going postal
- Thread starter chris.ph
- Start date
My opinion of the show is that it was the best adaption yet.
As i was never really a fan of the Hogfather and they completely miscast the main characters in COM, but i blame David Jason for that, partly.
But Going Postal was far from perfect but it is getting there. My niggles were the actress who played Angua was just wrong, the golems looked to cheap. Richard Coyle didnt convince me as a conman and seemed a bit overwhelmed by the material.
The whole smoking is bad thing seemed out of place. The Vampire, i cant remember his name, (it has been several years since i read the book, so dont remeber the story too well.) was unintelligible. But I did like Charles Dance as Vetinari and Claire Foy was also good.
It felt a lot more polished than the previous ones. I think this may be due to the departure of Vadim Jean, if he was involved i didnt see his name in the credits.
Nest up put Guards, Guards on the big screen.
As i was never really a fan of the Hogfather and they completely miscast the main characters in COM, but i blame David Jason for that, partly.
But Going Postal was far from perfect but it is getting there. My niggles were the actress who played Angua was just wrong, the golems looked to cheap. Richard Coyle didnt convince me as a conman and seemed a bit overwhelmed by the material.
The whole smoking is bad thing seemed out of place. The Vampire, i cant remember his name, (it has been several years since i read the book, so dont remeber the story too well.) was unintelligible. But I did like Charles Dance as Vetinari and Claire Foy was also good.
It felt a lot more polished than the previous ones. I think this may be due to the departure of Vadim Jean, if he was involved i didnt see his name in the credits.
Nest up put Guards, Guards on the big screen.
I dont know where to start.
I recently found out that they have made Going Postal into 'live fottage', and searched high and low for the movie on the net. (found it on http://www.letmewatchthis.com btw). I eagerly started it up and found myself, after like 15 minutes, talking aloud to the room (I was alone at the time) phrases like: "what the he*k have they done?", "Thats bullshit", "hey, thats the wrong charachter doing that scene/giving that speech". "hey! that never happened" and it goes on and on for most of the movie.
For those of you that liked the movie you have obviously never read the book. I have, at least five times, and 'Making Money' about 4 i think.
(I have all the books, and have read each 5-6 times at least).
They have cut off huge parts of the story, mixed up charachters (for ex its Groat that gets attacked in the postoffice, not Stanley), added things from like 10 different scenes into one scene, added stuff thats not in the book (like that Dearheart stopped the horse and rode with him? Where did that come from?) All this stuff about the movie-projector showing him pieces of what he has done is also bullshit. And the list goes on forever...
I dont even want to start on the charachters themselves. Only Vetinari and Stanley gets a thumb up from me.
Well, I liked the first two adaptions (Color of Magic and Hogfather) cause they where true to the books. This one is not.
I can't believe, as they state, that Mr Pratchett himself worked behind the camera to check on everything. Did he sleep through the whole process?
Its a looong time since I have been so angry after seeing one of my favorite authors adapted to the silverscreen.
Btw, I'm an old dude (30'ish) and english is not my native language, so no flaming for mispelling and stuff like that.
All my respect to Mr Pratchett, and none for the makers of this on-screen mess, called "going postal" (it dosent deserve capital letters).
.
I recently found out that they have made Going Postal into 'live fottage', and searched high and low for the movie on the net. (found it on http://www.letmewatchthis.com btw). I eagerly started it up and found myself, after like 15 minutes, talking aloud to the room (I was alone at the time) phrases like: "what the he*k have they done?", "Thats bullshit", "hey, thats the wrong charachter doing that scene/giving that speech". "hey! that never happened" and it goes on and on for most of the movie.
For those of you that liked the movie you have obviously never read the book. I have, at least five times, and 'Making Money' about 4 i think.
(I have all the books, and have read each 5-6 times at least).
They have cut off huge parts of the story, mixed up charachters (for ex its Groat that gets attacked in the postoffice, not Stanley), added things from like 10 different scenes into one scene, added stuff thats not in the book (like that Dearheart stopped the horse and rode with him? Where did that come from?) All this stuff about the movie-projector showing him pieces of what he has done is also bullshit. And the list goes on forever...
I dont even want to start on the charachters themselves. Only Vetinari and Stanley gets a thumb up from me.
Well, I liked the first two adaptions (Color of Magic and Hogfather) cause they where true to the books. This one is not.
I can't believe, as they state, that Mr Pratchett himself worked behind the camera to check on everything. Did he sleep through the whole process?
Its a looong time since I have been so angry after seeing one of my favorite authors adapted to the silverscreen.
Btw, I'm an old dude (30'ish) and english is not my native language, so no flaming for mispelling and stuff like that.
All my respect to Mr Pratchett, and none for the makers of this on-screen mess, called "going postal" (it dosent deserve capital letters).
.
Hi and welcome banzai
I refuse to watch Going Postal because my reaction might well be similar to yours. I have my own images of each character and won't even listen to an audio book for fear of ruining that image.
Feel free to post any criticism you like about any subject without fear of being flamed. For example, I personally think Making Money is one of the weakest Discworld books, yet there are people on this site who love it.
There are people on this site who loved the Sky Going Postal adaptation and there are people who didn't. Such is life.
And don't worry about spelling mistakes or grammar. We don't flame people here for that sort of thing (well, I do sometimes, but only if they're being pretentious or deserve it. :twisted: )
PS I'm an older dude than you and have re-read all the Discworld books more times than you 8)
I refuse to watch Going Postal because my reaction might well be similar to yours. I have my own images of each character and won't even listen to an audio book for fear of ruining that image.
Feel free to post any criticism you like about any subject without fear of being flamed. For example, I personally think Making Money is one of the weakest Discworld books, yet there are people on this site who love it.
There are people on this site who loved the Sky Going Postal adaptation and there are people who didn't. Such is life.
And don't worry about spelling mistakes or grammar. We don't flame people here for that sort of thing (well, I do sometimes, but only if they're being pretentious or deserve it. :twisted: )
PS I'm an older dude than you and have re-read all the Discworld books more times than you 8)
It just goes to show that one man's rubbish is another man's treasure.
I think that sometimes you need to see these adaptations as exactly that adaptations. If you were able to film Going Postal exactly as it was in the book it would take a lot more that the 3 hours allowed. Jokes and ideas that work well written would fall flat in visual form. Adaptations by their nature change the story. Personally I enjoyed Going Postal but I seem to be able to remove myself from the original material more than others.
I could make a list of 100 things wrong with the adaptation but I won't because I didn't let the enjoyment of the film get spoilt by minor diversions from the source material.
I think that sometimes you need to see these adaptations as exactly that adaptations. If you were able to film Going Postal exactly as it was in the book it would take a lot more that the 3 hours allowed. Jokes and ideas that work well written would fall flat in visual form. Adaptations by their nature change the story. Personally I enjoyed Going Postal but I seem to be able to remove myself from the original material more than others.
I could make a list of 100 things wrong with the adaptation but I won't because I didn't let the enjoyment of the film get spoilt by minor diversions from the source material.
It's like the movie Master & Commander (Far Side of the World). The movie only bears a passing resemblence to Patrick O'Brien's books - and yet, having read the books, I still love the movie.
You can't always make a perfect carbon copy of a book into a movie - it's simply not possible. Why not enjoy the movie for what it is and then go and read the book?
You can't always make a perfect carbon copy of a book into a movie - it's simply not possible. Why not enjoy the movie for what it is and then go and read the book?
The thing is, Going Postal is one of my favourite discworld books. I could (barley) live throgh the C.O.M but Going postal had me tearing at my hair. And dubbing over the dialouge with what it SHOULD be (I didn't even know that I could do that ) Normally I can stand it (just) even if it's meant to be a faithfull adaption of a book and strays from the plot. Just not with one of my favourites
^makes no sense[/u]
) Normally I can stand it (just) even if it's meant to be a faithfull adaption of a book and strays from the plot. Just not with one of my favourites^makes no sense[/u]
Well, if they had been true to the book, kept the storyline intact and not adding stuff thats not even in the book i could agree to cutting out some of the stuff from the book (it's one of the longest ones in the serie).
But why cutting stuff out and then adding stuff thats not in the book in the first place?
Examples:
This is not an adaption of the book, this is free-writing with the idea of the book in mind, and Mr Pratchetts stories are way to good to be slaughtered in this way.
.
But why cutting stuff out and then adding stuff thats not in the book in the first place?
Examples:
- Dearheart stopping the horse and joining him to Genua.
Movies about Dearheart choosing cigarettes over chocolate / and all other movieclips in the film regarding his past.
Mort hires a bunch of golems before the senior postmen have arrived.
Stanley gets attacked by the banshee instead of Groth (who is saved by the chest-protection he wear made by his natural-health obsession. Not mentioned in the movie).
...and the list is at least two-three pages longer...
This is not an adaption of the book, this is free-writing with the idea of the book in mind, and Mr Pratchetts stories are way to good to be slaughtered in this way.
.
You can see the movie at http://www.letmewatchthis.com/watch-350071-Going-Postal. Not dvd quality, but not bad either. (Streaming site).
And regarding to Mr Pratchett working behind the camera: Yes, they say so, and he's in the last scene as the postdude, but I cant imagine him controlling every aspect of the screenplay (not with this result).
Does Mr Pratchett read this forum btw?
And regarding to Mr Pratchett working behind the camera: Yes, they say so, and he's in the last scene as the postdude, but I cant imagine him controlling every aspect of the screenplay (not with this result).
Does Mr Pratchett read this forum btw?
Richard Coyle); it had great pace, looked bloody fantastic and the acting was spot on - Charles Dance as Vetinari was a stroke of genius, once I got over the ginger hair!
Maybe this will answer your question about how much imput Pterry had just found this.
interview on the book show http://thebookshow.skyarts.co.uk/homepa ... chett.html
interview on the book show http://thebookshow.skyarts.co.uk/homepa ... chett.html
