If you never had read a Pratchett book (Im one of those few I suspect) as a standalone piece of drama, I found it a pleasently intriguing view. The chemistry between Richard Coyle and Claire Foy was definately there, and excellent character performances from Andrew Sachs, Charles Dance and David Suchet added to the fizz.
It faltered substantially in the middle with vague twists and needless additions that need not have been added in my opinion (Clacks v Post Office marketing and newspaper skits) as that had already been established earlier.
All in all an enjoyable romp.

[Jim_Campbell]

Just finished watching this. Definitely the best of Sky's Pratchett adaptations, which makes it quite possibly the best bit of original programming Sky have ever done. Visually far more consistent and impressive than previous outings. I'll confess to not having read the book so can't speak to the faithfulness of the adaptation, but I rather enjoyed it.

Does anyone know if there are any more planned? I'm rather fond of Feet of Clay and The Truth, myself.

Cheers!

Jim

[Noisybast]

It was very well done, but as with the other Pratchett adaptations, most of the humour in his writing is lost because it's based wordplay rather than the characters' situations. Enjoyable enough, though.

The pedant in me was irked by the fact that all the golems were identical. By which I mean the actors were wearing identical rubber golem suits, so they all had the same crack on the right breast and another on the left thigh, and the same two metal patches/braces bolted to their backs. OCD, I know...



*edited for spelling

[Paul faplad Finch]

Does anyone know if there are any more planned? I'm rather fond of Feet of Clay and The Truth, myself.

Cheers!

Jim

In the current SFX Pratchett is quoted as saying that he was pushing them to do the second Lipwig book but they are keen to do Sourcery. Seems pretty definite that they are doing something though.