First off I'd just like to say that I don't like being negative about bodies of work as a lot of people have worked tirelessly to put together a piece of art that has required dedication, hard work and many many late nights I'm sure.
This being said, I was moved to write a review on what is one of my favourite Pratchett stories due to one of the worst adaptations of a story I've watched (the worst by far being I Am Legend). This piece of work seemed extremely rushed, poorly thought out and, for me, seemed to completely miss the point of the book, and the progression of the characters.
I appreciate how hard it is to turn a large book into a 3 hour film. This being said, there were more scenes and dialogue made up than taken from the book. Entire chapters were replaced with generated scenes which didn't convey the message of the book, or develop the characters anywhere near the degree that the story did. Also, story-line's were invented and adapted to change the characters progression through story, in ways that didn't fit with the original story line. The biggest ones for me was Spike giving up smoking at the end, along with Gilt killing Horsefry and being overall far more evil than he is written as, and Moist's apparent turn from sinner into Saint. Even parts of the characters that existed were either accentuated or repressed to fit in with what seemed like Sky's target audience.
The character's were not fantastically portrayed either, although I put this down to the script rather than the actors ability. Moist had none of the flash and over the top promises that made the character who he is and was the focus for his philosophy (and gained his golden suit far too late and with no comment on it). Spike flirts constantly with Moist, and has none of the spite she begins with, and therefore came over as a wronged, fawning teen-comedy star. Vetinari was closer, but again missed the malevolent, no nonsense attitude he appears in the book with. Gilt comes across far less as a nasty business-man with a con-artist back ground, and more like a James Bond baddie determined to rule the world.
The one point of praise I do have is the fantastic casting. Purely on looks, I think it is one of the best cast choice since the LoTR trilogy. Every character, building and costume looks stunning and the extras who supplied their own costumes deserve an extra bit of praise for making the look if it so genuine.
If you haven't read the story, then go and enjoy it. If you have, then steer clear unless you want a simplified and child-like version of what is a fantastic story from one of the most prolific writers of our time.
This being said, I was moved to write a review on what is one of my favourite Pratchett stories due to one of the worst adaptations of a story I've watched (the worst by far being I Am Legend). This piece of work seemed extremely rushed, poorly thought out and, for me, seemed to completely miss the point of the book, and the progression of the characters.
I appreciate how hard it is to turn a large book into a 3 hour film. This being said, there were more scenes and dialogue made up than taken from the book. Entire chapters were replaced with generated scenes which didn't convey the message of the book, or develop the characters anywhere near the degree that the story did. Also, story-line's were invented and adapted to change the characters progression through story, in ways that didn't fit with the original story line. The biggest ones for me was Spike giving up smoking at the end, along with Gilt killing Horsefry and being overall far more evil than he is written as, and Moist's apparent turn from sinner into Saint. Even parts of the characters that existed were either accentuated or repressed to fit in with what seemed like Sky's target audience.
The character's were not fantastically portrayed either, although I put this down to the script rather than the actors ability. Moist had none of the flash and over the top promises that made the character who he is and was the focus for his philosophy (and gained his golden suit far too late and with no comment on it). Spike flirts constantly with Moist, and has none of the spite she begins with, and therefore came over as a wronged, fawning teen-comedy star. Vetinari was closer, but again missed the malevolent, no nonsense attitude he appears in the book with. Gilt comes across far less as a nasty business-man with a con-artist back ground, and more like a James Bond baddie determined to rule the world.
The one point of praise I do have is the fantastic casting. Purely on looks, I think it is one of the best cast choice since the LoTR trilogy. Every character, building and costume looks stunning and the extras who supplied their own costumes deserve an extra bit of praise for making the look if it so genuine.
If you haven't read the story, then go and enjoy it. If you have, then steer clear unless you want a simplified and child-like version of what is a fantastic story from one of the most prolific writers of our time.