CavemanLynn Posted January 20, 2020 Share Posted January 20, 2020 1 hour ago, DJM said: I watched Good Omens over the weekend, and while it was an ok 6-episodes/6-hours I thought it was also underwhelming and quite disappointing. David Tennant and Michael Sheen are pretty good in the lead roles of the demon and angel, and there are a lot of recognisable faces and voices in the others roles (given varying amounts of screen time), but I just did not find that either the characters or the story were interesting enough. That's something I find with Gaiman's translations to TV - the characters are brilliant and the world building expansive and interesting but subtle, but his whimsy keeps undercutting any sense of peril or urgency so things kind of tick along with a couple of bursts then everyone calms down and has a jolly British talky finish. Aside from the radio version of Neverwhere with James McAvoy sounding gorgeous throughout and incredible sound design (obvs), I found all the adaptations a bit underwhelming. Maybe his dream like stories work better in the imagination at the reader's pace. It's why I'm wary of adaptations of the Sandman - I've no doubt it'll be stunning and brilliantly played, but the lack of stereotypical climax feels like it might end feeling flat. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Awards Moderator Onyx2 Posted January 20, 2020 Awards Moderator Share Posted January 20, 2020 (edited) Speaking of shit translations to TV... what the fuck is this? http://www.bbcamerica.com/anglophenia/2020/01/first-look-photos-bbc-americas-the-watch-starring-richard-dormer And I thought Pratchett adaptations were bad. Maybe this is the answer? Stop trying to make Lord of the Rings, make some odd Cyberpunk Doctor Who adventure? Angua and Carrott:  Edited January 20, 2020 by Onyx2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members gmoney Posted January 20, 2020 Paid Members Share Posted January 20, 2020 Is that one of the waitresses from Allo Allo? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Awards Moderator HarmonicGenerator Posted January 20, 2020 Awards Moderator Share Posted January 20, 2020 I am aghast at what they’ve done to The Watch. It might not be fair to judge on a couple of pictures, but I’ll not be watching. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Retro Red Posted January 21, 2020 Share Posted January 21, 2020 I'll give it a chance, as a huge Pratchett fan I'm fine with a shift in visual/tone so long as the humour is there. The many Sky adaptations always struggled with the tone and veered too far into campiness with the budget really straining (shit casting didn't help). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Awards Moderator HarmonicGenerator Posted January 21, 2020 Awards Moderator Share Posted January 21, 2020 (edited) 1 hour ago, Bicurious Dad said: I'll give it a chance, as a huge Pratchett fan I'm fine with a shift in visual/tone so long as the humour is there. The many Sky adaptations always struggled with the tone and veered too far into campiness with the budget really straining (shit casting didn't help). I don’t know if the tone will be there. Again, judging from a few pictures, it looks like they’re going the dark-and-serious-dystopia route. Richard Dormer would be a perfect Vimes - but not if they’ve made Vimes a Maze Runner reject who wears a fucking lanyard. I’m not opposed to it veering off from the very light tone of the Sky adaps - Night Watch and Thud are some of the darkest books Pratchett wrote. But everything about this seems off. Sybil is a vigilante, Cheery has Carrot’s backstory... no thank you. Edited January 21, 2020 by HarmonicGenerator Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators Chest Rockwell Posted January 21, 2020 Moderators Share Posted January 21, 2020 That looks... Odd. Can't be worse than Sky's efforts butt I'll probably never find out tbh unless you all come back on here with rave reviews. Has Sky ever produced a good original show of their own? I can't think of one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Retro Red Posted January 21, 2020 Share Posted January 21, 2020 1 minute ago, HarmonicGenerator said: I don’t know if the tone will be there. Again, judging from a few pictures, it looks like they’re going the dark-and-serious-dystopia route. Richard Dormer would be a perfect Vimes - but not if they’ve made Vimes a Maze Runner reject who wears a fucking lanyard.  1 hour ago, Bicurious Dad said: I'm fine with a shift in visual/tone It's only loosely based on the books - which is fine if they take the source material and make something that works on screen. Again, Pratchett novels have never really transferred well - partly down to it being Sky who are atrocious at drama (or were - haven't watched anything of theirs in a few years), and with an environment where we have Game of Thrones and Witcher focusing on a more dark fantasy tone I would worry that characters like Carrot and Cheery (not to mention Colon and Nobbs) would come off as parody, and prevent any deep dive into the Discworld/Ankh-Morpork lore. Time will tell, but it's already up against it judging by the initial backlash. Cheery as a non-binary human, Vetinari is a woman, it'll be a big pill for the fanbase to swallow - lanyards aside. I'm here for it though, could be great - even if it's not true to the original stories. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members PunkStep Posted January 21, 2020 Paid Members Share Posted January 21, 2020 19 minutes ago, Chest Rockwell said: Has Sky ever produced a good original show of their own? I can't think of one. This is one of my biggest gripes with Sky. For all the money they throw at original comedy and dramas, why are they so fucking shit at making them? Mad Dogs was ok at best, but it went to shit. Fortitude started quite well and went silly. Falcon wasn't bad although it was only a couple of episodes and that drama about two doctors set in Russia starring Daniel Radcliffe and John Hamm was pretty good. But that doesn't read well from their hundreds of attempts, does it? Everyone else seems to be so much better at making shows. BBC, Netflix, the American networks- hell even Amazon can attempt a decent show now and then. Sky are hopeless. And the comedies- urgh. Dull as dishwasher 'feel good' comedies starring either Ruth Jones or Peter Kaye's mate from Corrie, shows that would fit perfectly into a 1990s ITV Sunday night schedule. My wife has watched a few of these shows and I've never seen her laugh, or even crack a smile. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Awards Moderator HarmonicGenerator Posted January 21, 2020 Awards Moderator Share Posted January 21, 2020 Sky commissioned Yonderland - it’s the weakest of the original Horrible Histories cast’s other projects but still good fun, and they gave it three series which was nice of them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members BomberPat Posted January 21, 2020 Paid Members Share Posted January 21, 2020 54 minutes ago, Bicurious Dad said:  It's only loosely based on the books - which is fine if they take the source material and make something that works on screen. Again, Pratchett novels have never really transferred well - partly down to it being Sky who are atrocious at drama (or were - haven't watched anything of theirs in a few years), and with an environment where we have Game of Thrones and Witcher focusing on a more dark fantasy tone I would worry that characters like Carrot and Cheery (not to mention Colon and Nobbs) would come off as parody, and prevent any deep dive into the Discworld/Ankh-Morpork lore. Time will tell, but it's already up against it judging by the initial backlash. Cheery as a non-binary human, Vetinari is a woman, it'll be a big pill for the fanbase to swallow - lanyards aside. I'm here for it though, could be great - even if it's not true to the original stories. I assumed that Cheery being a non-binary human "rebelling against the rules of her people" was because it was easier than casting her as a female-presenting dwarf. But then Carrot's backstory is apparently still being given as having been raised by dwarfs, so they're obviously still establishing that dwarfs exist in whatever passes for Discworld here. And none of the photos released fill me with confidence that it's going to be funny, either. As much as Ankh Morpork can get away with being a little darker and "grittier" than a broader Discworld story, it should never look like that. As for Colon and Nobbs, their names aren't on any cast lists, so I can only assume we're getting a Watch series in which they don't exist. It all looks like it would probably be broadly fine as a cyberpunk neo-noir thing, but literally nobody into Discworld has been crying out for that, have they? I just can't see how you can start with Guards! Guards! and end up with these photos. It's particularly egregious because the Watch is probably the easiest aspect of Discworld to adapt for TV without messing too much with the source material - it's a police procedural in a fantasy world, it's not rocket science. And I honestly can't think of anything less Sam Vimes than wearing a sodding lanyard! Part of the problem with adapting Pratchett is that much of the humour and the feel of Discworld comes from Pratchett's authorial voice, his descriptions, asides, turns of phrase and footnotes, rather than the story itself, and that's proved impossible to translate to TV. It's why Good Omens had to resort to clunky voiceover in places. A City Watch series that wasn't explicitly based on one book, but just telling stories around those established characters could have avoided that without having to completely reinvent the wheel. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Awards Moderator HarmonicGenerator Posted January 21, 2020 Awards Moderator Share Posted January 21, 2020 (edited) Agreed, I'd have been fine with using the City Watch characters, but creating a new set of crimes and cases for them to solve without feeling the need to adapt Men At Arms or Feet Of Clay (much as I'd enjoy that too of course). Like Pat says, a police procedural in a fantasy world, using these brilliant, well-drawn, complicated characters like Vimes and Sybil, Nobby and Colon, Carrot and Angua, Cheery and Detritus and so on. Use different villains or crimes so they can break out on their own a bit and not feel tied down to hitting every beat of the novels. No objection whatsoever. But BBC America's People Like Carnival Row Don't They? Here's That, Sort Of was on nobody's wish list. Edited January 21, 2020 by HarmonicGenerator Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Factotum Posted January 21, 2020 Share Posted January 21, 2020 Quote Part of the problem with adapting Pratchett is that much of the humour and the feel of Discworld comes from Pratchett's authorial voice, his descriptions, asides, turns of phrase and footnotes, rather than the story itself, and that's proved impossible to translate to TV I feel this with all of Douglas Adams work as well. Adams is the dominant voice in all his work, to translate it just leaves it bland. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members gmoney Posted January 21, 2020 Paid Members Share Posted January 21, 2020 I wouldn't call the Hitchhiker's Radio and TV series bland, they're both great, and iconic. The film was shit, but that was poor execution. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keith Houchen Posted January 21, 2020 Share Posted January 21, 2020 2 hours ago, Chest Rockwell said: Has Sky ever produced a good original show of their own? I can't think of one. Dream Team. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts