The Watch is growing on me

Welcome to the Sir Terry Pratchett Forums
Register here for the Sir Terry Pratchett forum and message boards.
Sign up

Sveinb

New Member
Feb 12, 2021
10
100
44
#1
I hadn’t read the Discworld books for 15 years, when I decided to revisit at the end of last year. I’m six books in now, and when I was asked to reccommend some audiobooks for a friend, I started thinking about how I would “sell” these books.
I’ve been watching the new series halfheartedly, slightly annoyed at the changes, more annoyed at how self-serious the first episodes were.
What I like the most about the Discworld is how it’s silly and smart at the same time.
Once The Watch hits its stride, it starts really moving into such a narrative.
If you’re really invested in the particular details of the Discworld, you’re never going to like this series, but if you miss Pratchett’s voice, it’s slowly seeping in to the series as it progresses.
It feels like the first episodes hold back the Discworld goofiness, and with good reason. A lot of people read the books in spite of the fantasy setting, not because of it.
I know I wasn’t enthusiastic at first, I just went along begrudgingly because I’d finished all the Douglas Adams books and was jonesing for something as escapist yet smart. And as the series progresses, the series slowly moves toward the narrative world of the books.
In the first episode, cheery had been changed from a dwarf to a trans person, what seemed a rather jarring interjection of modern politics.
But as the series move along, cheery’s narrative, the dwarf who shaves her beard in the books, aligns with the backstory of the TV character, only difference being the height.
And when you think about it, cheery from the books wouldn’t translate on screen. Either she’d be a cgi figure, or the series would have to spend an early episode explaining a convoluted back story on why its interesting why a small person would not be wearing a beard.
It’s hard to explain, but all the visual signifiers of the books are devices pratchett used to tell us stories about our world. Cheery was always a story about a person on the lgbt+ spectrum, escaping to the big c. The particulars were only so much fodder for jokes and stories.

the world of the watch is far removed from the first books, still. Those are the ones I have re-read so far, but I also read the Lipwig books, started the re-read on those.

I’m watching the most recent ep, and the Unseen University is mentioned for the first time. The Disc hasn’t been mentioned yet.

Vetinari of the first eps was very different to the fleshed-out character driving the plot of the late-era moist von lipwig books. The dull character made the gender swap of the character more apparent too.
But vetinari is slowly getting there too. And going back into the books, I start noticing that the progressive changes made for the show seemed to match how pratchett built the world. It started out being just about dudes, but then he seemed to progressively try to mirror the changes of society in his day, often seeming rather ahead of the curve.
As far as technology goes, the world of the show seems to have followed the path of the later books, where Pratchett seemed to have grown tired of the medeivalness of everything and started inventing things, the telegram, movies, what have you.
It’s not quite the same quixoitic world, but a similar one.
So the changes made early on get the viewer used to the compromises that the adaptation needs.
And they don’t push the new viewer away with a visual landscape that only makes sense if you read the books.
Pratchett didn’t write dense descriptive prose for no reason, so it just makes sense that the series build a world much in the same way he did.
The world we know was built up around the story of rincewind. Most of the world we saw in other stories varied on the needs of each story. The witches lived in fairy tale lands, the wizards in a sort of hogwartsy existance, many others in a 19th century london with debris from the first books sort of scattered around.
But the voice is there. Not quite the same of couse, but it feels like the spirit of the source material is there.
The adaption towards a US tv audience doesn’t kill it. Its just a bit jarring to begin with, and then you realise, we’re getting new discworld stories.
Not bad, that.
So I wholeheartedly recommend giving it a few eps, it really gets cooking around episode 6 or so. I’m looking forward to the next ep now. I want the series to survive, I want more new stories from the (as yet unmentioned) disc.
And I suspect the series will get even more pratchetty with time.
 

Sveinb

New Member
Feb 12, 2021
10
100
44
#2
Oh and Death is different too, but also kind of the same guy.
and my theory is that this version of the disc is just another version of the world we know, from the multiverse.
The intro text pretty much says so too.
 

Tonyblack

Super Moderator
City Watch
Jul 25, 2008
30,841
3,650
Cardiff, Wales
#3
Welcome to the site! Thanks for the insights to the TV series. :) I'm pretty certain that Cherry never shaved her beard in the books. The only dwarf I can think of that did that was Cassanunder - but I could be mistaken.
 
Likes: Molokov

Mixa

Sergeant
Jan 1, 2014
1,017
2,750
Barcelona, Catalonia
#5
Welcome @Sveinb! ;)

I haven't watched the Watch but it's interesting to read your analysis. We don't know if Pratchett would've agreed to all these changes, but I feel like the producers took for granted their version was cooler (and that Pratchett's original version wasn't interesting/powerful enough). But the worst is it looks like they weren't interested in getting the approval of those who care about Pratchett's legacy (like Rhianna).

I recently read this here:

The cruel irony is that, for all the efforts the producers of The Watch made to separate themselves from the source material to present a "punk rock thriller," the show was entirely beholden to the original Discworld books. Much of the humor of the series was based around knowing winks to the audience whenever a reference was made to something from the books, such as the librarian of Unseen University being an orangutan. Unfortunately, these references only confused the new audience The Watch hoped to attract and further irritated Discworld fans in the wake of the random changes from the books.
Mx
 

Sveinb

New Member
Feb 12, 2021
10
100
44
#6
Welcome to the site! Thanks for the insights to the TV series. :) I'm pretty certain that Cherry never shaved her beard in the books. The only dwarf I can think of that did that was Cassanunder - but I could be mistaken.
I must admit I did take that from an article of some sorts, I haven't gotten to the watch yet in my re-read.
Re-reading the article, the gender bits were somewhat less dramatic. Cheery, it says, was outed, and started presenting her gender more how she felt. The point I'm seeing is that it was a different story to tell, because times were different. People aren't much outed any more, instead they just come out, and have to brace themselves with a steely attitude. I don't know if Pratchett wrote such characters because they weren't all that common.
So if one assumes that a current work in the spirit of Pratchett tries to engage with current issues in a progressive manner, you have to give a bit of room for characters that maybe didn't so much exist in his time. But I'm a bit of a novice here, so I don't want to declare too much. What I'm trying to present is a view in which more die-hard fans could enjoy the series and look past the discrepancies.
 

Sveinb

New Member
Feb 12, 2021
10
100
44
#8
Welcome @Sveinb! ;)

I haven't watched the Watch but it's interesting to read your analysis. We don't know if Pratchett would've agreed to all these changes, but I feel like the producers took for granted their version was cooler (and that Pratchett's original version wasn't interesting/powerful enough). But the worst is it looks like they weren't interested in getting the approval of those who care about Pratchett's legacy (like Rhianna).

I recently read this here:



Mx
Thanks! I must say I appreciate the reception here.
"Approval" is a simple word, but it really means absolute creative control. To get approval you have to give at least veto power, or use backchannel methods to get the person to play along.
So I think it's pretty difficult to achieve.
The larger picture I see is one in which the greater fandom culture in sci-fi and fantasy has taken itself enormous power, without really realising what this means.
The assumption here is that the product is bad, and that assumption was made way before anyone had seen the end product, probably not even Rihanna. Usually people see the first two episodes or so, and those were bad.
And following Rihanna's words like law means that she'd have to like it. And she shouldn't have to. Authors seldom like adaptations. The wiser ones just stay silent about it, and the most clever ones, like George RR Martin, just tell us that they know they're not supposed to.
Any fandom gains from growth. If new fans come in, adaptations get more budget. Discworld isn't there now, but attacking lower-budget adaptations like The Watch for changes mostly based on budget just ends up keeping the fandom small.
And I don't think this is anyone's intention. I think this is the larger culture at play. This movement only really serves fans of super-franchises like Marvel. Even with Star Wars, hampering the creatives makes for worse product, even if the budget is there. Marvel is unique in both budget and the special adaptiveness between comics and the screen. With anything else, you have specific problems. Text to screen, like book adaptions, means that verbal descriptions don't translate into dialogue and scenery, so you have an awful lot that needs to be reconfigured. Just all the different types of being in Discworld would explode the production budget or the visual value. In books those are just words. And continuations, like Star Wars or Star Trek, call for additions to canon. The Watch does both. So you'll see a lot of compromise, and to enjoy it, you have to accept it, and then wait for the vibe to seep in.
But it's hard to do that, when you've been primed by the discourse to look at the show very critically, and with negative expectations. So I recommend a more neutral view. And wait until you're bored and out of things to watch or read.
Oh and as far as "cooler" goes, I think that whole gambit was just to create a frame where they could create more freely. A story device to explain differences. Lower expectations of faithfulness early-on, giving them space to interpret and adapt to budget. I think this was to avoid crummy costumes and such, and forcing in things that don't work or don't add anything to the TV show.
But I'm someone who enjoys creative interpretations, cover versions of music and so on. I don't mean to criticise people who are really invested in the Pratchett world or expect them to enjoy this. Certain things are sacred to you. In the same vein I respect the authors views and their people's.
 
Likes: Tonyblack

Sveinb

New Member
Feb 12, 2021
10
100
44
#9
I love Cheery's story. Terry was very clever to introduce the dwarfs as somewhat gender neutral. :)
Yeah he was very nimble with these topics, and my chronological revisit shows a surprising amount of insight given the time the books were written in. He was well ahead of his time.
 

RathDarkblade

Moderator
City Watch
Mar 24, 2015
15,992
3,400
47
Melbourne, Victoria
#10
Greetings, Sveinb! :) Interesting to read your analysis of the Watch.

By the way, I noticed that somehow your post was *ahem* posted twice. No worries -- I deleted the other one, so as not to clutter up the board. ;)
 

RathDarkblade

Moderator
City Watch
Mar 24, 2015
15,992
3,400
47
Melbourne, Victoria
#12
True. If "The Watch" was a completely original story, with its own world, characters etc., it might've been worth watching. As it is ... sigh. To Discworld fans, who had been reading it for years or even decades ... well, I can't speak for other people, but to me, it feels like an insult, like a punch in the gut and a kick in the teeth. :mad:

All right, I know that someone will now say: "Don't hold back Rath, tell us how you really feel!" ;) But that's how The BBC Watch makes me feel. *shrug* Sorry.
 

Mixa

Sergeant
Jan 1, 2014
1,017
2,750
Barcelona, Catalonia
#14
But I'm someone who enjoys creative interpretations, cover versions of music and so on. I don't mean to criticise people who are really invested in the Pratchett world or expect them to enjoy this. Certain things are sacred to you. In the same vein I respect the authors views and their people's.
Thanks for sharing your opinion, I totally respect it too. As I said, it's great to read different points of view. :)

As for the budget... I mean, Troll Bridge was made by fans with 0 budget (they crowfunded it) and is a wonderful adaptation. Anyway, I understand the need to be creative when you don't have a big budget, and maybe I could've accepted some changes, like a more "modern" Discworld.

What makes me angry like Rath is they totally changed the characters personality, story and appearance. People had been waiting for years for a very specific adaptation, and in the end we got something completely different. If there already existed lots of adaptations I would understand the need to break the rules and do something different... but we just wanted one truthful adaptation of The Watch. *sigh*

Mx
 

RathDarkblade

Moderator
City Watch
Mar 24, 2015
15,992
3,400
47
Melbourne, Victoria
#15
I agree with Mixa -- "Troll Bridge" is wonderful. :) I went to see it when it premiered in my hometown. It was late, and chilly, and damp -- but everyone stayed to watch all of it, even the closing credits. And then cheered the roof off. :)

By contrast, "The Watch" looks like something created by someone that's high on ... I don't know what. Vimes is wooden, Sybil fights with crossbows (what?), Death ... oh, dear lord. Please don't talk to me about Death. When I saw that character for the first time, I thought he was Detritus! :eek:

I'm not angry, I'm sad and resigned. I've passed through anger and out the other side. My sadness stems from the fact that now people who had never read any Discworld (or listened to the audiobooks, or watched the earlier live-action films) will see "The Watch" and think that THAT is what Discworld is about. :oops: I'm resigned to it; we can't save 'em all. But let's at least go out there and tell people "No, that's not Discworld. Compared to Discworld, that thing is a pile of ..." :poop: :p

Please don't mistake me: I wasn't there to welcome the first "Colour of Magic". I didn't even know about Discworld until about 1997, when I borrowed "Interesting Times" from the library. But after that, I borrowed and read everything by Pratchett I could find . Then I went out and got my own copy, and re-read it, and found L-space (for the annotations) and read them. Then I got into the audio-books, and the films, and the maps, and encyclopedias and dictionaries and ... :)

My point is, I think Pterry has achieved something extraordinary, and that is to create the first fully fleshed-out world - from scratch - since Tolkien's Middle-Earth. Harry Potter is fine, but HP draws previous books (e.g. Gormenghast). What is Hogwarts but Unseen University with different staff and bloody students, perish the thought? What are Dementors but a rather inferior copy of the Nazgûl? What are Death Eaters but an inversion of the Discworld rule that wizards and witches can't have babies? (In the HP universe, of course, they can - but the Death Eaters think those babies are the only "true" wizards/witches. In Discworld, they can't - or rather, they can, but ... see Sourcery). ;)

Terry's A-M City Watch is an organic force that grows almost from nothing to become a complex, dynamic power within A-M, and even influences politics. The BBC's "Watch" (or at least the people in it) are about as complex as my wrist watch, and about as dynamic as this guy. :poop: Sorry! No I'm not :devil:
 
Likes: Mixa

Sveinb

New Member
Feb 12, 2021
10
100
44
#17
What makes me angry like Rath is they totally changed the characters personality, story and appearance.
This is a tough one. Its a given that characters will have to be changed in adaptations, so one is primed to dismiss this type of criticism.
But having listened to 12 or so discworld books since I posted this, I must admit that only Sam Vimes seems like something out of the books, and he’s a bit of a “straight man” anyways, someone the more colorful characters’ personalities reflect off.
Carrot too is not dissimilar, but all the color is gone.
There is a maturity in Pratchett’s voice that is gone from this. That’s maybe the main thing. The Discworld is warm, this is not.
In much the same way fans of GRRM could be happy with Game of Thrones, because the spirit maintained even though characters were reshuffled, fans of Pratchett don’t have much to like here.
I liked both Dirk Gently adaptations, even though they were complete ground up rewrites, because they still spoke to what the fans like.
Here, it’s like the producers felt saddled with the Discworld and wanted to do something else.
And even though I enjoyed much of it, the more I listen to the discworld audiobooks, the more I feel it should be due a grand TV adaptation.
With as much room for rewrites as would be needed, but maintaining the narrative core. I do feel that Granny Weatherwax should be the main character, and it should be in the budget-vicinity of The Witcher, so a bit more of a budget-leap-of-faith than the watch is.
In Icelandic we have a turn of phrase, “elbow child”. Means something like an unloved or neglected child, and its used to describe things that are neither cared for or fully neglected, often projects that… are like the watch.
It ended up somewhere, done by someone, they did their best, but they’d done a better job if they could have done away with the discworld entirely, because it just isn’t helping, and its wasted there.
Now I’m just curious if it has any fans, and if it got any viewers. How it appears to a new viewer.
I suspect it won’t return, and it’ll soon be forgotten.
Sad for all involved, since I can’t fault anything about the production. The screwup sits solely on the sholders of the producers and buyers.
And the risks taken were often good. The Patrician was a reinterpretation I suspect Pratchett would have found interesting.
But it needs to go, because we want an actual discworld on screen, and an actual ankh morpork.
I have a lot more to say about my revisit to the disc, and the lens of modernity The Watch brings, but I’ll leave it for another day.
 
Likes: Mixa

Tonyblack

Super Moderator
City Watch
Jul 25, 2008
30,841
3,650
Cardiff, Wales
#18
Interesting. The series may, possibly be a launching pad for future Discworld fans. I'm sure that fans of the Lord of the Rings films, may have been inspired to read the books. I suspect that new readers to the books, that watched the Watch series, will find a much richer and fleshed out version of the Discworld.
 

RathDarkblade

Moderator
City Watch
Mar 24, 2015
15,992
3,400
47
Melbourne, Victoria
#19
Hi Sveinb,

I think you're right about characters changing in adaptations - but this is only true when a book is adapted into a film or TV series (and even then, not when the TV series is animated).

The LOTR films, for instance, are a good example. Faramir is changed a little, and his father Denethor is almost completely re-written (and becomes a villain instead of a weary pragmatist). The Hobbit films are an excellent example, but that's another rant.

On the other hand, when "Soul Music" and "Wyrd Sisters" were adapted as animated series, almost nothing was changed. Sure, not every joke made it, but I wouldn't have expected it to. :)

The problem here is that not only were characters changed, but Ankh-Morpork itself was too. The changes were so drastic that this adaptation was no longer recognised as Discworld. By all accounts, it was bland, middle-of-the-road fantasy fare that tried to sell itself as Discworld and trade on the Discworld name. Why? Because the Discworld name is worth a lot of money.

I understand the producers felt "saddled" with the Discworld and wanted to do something else. But if that's the case, they should not have accepted the contract. They should have said "No, thank you" and done something else. But they didn't, and they tried to pass this off as Discworld.

That's what makes me so angry. They could have called their vision anything else and tried to make it, but no: they jumped on the Discworld bandwagon. But Discworld has its own rules, its own settings and its own characters. If you change those settings and characters so much that they're no longer recognisable, it's not Discworld -- and you're lying to your viewers by saying that it is.

Further, if the producers didn't have enough confidence in their creation to give it a name of their own, why should I watch it in the first place? :(

I agree with you, though, that the Discworld books deserve a grand TV adaptation. :) I thought that "Hogfather" was good, if a little dry; "The Colour of Magic" was fairly good, and "Going Postal" was generally excellent (though there was one moment I definitely disagreed with, i.e.
Reacher Gilt murdering Crispin Horsefry
, which he would never do. He's smarter than that).

A film with Granny Weatherwax as the main character? Hmm ... "Equal Rites", then! :) In ER, Granny doesn't yet have Nanny or Magrat to deal with. In the later books, Granny has the Big Scenes, but Nanny and Magrat have good scenes of their own. That's a good thing: that's as it should be. It's no good to have just Granny hogging the limelight all the time. :) That's not the kind of witch she is, anyway.

Besides, ER has many good things to say about sexual equality. I only hope that, if an ER film is released, movie-goers won't think that it's trying to jump on the "Me Too" bandwagon. :confused:

Alternatively, for a film with Granny as MC, "Witches Abroad" will be good. :) Granny has some very strong Big Scenes, while Nanny and Magrat have very funny ones too! :) For my money, WA is clearly in the Top 3 Witches books (the other two are Wyrd Sisters and Maskerade).

What do you think? :)
 

User Menu

Newsletter