The Watch (Terry Pratchett) [BBC America]

Mickeroo

You're probably right pixel unfortunately.

Do I see a female wizard in there too? Christ, they haven't a clue.

Bannasidhe

Reading the scuttlebug around this it puts me in mind of when Stallone was cast as Judge Dredd. And absolute car crash of a film where it was obvious that no-one involved had the slightest idea about the characters or the storyline.
And I think the issues come from the same place - like Dredd, Pratchett's work was 'British' -by which I mean it was informed by his life, education, culture growing up in the UK. Not just the jokes about Morris Dancing or references to potent alcohol made (mostly) from apples, it drew it's humour from the same well as the Pythons. The Well of Absurdity in Everyday Life and that 'life' was British.

They might speak the same language in the US (mostly), but the nuances of everyday life, the humour, the cultural references etc are completely different. They just don't get it. Not really.

Sybil is a character that could be found in Agatha Christie. The dowdy, eccentric, aristocratic, hunter welly/wax jacket wearing middle aged spinster, awfully jolly hockey sticks who is utterly passionate about dogs horses dragons to the exclusion of all else. She probably went to St Trinians as a young gal. It it wasn't for the fact that she has blue blood and is stinking rich she'd have been locked up due to being 'a bit bonkers'.

CMOT is Del Boy/Arfur Daly/Flash Harry.

Sam Vimes is like a million Sean Bean roles - working class lad grew up in poverty, bit of a chip on his shoulder when it comes to his 'betters'. Prides himself on his street smarts. Handy with his fists but also sentimental.

Vetinari is that public school boy. The odd clever one. He's one of those is he gay or British types. Terribly well educated, terribly well connected, posh enough to put the aristocrats in their place, wily enough to get one over the guilds, ruthless enough to terrify everyone.

On this side of the Pond we 'know' these characters. We grew up with them. We read them in Christie and Blyton. We have watched them in countless TV shows. We were immersed in the same source material Pratchett drew on.

pixelburp

Yup, I think Bannasidhe you've summed it up: Pratchett was the evolution & deconstruction of a distinctly British set of cultural markers, both from fiction & reality. So far this adaptation feels like it has intentionally torn out those British'isms, because of a misguided feeling they're irrelevant or alien to what will presumably be an international audience.

I'm actively hoping this will die on the production table but it does sound like it's all systems go; and thanks to the arbitrary casting choices, it'll ensure any sober discussion about it being a faithful adaptation gets drowned out by those either ranting about SJWs, or those emotionally investing their slacktivism for this cause.

Stop moaning ffs

Was so excited when I saw this thread. Had no idea this was coming. A huge brave endeavor. Seems some of you aren’t happy tough and now I can see why.
Worrying indeed.

Bannasidhe

pixelburp wrote: »

Yup, I think Bannasidhe you've summed it up: Pratchett was the evolution & deconstruction of a distinctly British set of cultural markers, both from fiction & reality. So far this adaptation feels like it has intentionally torn out those British'isms, because of a misguided feeling they're irrelevant or alien to what will presumably be an international audience.

I'm actively hoping this will die on the production table but it does sound like it's all systems go; and thanks to the arbitrary casting choices, it'll ensure any sober discussion about it being a faithful adaptation gets drowned out by those either ranting about SJWs, or those emotionally investing their slacktivism for this cause.

It's like they are trying to morph Miss Marple into Jessica Fletcher so we'll end up with some bizarre Jessica Marple living in St Mary's Cove stripped of their storyline, motivations, history.

Gbear

pixelburp wrote: »

Yup, I think Bannasidhe you've summed it up: Pratchett was the evolution & deconstruction of a distinctly British set of cultural markers, both from fiction & reality. So far this adaptation feels like it has intentionally torn out those British'isms, because of a misguided feeling they're irrelevant or alien to what will presumably be an international audience.

I'm actively hoping this will die on the production table but it does sound like it's all systems go; and thanks to the arbitrary casting choices, it'll ensure any sober discussion about it being a faithful adaptation gets drowned out by those either ranting about SJWs, or those emotionally investing their slacktivism for this cause.

There's more than enough substance in Pratchett's work that the references are irrelevant. I started reading them when I was 9, and you can be sure almost every reference flew straight over my head, but I still loved them, because they're brilliantly written. The characters are deep, but more than that, they're human and relatable. They're not superheroes, mostly. And even when they stray into that, it's done knowingly and in a limited fashion. Indeed, Carrot would be a superhero in any other series, but in Discworld, he just wants to be a bog-standard public servant.

It comes across as someone not understanding the source material, or a profound degree of meddling from the higher-ups.

Also, I'm all for inclusivity in media, and quite often there's little harm in switching the ethnicity of a character. In a place like Ankh-Morpork, there's no reason why you can't have a racially diverse set of characters.

Switching genders does more than that though. The context of a character is important, and while switching the ethnicity of a character might have no impact on that context, especially in certain fantasy settings, the gender virtually always will.

As with the aforementioned racial-swap for a production of Othello, you're making a statement by making Othello white and the rest of the cast black.

And that's, of course, not to say it's even necessarily bad. It's just a quite profound change to the source material, and you better have a bloody good reason for doing it.

This really should not be the hill to die on for the cause of representation in media.

It's arrogant to try, but if I attempt to put myself in the shoes of Pratchett and imagine what sort of changes he would be ok with, having Sybill be black is not one I think would bother him in the sligthest. Or even making Vimes (and Keel) black. But the gender-switching, the role-switching, totally changing the setting, stripping out the fantasy elements. That would surely not be ok with him.
He'd have stuffed that in a box and thrown it under the steam-roller along with his unfinished works.

Sonics2k

Well this is never good.

https://twitter.com/terryandrob/status/1199301665284935680

Stop moaning ffs

The danger involved with a writer selling the rights on for his stories.

donegal_man

donegal_man wrote: »

Some of the stuff coming from the people behind it would suggest it's going to be one of those shows "based on characters created by ..." It may start with an episode based on one of the books to attract fans then go off on its own as happened with the Dresden Files adaptation.



Full article on BBC America

I've never been less pleased to be right

Stop moaning ffs

Thinking on it, this series was never ever going to match the heart and spirit of the watch stories. Or the humour or the humanity or any of it. We all probably have different versions of ankh morpork and everyone in it in our heads. Seeing it stripped and repackaged should be enough of a warning. Leave them to it. It won’t work.

pixelburp

Begs the question what kind of custodians are running the Pratchett estate now that he's no longer with us - and indeed what role Rhianna plays, if any. Certainly her tweets made it sound like she had nothing to do with it.

The Good Omens adaptation was pretty faithful, if a little baggy and maybe TOO faithful in translating the written word. And as I said already, Pratchett resisted adaptations for the longest time precisely because they nearly always involved changing too much of his work. Mort without Death, that sort of thing. Sad that his anxieties are being born out.

Mickeroo

Good Omens was also unique in that Gaiman was still there to help steer the ship in the right direction.

pixelburp

Mickeroo wrote: »

Good Omens was also unique in that Gaiman was still there to help steer the ship in the right direction.

True, but way back when The Watch was mooted, Rhianna was part of the production, that much I'm certain. So that at least would have ensured some parity with the source material. Somewhere along the line then she left, either pushed out, had "creative differences" or her own priorities shifted (to be fair, she may never have wanted to be steward to her father's creative estate). The terse, noncommittal tweet where she clarified her absence from this production read as guarded, a lip bitten, though I'm probably reading into it.

One day a good, faithful adaptation will arise of Pratchett's discworld material.

Until then we have lady Sybil as batman. Sigh.

Sonics2k

I'm half expecting them to say they'll use Daisies instead of Lilacs as part of their re-imagining.

blueshade

All this woke nonsense is doing more harm than good. When you change the gender, colour or nature of a character then it isn't the same character. With Pratchett books everyone creates their own image of the characters. Lady Sybil is a strong overweight middle aged woman, what is wrong with having a strong white female character like that, why change it to a vigilante young black woman? Why make a wizard female? Why make the Patrician female? It has been disastrous in all the all female remake movies because nobody wants to see a terribly butchered remake of an old favourite. I've no issue with diversity but instead of making horrendous ''reimaginings'' of old favourites for the sake of diversity why not just make a new film/series with diverse new characters? I won't be watching this.

Sonics2k

blueshade wrote: »

All this woke nonsense is doing more harm than good. When you change the gender, colour or nature of a character then it isn't the same character. With Pratchett books everyone creates their own image of the characters. Lady Sybil is a strong overweight middle aged woman, what is wrong with having a strong white female character like that, why change it to a vigilante young black woman? Why make a wizard female? Why make the Patrician female? It has been disastrous in all the all female remake movies because nobody wants to see a terribly butchered remake of an old favourite. I've no issue with diversity but instead of making horrendous ''reimaginings'' of old favourites for the sake of diversity why not just make a new film/series with diverse new characters? I won't be watching this.

I'd actually be inclined to disagree, partially. Changing the race of a character isn't really a big deal or problem, unless it's an intrinsic part of the actual character.

For example, changing Carcer to a black guy, not an issue at all. His race is nothing to do with his actual character or the plot.

Changing Sergeant Keel to a black guy, well that is a problem as Vimes is supposed to be him during the events of Night Watch, and as we know, Ned Coates knows the real Keel so from the get go that's a problem.

Sybil can absolutely be played by a black woman, there's no reason she can't be. Even Pratchett noted that the concept of racism doesn't exist on the Disc, so white and black people live together without issue. Why bother with racism when Trolls and Dwarves exist.
The problem they've caused with Sybil is that they have changed the entire identity of the character, which was a direct reflection of Vimes. Changing her to a young vigilante is the real problem here, not the actresses race.

Most of the reason I dislike the changing of Vetinari to a woman is
a) Charles Dance was amazing and should have been recast.
b) It kinda messes up his backstory. He's supposed to have been a young boy, inducted to the Assassins Guild and his real love was the vampire Lady Margolotta.

pixelburp

I don't care that Sybil is a black woman - Ankh Morpork is SUPPOSED to be a big melting pot of peoples so honestly it's disingenuous to even flag it - I do care that they've warped her into Batman, and about 20 years younger than Vimes. Which is classic Hollywood really, but ultimately smacks that they don't have faith in the inherent Britishness of the source material to translate it accurately.

I've even come around to Vetinari being a woman, cos she at least looks the part, but the cracks are in the substance, not the superficial appearance.

Oh and as for Keel, I'm going out on a limb and say they're NOT going for an adaptation of Night Watch; no way they'll jump straight into a time travel plot off the bat, while the novel relied on that backlog of novels to make its emotional impact all the stronger. Keel will just be another name.

Bannasidhe

Sonics2k wrote: »

I'd actually be inclined to disagree, partially. Changing the race of a character isn't really a big deal or problem, unless it's an intrinsic part of the actual character.

For example, changing Carcer to a black guy, not an issue at all. His race is nothing to do with his actual character or the plot.

Changing Sergeant Keel to a black guy, well that is a problem as Vimes is supposed to be him during the events of Night Watch, and as we know, Ned Coates knows the real Keel so from the get go that's a problem.

Sybil can absolutely be played by a black woman, there's no reason she can't be. Even Pratchett noted that the concept of racism doesn't exist on the Disc, so white and black people live together without issue. Why bother with racism when Trolls and Dwarves exist.
The problem they've caused with Sybil is that they have changed the entire identity of the character, which was a direct reflection of Vimes. Changing her to a young vigilante is the real problem here, not the actresses race.

Most of the reason I dislike the changing of Vetinari to a woman is
a) Charles Dance was amazing and should have been recast.
b) It kinda messes up his backstory. He's supposed to have been a young boy, inducted to the Assassins Guild and his real love was the vampire Lady Margolotta.

I agree with this.

Skin colour is a complete non-issue for me (Keel being the exception for the reasons given here - if Keel is Vimes and Vimes is white then how does that work?).

Sybil is a Margaret Rutherford type character - her skin colour is immaterial but her age is vital to who she is when Vimes meets her. She isn't a young gal. She's a middle aged woman who had long given up on finding love and was going through life like a galleon in full sail using her aristocratic privilege to get away with ignoring conventions. Sybil is a particular kind of eccentric rebel against social convention - she is not a social justice warrior... unless poor helpless little dragonkins are involved.

As fr Vetinari - unless they envisage he being played by a woman would impart a certain (unnecessary) androgyny to the role then no.

Stop moaning ffs

Isn’t it one of the watch books where someone says ‘dwarves are like the Irish, they become more Irish the further away from home they get’

Am I misremembering that?

Bannasidhe

Stop moaning ffs wrote: »

Isn’t it one of the watch books where someone says ‘dwarves are like the Irish, they become more Irish the further away from home they get’

Am I misremembering that?

Not ringing any bells for me.

Sonics2k

I believe there's a line in Guards! Guards! referring to Dwarf bars being full of Dwarves who suddenly change their names to things like "Galf Shinkicker" and start wearing chain mail and spiky helms but they'd never go home to the mountains.

iirc there's no reference to the Irish directly in any Discworld book.

Greyjoy

Stop moaning ffs wrote: »

Isn’t it one of the watch books where someone says ‘dwarves are like the Irish, they become more Irish the further away from home they get’

Am I misremembering that?

Yeah it's one of my favourite quotes. The further away from home the more their national character gets exaggerated. PT describes it as happening to "the Welsh in London, the Irish in New York and Australians everywhere".

blueshade

I have to disagree with people who say that Lady Sybil's race doesn't matter. It would be difficult to find a character that is more typical of old white British Empire than Sybil. To suggest that her skin colour doesn't matter is ridiculous. The only reason to make her young and black is to pander to a woke audience who complain about a lack of diversity.

Gbear

Sonics2k wrote: »

Sybil can absolutely be played by a black woman, there's no reason she can't be. Even Pratchett noted that the concept of racism doesn't exist on the Disc, so white and black people live together without issue. Why bother with racism when Trolls and Dwarves exist.

That's not precisely true.

In Jingo, the concept of racism (or perhaps more precisely, xenophobia) is addressed, so there can be a distrust of the other, but it's not based purely on skin colour, although the victims in question are supposed to be North African or Middle Eastern.

I think Pratchett had a certain image of London in mind, and neither I, nor he, I suspect, envisaged there being black people in Ankh-Morpork, or at least not any specific black people, but that was not, I think, for any particular reason. I'd imagine it was an oversight. For a modern audience, there's no harm in chucking in a bit of inclusivity.

A recent example I've noticed is in the BBC His Dark Materials adaptation - they've made one character, Lord Boreal, black, when I don't think he was in the books. It has no impact, and he's doing a very good job. They probably just got the guy who did the best in the casting call.

I suppose the way I'd look at it, is that the casting call for most, if not all characters needn't have mentioned their race. Probably the only exception would be Carrot, because he has to be ginger, and maybe Angua, because she is supposed to represent a certain stereotypical germanic archetype, but for most, it doesn't matter.
I think, for example, Chiwetel Ejiofor would make for an amazing Patrician, or Dr Cruces.

What I suspect, is that they've deliberately done the gender-bending (and the race stuff) to make a point, which isn't a problem in itself, but makes this an exercise in feminist media rather than an actual adaptation of Terry Pratchett's works.

I'm not particularly fond of that decision, but it doesn't destroy the originals so it's no skin off my nose, really.

bucketybuck

Gbear wrote: »

What I suspect, is that they've deliberately done the gender-bending (and the race stuff) to make a point, which isn't a problem in itself, but makes this an exercise in feminist media rather than an actual adaptation of Terry Pratchett's works.

I have little doubt that at some point there was a brainstorming session beginning with something like:

"Ok guys, analytics show that diversity is trending with millennials, we need to be thinking outside the box here so what can we do to target the demographic?"
"Lets make the patrician be a woman"
"We need a plucky person in a wheelchair"
"Make sure we get a few different races in there"
"Fat old white woman isn't going to play on Insta, we need to make her more vibrant".

I'm just surprised that they didn't go all the way and change Sybil into Simon.

blueshade

bucketybuck wrote: »

I have little doubt that at some point there was a brainstorming session beginning with something like:

"Ok guys, analytics show that diversity is trending with millennials, we need to be thinking outside the box here so what can we do to target the demographic?"
"Lets make the patrician be a woman"
"We need a plucky person in a wheelchair"
"Make sure we get a few different races in there"
"Fat old white woman isn't going to play on Insta, we need to make her more vibrant".

I'm just surprised that they didn't go all the way and change Sybil into Simon.

Give it time, at some point Sybil will probably ''identify'' as Simon.

Bannasidhe

Gbear wrote: »

What I suspect, is that they've deliberately done the gender-bending (and the race stuff) to make a point, which isn't a problem in itself, but makes this an exercise in feminist media rather than an actual adaptation of Terry Pratchett's works.

'Feminist media' ?
Ah for feck sake. I'm a feminist and I think it's complete crap changing the genders so don't be trying to lay that one on us like. :rolleyes:

I want it the way Pratchett wrote it because the way he wrote it was the right way because it was his creation.

Stop moaning ffs

Would we even be aware of any of this if it weren’t for the ever so fragile menimists popping up in every single topic using words like woke and agenda?

I wouldn’t. Don’t care either. Funny watching their masculinity such as it is, be so easily threatened though.

Sonics2k

Gbear wrote: »

What I suspect, is that they've deliberately done the gender-bending (and the race stuff) to make a point, which isn't a problem in itself, but makes this an exercise in feminist media rather than an actual adaptation of Terry Pratchett's works.

I'd say it's far less to do with Feminism, and far more to do with bloody Americans who simply insist on butchering British comedy because they don't understand it.

Does anyone else remember that god awful Faulty Towers remake?

blueshade

Stop moaning ffs wrote: »

Would we even be aware of any of this if it weren’t for the ever so fragile menimists popping up in every single topic using words like woke and agenda?

I wouldn’t. Don’t care either. Funny watching their masculinity such as it is, be so easily threatened though.

Scarlet for ya. The artwork on the books reflects how Pratchett imagined the characters. Lady Sybil was not a black slim vigilante and the Patrician was a man. Now people can get their panties in a bunch and insult other posters as much as they like but it will not change the reality that the American version is nothing but a woke attempt at marketing a different story to a new audience by pretending to be something it isn't.

Book reading Pratchett fans will be appalled but non Pratchett readers seeing it on TV will probably lap it up. It is not The Watch and I'll be giving it a miss.