Going Postal

I did like Hogfather and Colour of Magic too, but what made me like Going Postal best of all was that it was more solid in especially the story, pacing and acting departments. Not that the other two were bad in those categories, but they did have characters that weren't explored as well as they could have been or there were moments of sluggish pacing or forced dialogue.

Going Postal could have easily had those problems but it didn't really. Of all the Sky/Pratchett adaptations it is the best paced overall, while the story even with the changes is compelling and the writing is playful and witty on the whole.

The costumes are colourful and beautiful, and the sets and scenery are also stunning and the effects in general are above average though I wasn't crazy about the Banshee. The photography does very well to capture these lovely visuals, while the music is very good and the direction credible enough.

The cast I feel is the best yet. Charles Dance, Richard Coyle and Steve Pemberton turn in great performances, and Claire Foy is also appealing and David Suchet is an interesting Gilt.

All in all, I thoroughly enjoyed it, and while I liked all three Sky/Pratchett adaptations this one was the best. 9/10 Bethany Cox

First off, This is the third film based on Terry Pratchett Discworld and if you have seen the previous films you know they lacked in quite many areas.

As it happens to be, the moment I started reading Going Postal(the book) I thought for myself "This would make a really great movie!".

Why? you ask and I answer Good story that is easy to follow without any previous knowledge of Discworld. Small amount of magic and special effects that would require a 100 Million budget to make decent. This is where the previous movie Color of Magic went wrong.

So as it came to my knowledge Going Postal was the next movie to be made I felt quite happy, perhaps this would be the time when they got it all right?

Now that I've seen the result I must say that it was in fact, quite awesome! This is far much better than the mediocre Color of Magic adaptation, and it even goes ahead and surpasses the first movie Hoghfather.

There are a few things to hate about Going Postal though, and I believe these are the reasons some people absolutely hate this movie. I believe what all this is about is the use of Cinematic Freedom. First, Angua has been totally removed use some cinematic freedom and replaced with a "posh blond pale looking I'm not afraid to transform to a werewolf anywhere" girl, which many fans probably hate, I myself hate it as well. And even then they had to go ahead and make a wolf animation of her, the type of crappy animations I was hoping wouldn't be required in Going Postal!

Second thing to hate about the movie is the Banshee, seriously, it's the most silly piece of outfit ever seen! If you cant make a good banshee with wings, then use some of that cinematic freedom and just make him normal man dressed in black with some black smoke around him! As it turns out the banshee is the single most disturbing thing about this movie since everything else adds to an atmosphere that the Discworld is actually real. The moment this guy enters flailing his paper wings and screaming the whole atmosphere takes a big dip.

So now you ask, if the movie is so bad why did you rate it so high? Its quite simple really, because of the two things I just discussed. Because even if those 2 details could have been done A LOT better, there is the whole rest of the movie, and this is a movie that has great acting, great story, great atmosphere, great characters and not to forget Great Entertainment Value!

Going Postal is by far the best Discworld movie as of yet and if you are only able to see past the few bad drops in the bucket filled with greatness, Im sure you will come to the same conclusion as me.

I must admit that I am quite surprised about the negative feedback the third movie based on Pratchett's works has received. There are many reasons for my surprise, which I will introduce in the following short review.

Going Postal is a story about a master con-artist who faces the gallows but it given a second shot at life as master of Ankh Morpork's run-down post office. To save the post (i.e. his own life) and win over the principled Golem-rights-activist Adora Dearheart, he has to employ all his conman wit to beat the owner of the telegraph-like "Clacks" in a business race evoking industrial-age competitions like that between Westinghouse and Edison, where showmanship and publicity were far more important than the actual product.

Talking about the product, this movie is well-acted and well-presented. It is based on one of Pratchett's newer stories and evokes a more urban industrial Steampunk feel than its Fantasy (Colour of Magic) and Faerie Tale-based (Hogfather) predecessors.

Still, for a friend of solid acting, solid backdrops, and more substance than metaphor, this may qualify as the best of the bunch.

Someone pointed out that the film lacked the "magic" of the other adaptions. This is all but true, yet, the lack of a fairy-tale air allows the narrative to flow much better. This time, you know precisely what you are looking at. After the somewhat confused and heavily-altered adaption of Colour of Magic, it is a relief to see a certain solid quality in terms of serious movie features returning to the series.

Let's face it: a TV-based production never does well when it relies on special effects more than it does on good actors, a decent script and solid direction. This was a mistake all too obvious in Colour of Magic, and is one not repeated here. Certainly, the visuals still to a perfect job at bringing Discworld to life, mostly due to the enormous attention given to them. However, they never feel overtaxed with their task, which makes it easier to suspend your disbelief in this adaption than in the other ones.

Of course, the movie is not for everyone. Especially those expecting a fantasy-fest will be sorely disappointed. This is fantasy only in the broadest sense, i.e. it takes place in a world quite fantastic and (maybe not quite to) unlike out own. If one wanted to exaggerate, it is - as Discworld always was - to fantasy what Daybreakers is to vampire fiction - a satiric subversion of the tropes.

It should be noted that the film is staffed mainly with rather less known actors - and this is a good thing. Although one might miss the presence of the likes of Tim Curry, Jeremy Irons and even Sean Astin, these are not exactly C-list actors either. You will be surprised how many of them you have seen before. I have graded some of the initial performances below. Please note that the 9 is not an average but a measure of the entire film relating to other reviews.

Plot: 10/10 - The best adaption yet, the changes within which are less noticeable than in Colour or Hogfather. Visuals: 7/10 - Clearly a TV production, but made with love. Not in over its head, unlike the previous adaptions. Special kudos for the sets (even though there is much subtle CGI involved), which are beautiful. Audio: 8/10 - More subtle, fitting. Certainly did not have a huge budget, but everything fits.

Richard Coyle as Moist: 8/10 - I was skeptical at first, but Richard Coyle makes for an energetic and sharp-witted scoundrel. An excellent fit for Moist Von Lipwick.

Claire Foy as Adora Belle Dearheart: 7/10 - She plays the role very much to the expected degree, and while her on-screen chemistry with Coyle is great, her performance is a bit too much "by-the-book" for my taste. Still, Claire Foy displays a lot of charisma; a more courageous performance might have been in order, though.

David Suchet as Reacher Gilt: 5/10 - Suchet plays Gilt very much as a commedia dell arte "scaramuccio", the scheming, conniving, but ultimately inept villain, always with a top hat and twirl-worthy beard. Oh, and the eyepatch. This is actually precisely what the role demands and he delivers. Still, there is not crowning moment in his performance, he just "gets it done", which is a pity given that his character is the only one standing up to Lord Vetinari.

Charles Dance as Vetinari: 7/10 - Charles Dance is not Jeremy Irons, that is for certain. It is also for the better, as Irons' performance in Colour, while memorable, was also very much unbearable on the longer run. Good thing it was so brief. Dance does a solid job, and gives Vetinari a very human, while inhumanly competent, face.

Steve Pemberton as Drumknott: 10/10 - I have singled out Pemberton as Drumknott because it is hard not to like his take on the character. Drumknott may just be Vetinari's right-hand-man and therefore destined to an existence as living piece of backdrop, but Pemberton really gives the devout assistant a depth which, I believe, is quite true to the spirit in which the character was conceived. He is not a footstool, although trained as one, and actually immensely able when tasked. However, he does not show this openly but rather gives subtle hints at his capability. Of course, this is (probably) not in the script, but mainly conveyed through Pemberton's acting. He nailed this part.

All in all, if the Sky1-Productions continue in this vein, we will not have to fear another disappointment like Colour. Expensive actors a good movie do not make. Great overall style and love and care, that's more like it.

I've only come to the Discworld fairly recently and 'Going Postal' was the first book I read. I've found it one of the most enjoyable books in the series, and Moist Von Lipwig is by far and away my favourite character. So I had a vested interest in this, Sky's third adaptation of a Terry Pratchett novel.

After the first episode aired, I was in raptures. It was well filmed, the script was good, it had remained fairly faithful to the plot and it appeared to be well cast (although all the way through I expected Richard Coyle to jump into the TARDIS as there's something very Doctor Who-ish about his performance. And I thought Adora Belle Dearheart wasn't written very well at all). The second episode, however, was very disappointing. It seemed that the writers had read half of 'Going Postal' and then left their copy on the bus so had to resort to making the end of the story up. I cannot understand why they would change it so drastically. There's artistic license, and then there's sheer stupidity.

I guess we cannot expect any better from the writers. For a screenplay to be 100% true to the book, Pratchett would have to write it himself and now that's never going to happen. I would have liked to have seen them have a crack at 'Making Money' but their ending of 'Going Postal' hardly segues smoothly into the following book.

I prefer 'Hogfather', but 'Going Postal' is still very entertaining. You just have to try to forget ever having read the book.

Perhaps I lack sophistication but I liked it.

It's been so long since I read the book that the details were fuzzy to me but as with the other two adaptations I can live with the changes. To do faithful film versions would require making mini-series of them.

I didn't expect a high budget production and expected to see changes, partly to make sense in the allotted time and partly to appeal to a broader audience.

As for the uninitiated, I'd think that those who liked it will like the book better and those who don't probably wouldn't like the book either.

Even with all the flaws in the movies I hope to see other of T. Pratchett's books adapted to film. I'm rooting for "Night Watch" as the next one.