Going Postal (2010)

Absolutely brilliant

It's entirely possible that sending the audience out feeling lousy was intentional

It's easily one of the freshest, sharpest and most enjoyable films of this year.

Very good movie overall, highly recommended. Most of the negative reviews don't have any merit and are all pollitically based. Give this movie a chance at least, and it might give you a different perspective.

I'm a big fan of Terry Pratchett novels. I've read about thirty of them and I love them. "Going Postal" was among my favorites.The film renders the plot quite faithfully most of the time. Most of the characters are very similar to their novel counterparts. Richard Coyle (whom you may know from TV comedy show "Coupling") does a very good performance as Moist von Lipwig, the new postmaster and Charles Dance (the doctor from "Alien 3") is fantastic as lord Havelock Vetinari.You haven't read the book? You get a decent comedy with many funny quips and one liners. There is some fantasy (fantastic creatures like werewolf, banshee and golems) and some magic, but most of the plot revolves around humans and their emotions: love, hate, greed, vengeance. The story is about the Post Office of Ankh Morpork. People have forgotten about Post Office in times of "Clacks" (something like telegraphy). But there are some who want Post Office running again and a lifelong conman Moist von Lipwig is conned into trying to run it.Of course the movie misses many of the novels subtle humorous details, but is fun enough to watch.

So one of better recent Terry Pratchett books get converted into a miniseries/3 hours movie? As a huge Pratchett fan I should be thrilled... or should I? I'll try to keep it short. Basically, they did a more or less good job of making a random Victorianoid adventure movie with light fantasy elements. They failed at making a Discworld movie.Ankh Morpork simply isn't Ankh Morpork. Not just for the lack of dwarfs and trolls. It misses nearly all the elements that make it special. It could be nearly anywhere.Acting was generally good, with some really good performances to lift everything to a higher level, and casting was generally good as well. There are exceptions to both though.The costumes? Unsure on the golems, but the vampire and the banshee are just silly.Too many liberties have been taken with the script, Pratchett's legendary humour is rarely well replicated. The movie even gets slightly shoddy at some times (obvious unpolished cuts).I'm sure that the budget wasn't brilliant and the movie has its' own merits - it's highly approachable by those who don't know anything about Discworld. But for a fan, it'll be a disappointment on more than one level.

First off, I thought Going Postal was an above average Discworld novel. It flowed nicely, the character development was interesting, and of course it included Pratchett's trademark similes.This production, however, was sub-par. First, though, what they got right.The special effects were adequate. The golems looked like what you'd expect a guy wearing a hundred pounds of clay-coloured latex to look like, but the clacks towers were well done, as were the swirling letters in the post office. The sets and costumes, however, were excellent. The city streets lived and breathed, and the post office was wonderfully dark and decrepit. (Moist's Postmaster hat, I noticed, improved over time as the Post Office's fortunes improved.) The script benefited from streamlining the novel's plot somewhat. Just about everywhere the plot was changed, I could see why they did so. Much of Pratchett's wit made it into the dialogue, as well as more than a few good lines that weren't in the novel. But nothing, nay, nothing can make up for the acting. I don't blame the actors here: plainly they were directed to mug like Jim Carrey having a facial spasm. So much of what was funny in the novel was made utterly cringe-inducing by being overdone. Pratchettian humour works by understatement, by the characters taking themselves and what they do seriously. Of the characters played for comedic effect only Vetinari, as far as I could see, was played straight, and not coincidentally only he survived this massacre unscathed. It might be that the program was aimed at children, and this explains the awful, awful hamhandedness. But Pratchett is lost on apparent age level they were trying to pitch to. A terrible, terrible shame, after all the thought and effort that went into the production, that the delivery was muffed so badly.

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.