Going Postal (TV Mini-Series 2010) Poster

(2010)

User Reviews

Review this title
40 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
8/10
A few things to hate, So Many things to love!
Sevenixx13 June 2010
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.
45 out of 52 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
9/10
Excellent adaptation
jsimonbennett31 May 2010
Of the three Sky adaptations of Pratchett's discworld novels this is by far the best. The storyline is true to the book although,as with the other two discworld films, since the history has not been covered by previous stories, more explanation is required which can get in the way of the plot on occasion.

Clair Foy's Adora Belle Dearheart is a little too jovial and Charles Dance is not quite menacing enough as the Patrician. Nonetheless the performances are very good and certainly believable enough for a fantasy world.

Sir Terry's influence on the script is obvious and the Post Office building is magnificent in it's conception.

If Sky can keep this up then I look forward to adaptations of the witches and watch novels with eager anticipation.
61 out of 74 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
9/10
Best out of the three adaptions
lordman22 October 2010
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.
39 out of 46 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
This movie truly brings the book to life!
ithyl25 January 2012
Those who haven't discovered Terry Pratchett's brilliantly funny novels have a treat in store. Most of them are set in an alternate universe, upon a flat world that travels through space on the shoulders of four elephants that stand on the shell of the great Atuin, a huge turtle. Despite the fact that the Discworld is so fundamentally different from our own and his characters so fantastic, you will see yourselves, the conventions and concerns of your own world, reflected in surprising, hysterically funny, and entirely entertaining ways.

Going Postal is the story of a con man who, when his cons catch up to him, is faced with the choice of re-opening the derelict post office or dying a painful death. As he reluctantly takes up his post he is faced with the unintended consequences of his crimes and soon finds himself, with his engagingly unbalanced staff, committed to saving the post office, bringing Reacher Gilt, evil owner of the clacks system (rather like the internet without electricity) to justice, and winning the heart of Adora Bell Dearheart.

I've seen all of the Discworld movies and mini-series and enjoyed them ... The Hogfather was great, and The Color of Magic was wonderful,(although I felt Vetenari was a bit too much a comic figure in that one), but Going Postal is nearly perfect! Though I didn't envision the patrician as ginger-haired, it made no difference because Charles Dance absolutely IS Vetinari. The rest of the cast Richard Coyle as Moist Von Lipwig, Claire Foy as Adora Belle Dearheart, David Suchet as Reacher Gilt, Andrew Sachs as Groat and Ian Bonar as Stanley, all are fantastic. Even the Golems are just as I thought they should be! Going Postal is a must-see for any Terry Pratchett fan.
12 out of 13 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
9/10
So far, the best of the Sky/Pratchett adaptations
TheLittleSongbird20 February 2011
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
24 out of 31 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
Not all it could have been, but still a very entertaining 3 hours.
suza-lilli22 August 2010
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.
17 out of 21 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
I liked it
waygarn24 September 2010
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.
7 out of 8 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
5/10
Better than "The Colour of Magic" but worse than "Hogfather" (Updated)
SoWhy31 May 2010
Warning: Spoilers
SkyOne has tried to tackle the very difficult task of creating a movie based on Terry Pratchett's fantastic universe once again with it's third movie, "Going Postal". Just like those two before it, "The Colour of Magic" and "Hogfather", this title seems randomly picked from the list of Discworld novels - their first movie was based on the 20th, the second on the 1st and 2nd (unsuccessfully trying to merge them into one), this one on the 33rd. While "Hogfather" was a brilliant adaption, with characters and scenes true to the book and a great atmosphere, "The Colour of Magic" was influenced by a terrible arrogance. After having made a near-perfect adaption (as perfect as possible at least) with "Hogfather", "The Colour of Magic" changed a great many things from the books it was allegedly based one: The main character was 40 years older, the plot changed, they tried to cast people who were famous rather than those who fitted the book and they tried to combine two novels into one movie. And the end result was, predictably, very bad, at least if you had read the books before it.

"Going Postal" seems to rectify some of the last adaption's mistakes. The scenery looks much more like it's described in the book and many of the secondary characters are indeed based on the book - with the exception of the main character, Moist von Lipwig, unfortunately. While I do like Richard Coyle, he, as a 38-year-old, cannot convincingly play a character who should be in his mid-20s. And of course a number of changes were made from the book, some irrelevant and partly creative (like the B/W sequences depicting his crimes) and some relevant and stupid (like having Adora ride with him, Angua in the beginning, meeting Reacher Gilt so soon etc.) because they were different precisely to make the story work.

One can hope for further adaptations of Pratchett's works nonetheless and possibly SkyOne will avoid unnecessary changes in their next adaption (we can only hope it's "Night Watch" :-)) and stay true to the book where possible. Still, "Going Postal" is an enjoyable adaption of one of the (imho) best books by Terry Pratchett, despite some changes that will annoy someone who already read the book.

Update: It seems I spoke too soon. When I wrote the review, it was after viewing part 1. Unfortunately, part 2 managed to be much more like "The Colour of Magic" than "Hogfather". Vital, important parts of the plot were either removed or changed (Vetinari keeps the money; Offler was the god who allegedly provided it; Moist chose the message rather than Ridcully - although it was vital to the plot that the wizard did so (because it had many pictures); Adora giving up smoking; etc.) and frankly ridiculous story lines and changes were added (Gilt is now, as a fellow reviewer wrote, more of a James Bond supervillian wannabe rather than a con man like Moist - even to the point of killing Horsefry himself; the overly dramatic scene on the tower at the end; the soppy speech at the end and the "rescue"; etc.)

So I have to revise my initial conclusion, it's far worse than "Hogfather" (9/10) while still being better than "The Colour of Magic" (2/10): 5/10. Hopefully future SkyOne adaptions will rectify those problems.
21 out of 32 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
Much better than I expected
MrVanilla7 March 2014
Warning: Spoilers
People talk about the phenomenon of binge TV watching. I've been binge reading all of the Discworld books, all of which are on my shelf. That makes the second or third (or at least one fourth) time through. I had only seen the terrible "Color of Magic" and the worse "Hogfather" before, so had low expectations for this.

Going Postal is true to the "look and feel" of the book. Of course, it doesn't stick to the plot, word for word. Of course, many of the characters are two dimensional. But then, the movie is made from pictures and the books are made from words. And words have power.

It was a joy to watch. My wife didn't enjoy it nearly as much as I did, but that was probably because I kept telling her the difference between the book and the movie. And pointing out the similarity ("Honey, did you notice the vampire photographer? That's great, he really didn't add to the movie story line, but in the Discworld series...." And we're still married.

Spoiler: Viewers should be aware that the movie pays homage to old time movies in a couple of ways. One controversial way is to make the banshee into a replica of Nosferatu. I think this was a misstep, but a minor and intriguing one.
3 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
Weaker than Hogfather, but still pretty good
siderite4 June 2010
I have not read the books, so I can hardly comment on the similarities or differences from the story, feel or characters therein. I thought it was a fun movie, with good actors but with a slightly commercial script.

The Discworld universe is presented in a far more modern light, where magic gives way to technology and economic mechanisms. The entire film is a satire to the present capitalist world and no one is left unscathed. Company owners that cheat and lie and do anything for a bottom line, shadowy and powerful people that change the course of the "free" market as they see fit for their (often petty) needs, ridiculous worker syndicates, corporate spying, bureaucracy, nothing is spared.

However, while it makes for a good social commentary, the film is less funny and definitely less magical than the previous two adaptations of Discworld stories. I would say that if it weren't for the attention to detail of British actors and film makers, this film would probably have felt average.

Bottom line: nice, but I kind of expected a little more.
17 out of 28 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
Probably deserved better
doggydog231219 April 2011
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.
9 out of 15 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
Whimsical and Wacky
marspeach27 April 2011
It's not really a period drama so much as a costume drama- It's got a magical, Dickensian feel with the Victorian inspired costumes and settings. The world is located on the back of four elephants who are on a giant turtle…I haven't read any of the series but from what I've read about it and from watching this adaptation, it's a comical cross between Dickens and fantasy.

This series definitely made me interested in Terry Pratchett's works! Don't know if I'll have time to read them any time soon but one day it would be fun! I think if you like fantasy series like Harry Potter and such as well as costume dramas you should like this show.
6 out of 9 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
2/10
Gone Postal, and not going back
Funky_B901 June 2010
Warning: Spoilers
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.
11 out of 26 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
Turned out to be lots of fun...
Franklie21 May 2015
This show was not at all what we expected. We're not familiar with Terry Pratchett's work and had his name mixed-up in our minds with Monty Python's Terry Gilliam, so it was VERY fun to occasionally hear a line in the movie that sounded very Python-ish.

The writing was fantastically clever and witty. LOVED all the humor about the pins. We didn't realize it was a story with a message, several of them in fact, and very timely.

We also didn't realize the show would be family-friendly, which was fantastic!! They didn't even refer to "crap" or "freakin" (or their synonyms) which most writers can't seem to avoid these days. Instead, we got to hear all sorts of fun exclamations and whatnot that just made us smile.

There were some big plot holes in the type of message used in the race at the end of the show, but they're easy to overlook if you're into the spirit of the story. And we could have done w/o the sliminess of the banshee and the blind man bit.

But we really really liked it and wish more shows would have this level of writing.
2 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
Fantastic Pratchett
foreverfooled10 January 2019
Going Postal is the best version of a Pratchett novel turned into a movie. The cast is perfect!!!
1 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
It's the little things.
hjalsayegh10 April 2018
Going postal is one of the more popular books in the discworld series and in this movie you find out why.

The story is a stand alone about a con man trying to revive the postal service. All other characters from the discworld are cameos, magic and it's rules don't come into play.

The movie has flaws. The effects used for both the banshee and werewolves were horrendous! In movie so old world and atmospheric those effects stood out like a sore thumb and I really, really, REALLY wish they were left on the cutting room floor.

Angua who's a prominent character in the guards series was diluted to "blonde, pale, werewolf" Which just made me sad every time she popped up.

What I liked however was the rest of the movie. It's charming, Atmospheric and the little details will get to you. The world feels lived in from the men's top hats being a bit worn from use to the women's sweeping skirts being muddy and dusty from.... well from sweeping the dirty streets!

Seeing a few characters from other books cameo in this one made me smile (Everyone's favorite vampire photographer for the win!)

I loved that they didn't shy away from Ludwig's past haunting him or how badly his confession to his lady love went. Those could have been written out for a more Hollywood classic tale.

I don't think any of the movies are as good as the books. The writing style doesn't lend itself to the visual medium by the author's own admission. He wrote them to be books and mentioned that if he was writing for a movie then things would have been very different. I still enjoyed this as a movie and would recommend it even if you know nothing of the discworld.
1 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
Imaginative and fun
mikeburdick4 September 2015
If you enjoy getting absorbed in fantastic worlds, like Harry Potter, then "Going Postal" should definitely be on your list. Adapted from a Terry Pratchett novel, it's imaginative, humorous and highly entertaining.

Despite being made on a budget as a miniseries for telly, "Postal" has big-budget cinematic feel and probably could have been released in theatres. The costumes, set design and art direction are particularly outstanding. And rather than rely on big budget effects, they got rather inventive with practical effects, such as the Golems.

There's also some tremendous acting from veterans like David Suchet and Charles Dance, and a great cast of comedic actors, like Tamsin Greig from "Black Books" and Andrew Sachs (aka Manuel from "Fawlty Towers").

There are little niggles, such as the unconvincing chemistry between the two leads, but overall, "Going Postal" is well worth a watch, especially if you have kids, meaning 11 or 12+. It does get pretty dark in a couple spots, but mostly lighthearted and fun.
1 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
Big fan of Pratchett books reviews the movie
elessardunedain9 February 2013
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.
1 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
Disappointing
itamarscomix24 September 2012
Going Postal may be, as many people seem to think, the most accurate of the three live-action Discworld adaptations done so far - but what does it matter, when the book it's adapted from is one of the weakest in the series? Going Postal is, by any measure, a well-made and watchable TV movie - it has some good jokes, solid pacing, a few good performances (always great to see Andrew Sachs in action again) - but nothing about it has the unique flair and insanity of the Discworld novels. A couple of characters familiar to fans make an appearance - like Angua and Mustrum Ridcully - but they have none of the depth and personality of their book counterparts. Lord Vetinari is the only possible exception - Charles Dance is a natural choice for the part, and he does fantastically well.

Going Postal, like so many Discworld novels, is about the Discworld equivalent of a real-world phenomena, this time - mail. But that same basic premise had been used in many other Discworld novels to funnier results - I'd much rather see a TV adaptation of Moving Pictures or The Truth. Even more than that, I'd rather have Sky stick to the earlier classics in the series, to the dry nonsensical humor that made them classics, and to beloved characters who made the series great, back when it was a fantasy series. Going Postal is watchable, but anybody who doesn't know anything about Discworld probably won't get what the fuss is all about, and I'd much sooner recommend Hogfather as a starting point.
3 out of 6 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
2/10
Bitterly disappointed
Death-of-Rats14 September 2010
Warning: Spoilers
I begin this review wondering if 2/10 might be a little too generous. As quite a hardcore Pratchett fan for over 12 years, I don't know why I put myself through this kind of experience, I really don't. This TV movie was just excruciating to sit through, as I watched characters that I have know and loved for many years be desecrated, dumbed down, sexed up or just downright murdered. Sacrilege.

I think everyone understands that one cannot transcribe a book word for word, action for action onto the big or small screen. Obviously it takes a lot of work and effort trying to achieve a film adaptation of a great piece of literature. But seriously? There is no excuse for such lack of attention to detail, to the storyline, to the attitudes, appearances and mannerisms of the characters, to the general hubbub that makes Ankh- Morpork Ankh-Morpork. Some of this has been mentioned already by other reviewers so perhaps I shouldn't dwell, but a blond Vetinari? A chubby and snide Drumknott? Rubber-like homogeneous golems? a fawning Adora Belle Dearheart? And where is the life and hustle and bustle of the city? The interactive crowds, not to mention the lack of species diversity?

I should try and balance this with something positive, right?

It was a spirited attempt at Moist von Lipwig, I admit, and you can't fault an actor for a poor script or a pants director. Sargeant Angua looked awesome, for 2 seconds before she changed into a werewolf in a crowded bar, which obviously, is completely out of character. Stanley was almost spot on! and some of the visual effects were't half bad.

But the thing about Pratchett, and it's far too important to overlook when adapting his books, is that he crafts such amazing, intricate characters, beautiful running narratives and delicate witticisms that one is awed by his magic, and the life that his books take on inside ones head. Anything short of complete dedication to his intent is simply an insult. This adaptation was lazy, unspirited, rushed and complacent to obviously commercial interests. This makes me very sad.

I felt largely the same way about the previous two adaptations - I really can't understand any Pratchett fan being happy with the Hogfather or the Colour of Magic, and certainly not this. It is a shame that those of us truly enamoured with Pratchett's work should be sold out for a wider (dare I say less sophisticated?) audience.

Until Tim Burton directs a discworld movie, and all the actors, screenwriters, make-up artists and costume designers are contracted to read the entire discworld series at least three times over before daring to make an appearance on set, I think I'll be giving any screen adaptation of Pratchett a wide berth.
4 out of 10 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
2/10
Embarrassingly bad
rch42717 March 2012
"Going Postal" is a cringeworthy adaptation of Terry Pratchett's work for TV where every subtlety is lost, characters are utterly 2-dimensional, and music steamrolls you at every turn. Pratchett seems to have taken every cliché'd character imaginable (including the animated kitchen sink) and thrown them into a Steampunk "Christmas Carol". Vampires? Check. Werewolves? Check. Golems? Check. (And the Golem in question here is almost a direct rip-off of "Kryten" from "Red Dwarf".) But for all that "Going Postal" has that is unwelcome, it's conspicuously lacking two elements: a character that you can give a damn about, and a "McGuffin" that makes you care about what happens to them. "Going Postal" is a superficially clever premise that is utterly let down by a paper-thin script and made insufferable by treacly music and unnecessary voice-over. Give this one a WIDE miss.
5 out of 14 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
Awesome Movie
foreverfooled21 June 2019
I absolutely love Going Postal. It's such a fun movie and Richard Coyle is brilliant in this role!!!
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
The best of the three.
Java_Joe7 March 2019
After the disappointing cartoons of "Soul Music" and "Wyrd Sisters", I wasn't keen on seeing any more movie products bearing Sir Pterry's name. That is until I saw the trailer for "The Color of Magic". Well I had to see it and while it was far from perfect, it was still an enjoyable watch made even better by Tim Curry's role as the cunning Trymon and Christopher Lee's voice given to Death. This started me on the rest of the live action movies which leads us to "Going Postal".

What can I say other than I loved it and thought it was the best of the three. The story follows the novel, the characters are as described and RIchard Coyle as Moist Von Lipwig was perfect as the con man turned Postman. Much credit needs to also be given to Charles Dance as the Patrician. If there was ever a man that had the look of a predatory flamingo, it's him.

The special effects were quite well done and while I would have preferred a little more difference in how the golems looked I understand their reasoning in making them all look the same.

All in all, if you liked the novel I really suggest giving the three live action movies a try. Sir Pterry appears in all of them as a cameo and he was reportedly pleased with the work.
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
5/10
Third and darkest of the Discworld adaptations
Leofwine_draca31 December 2018
Warning: Spoilers
GOING POSTAL is the third and final of Sky One's Discworld adaptations, based on the work of Terry Pratchett. This one sees Richard Coyle playing a new postmaster who finds himself getting to grips with an unusual job, facing the usual magical allies and murderous villains along the way. The look is noticeably different to that of THE HOGFATHER and THE COLOUR OF MAGIC, with darker visuals, less reliance on CGI, and shooting locations in Hungary. The cast is slightly less impressive but the story makes more sense and has a better pace to it. There are still some dodgy moments - like that awful CGI attack that opens episode two - but otherwise this is quite watchable.
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
9/10
Books must be treated with respect, we feel that in our bones, because words have power. Bring enough words together they can bend space and time.
Bored_Dragon21 December 2018
Terry Pratchett is one of my favorite writers. I have every single book published in my country, 41 to be precise, and that's not even half of his bibliography. He is best known for his Discworld series, dozens of novels placed on a flat world, carried through space on the shoulders of four elephants, standing on the back of Atuin, gigantic turtle. Sounds familiar? In these novels, Terry parodies the whole history of humanity in all its aspects. I can not choose the favorite one, because every single one is awesome. Some of his work is adapted to movies, TV series and cartoons and I think I saw them all. On par with "The Colour of Magic", this is by far the best adaptation. I won't go into the story itself because I will assume everyone has read the book. And if you still didn't, do yourself a favor and put it on your priority list. Like Terry's books, this movie is extremely entertaining, hilarious and joyful. It may not be a masterpiece of cinematography, but it surely is the masterpiece of clever and meaningful comedy.

9/10
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
An error has occured. Please try again.

See also

Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews


Recently Viewed