I finally got a chance to watch Going Postal, the new adaptation from Terry Pratchett's very popular Discworld series of British fantasy/satire. On the whole, I thought it was a pleasant 3 hours of miniseries, with standout performances from costume drama regulars Charles Dance and, of course, Claire Foy. Some points of interest:
1) Claire Foy, in a role nearly the polar opposite of Amy Dorrit, plays the love interest/co-protagonist Adora Belle Dearhart in a classic film noir femme fatale style, with stern black dress, extremely cool double bun hair, long cigarette holder, and occasionally either a smile or a riding crop (but not both simultaneously).
2) The direction and scriptwriting is a huge step up from the previous two adaptations in this series, Hogfather and The Colour of Magic, probably because they got a new writing team and director (Jon Jones, who did quite solid work in 2007's Northanger Abbey). The previous director seemed to think that every line called for a silent reaction shot, with the end result being a 90-minute story with 90 minutes of reaction shots.
3) The adaptation, for all the "here's how the world works for the uninitiated" expository dialogue, really felt "for Discworld fans primarily." There wasn't enough affection or tension built up for me, so that I felt if I hadn't read and loved the book, I wouldn't have cared as much about the story or characters (other than Claire Foy, of course). That being said, I think it's hilarious to watch a literary fandom discover the world of film adaptation for the first time. People on the message boards and newletters are complaining that "they left this/that/the other out" and "the casting was all wrong." As someone whose fandoms have been adapted since the 1940s, at the very latest, I laugh at these quibbles. I think the real problem with the adaptation was not a lack of respect for the original material. In the first place, Pratchett's books require a fair amount of alteration to work in visual terms - there is so much worldbuilding in the narration, not to mention character backstory and thought processes. Furthermore, the whimsical nature of the stories and themes lends itself well to the kind of restructuring that goes on in even the most slavish of adaptations. The real problem was an intermittently leaden script (oh, what I wouldn't give for Andrew Davies to script one of these - I think he'd have a field day).
4) With David Suchet as the villainous capitalist Reacher Gilt, I was caught by the similarities of the plot to The Way We Live Now (starring Suchet in a nearly identical, if more civilized, role) and Little Dorrit. However, I was disappointed that the subtlety and intelligence of the character had been ditched for bumbling viciousness. I prefer my villainous capitalists to have minions to do their dirty work - I think it makes them more believable and imposing, Additionally, as this particular Discworld story was deliberately satirizing the Victorian postal system (the book even uses the old-fashioned chapter summaries), the Dickensian/Trollopeian world, now with added magic! was a lot of fun.
All this to say, it's gone of my list of DVDs to buy (mostly because it's Claire Foy and Dickensian and decently directed), and I hope it's available here in the states soon (it won't be out even in the UK on DVD till August, and no word on the US release).
In other news, the second issue of five in Marvel's comic book adaptation of Sense and Sensibility is out this morning, and I walked to the comic store to get my copy. Well worth it, though I was afraid Marianne's rain would overwhelm me and cause my poor paper book much distress.
