Thanks, Dug (and Rachel!) It makes much more sense now.
I'm still confused about Carcer's "goblin henchmen". It's funny, but I never pictured goblins looking like pillar boxes. Everything Pterry ever wrote about goblins, and all the illustrations, shows the opposite: less armour, more speed.
Rachel is right: those two guys look more like Deep-Down Grags (although considering that Deep-Downers are Dwarfs, I'd expect them to be shorter than Carcer).
Anyway, I only hope that people who watch The Watch (no wordplay intended) will then graduate to actually reading the books.
It seems like the art directors have confused steampunk with cyberpunk and classed them as the same thing.
I think I've heard of these terms: Steampunk is Victorian-era technology (lots of steam) along with a touch of magic, roughly 1880-1890; whereas Cyberpunk is much more modern, 1980s-ish style art. Am I right?
In any case, the timeline is all wrong, even for steampunk. The Discworld didn't get steam until "Raising Steam", by which time the Watch was very well-established, indeed.
If the writers are going for an earlier book - and by the look of things, they're going for (perhaps) G!G! or MAA - then A-M's technology should be much less developed, probably late medieval (or English Civil War at best).
Or maybe the impressions of imp-powered or magic seems too complex for someone who isn't familiar with Discworld and has been dumbed down to not complicate the environmental storyline and that is why the cyberpunk feel has been introduced to gloss over the fantasy aspects.
I hate it when people do that.
How would they feel about dumbing down a so-called "classic" of literature, I wonder - like "A Tale of Two Cities", say, or "Gulliver's Travels"? Oh, wait -
someone's already done that to "The Three Musketeers". Sigh.
Although if you like TTM (as I do), you may try
the 1993 version, which is much better. Anyway.
There's one piece of good news in all this: "The Amazing Maurice" is coming!!
