The Watch (BBC)

[Henry Nebrensky]

Has anyone braved this yet, or are we all hanging back, waiting for someone else to go in[*] first?

The PVR reports the whole series is available on iPlayer until next year; weird as I've not spotted it on the actual telly! From the trailers, it's definitely "inspired by" Discworld rather than "based on".

Thanks

Henry

* and more to the point, come back out again.

[Matthieu Weber]

Le Thu, 29 Jul 2021 16:59:12 -0700 (PDT), Henry Nebrensky
<tort...@gmail.com> a écrit:

> Has anyone braved this yet, or are we all hanging back, waiting for
> someone else to go in[*] first?

When I saw that the series existed I thougt ‘Great!’, then I read
something on the Web and thought ‘Probably not worth my time’.

> The PVR reports the whole series is available on iPlayer until next
> year; weird as I've not spotted it on the actual telly! From the
> trailers, it's definitely "inspired by" Discworld rather than "based
> on".

It does not mean it's bad, it may even be good, but it probably has as
much to do with Discworld as Robert Downey Jr.'s Sherlock Holmes films
have to do with Doyle's stories.

> * and more to the point, come back out again.

So my opinion on the subject is ‘don't bother’. But then again you don't
have to do what I say :)

Matthieu
--
HTML lesson #42:
The only legitimate use of the greatly loathed <BLINK> tag.

Schroedinger's Cat is <BLINK>NOT</BLINK> dead.

[real_gri...@yahoo.co.uk]

29 July 2021 at 16:59, Henry Nebrensky wrote:
The Watch (BBC) (at least in part)

>Has anyone braved this yet, or are we all hanging back, waiting for someone
>else to go in[*] first?

I have it a go, having spent ages complaining about the casting (but avoiding
any spoilers): -

Lady Sybil Ramkin, Coloured, Slim young
Cheery Littlebottom, male & taller than Carrot Ironfoundersson
Lord Havelock Vetinari, Female
CMOT Female and in a wheel chair
Errol the size of a budgie
no sign of Nobby Nobbs or Fred Colon

If you think of it as

Rocky Horror Picture show does DiscWorld you would not be far off

the only up side I can see id trying to spot how many DW stotries they have
tried to shoehorn in, not as much fun as spoting the Pop Group names in
SoulMusic though

[Matthieu Weber]

Le Fri, 30 Jul 2021 08:35:26 +0100, real_gri...@yahoo.co.uk
<real_gri...@yahoo.co.uk> a écrit:

> 29 July 2021 at 16:59, Henry Nebrensky wrote:
> The Watch (BBC) (at least in part)
>
>>Has anyone braved this yet, or are we all hanging back, waiting for
>>someone else to go in[*] first?
>
> I have it a go, having spent ages complaining about the casting (but
> avoiding any spoilers): -
>
> Lady Sybil Ramkin, Coloured, Slim young
> Cheery Littlebottom, male & taller than Carrot Ironfoundersson
> Lord Havelock Vetinari, Female
> CMOT Female and in a wheel chair
> Errol the size of a budgie
> no sign of Nobby Nobbs or Fred Colon
>
> If you think of it as
>
> Rocky Horror Picture show does DiscWorld you would not be far off

That does not mean it's bad. If you watch it and ignore the fact that
it claims to be an adaptation of Dicworld, is it enjoyable ? It's like a
pizza with pineapple: it's not bad to eat, as long as you don't claim
it's a proper variety of pizza.

[Henry Nebrensky]

On Friday, 30 July 2021 at 08:35:28 UTC+1, real_gri...@yahoo.co.uk wrote:
> 29 July 2021 at 16:59, Henry Nebrensky wrote:
> The Watch (BBC) (at least in part)
> >Has anyone braved this yet, or are we all hanging back, waiting for someone
> >else to go in[*] first?

...

> the only up side I can see id trying to spot how many DW stotries they have
> tried to shoehorn in,

That's disappointing - it sounds like they've chopped up the books and then tried to stick their favourite bits back together, which is always going to be an awkward tricky job...

I was hoping it might turn out like the Dirk Gently with Stephen Mangan a while back: the initial adaptation of the original book was clunky because of all the plot they'd had to crop out to fit the running time, but the subsequent, original episodes I thought did a good job both in themselves and in capturing the spirit of the Dirk Gently-verse.

I will probably give The Watch a go eventually, once I've recovered from wading through the swamp of Battlestar Galactica. :(

Thanks

Henry

[Lewis]

In message <slrnsg77st...@minikone.weber.fi.eu.org> Matthieu Weber <mwe...@eispammia.free.fr.invalid> wrote:
> Le Thu, 29 Jul 2021 16:59:12 -0700 (PDT), Henry Nebrensky
> <tort...@gmail.com> a écrit:
>> Has anyone braved this yet, or are we all hanging back, waiting for
>> someone else to go in[*] first?

> When I saw that the series existed I thougt ‘Great!’, then I read
> something on the Web and thought ‘Probably not worth my time’.

I watched the first two episodes. There were things I liked about it
(the look, especially). Everything else felt very much like it was not
Discworld, it was not Vimes, it was not Angua, It was not Cheery. Carrot
came off as dim and stupid instead of naive and good.

>> The PVR reports the whole series is available on iPlayer until next
>> year; weird as I've not spotted it on the actual telly! From the
>> trailers, it's definitely "inspired by" Discworld rather than "based
>> on".

> It does not mean it's bad, it may even be good, but it probably has as
> much to do with Discworld as Robert Downey Jr.'s Sherlock Holmes films
> have to do with Doyle's stories.

I'd say less than that.

>> * and more to the point, come back out again.

> So my opinion on the subject is ‘don't bother’. But then again you don't
> have to do what I say :)

I have no interest in watching the rest of it. I only watched the second
episode in the faint hope that the first episode suffered prom
"pilot-itis" and that maybe they'd improved once they stared shooting
the actual series.

--
"Remember -- that which does not kill us can only make us stronger."
"And that which *does* kill us leaves us *dead*!"

[Lewis]

In message <213f1d8e-9697-4e82...@googlegroups.com> Henry Nebrensky <tort...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Friday, 30 July 2021 at 08:35:28 UTC+1, real_gri...@yahoo.co.uk wrote:
>> 29 July 2021 at 16:59, Henry Nebrensky wrote:
>> The Watch (BBC) (at least in part)
>> >Has anyone braved this yet, or are we all hanging back, waiting for someone
>> >else to go in[*] first?
> ...
>> the only up side I can see id trying to spot how many DW stotries they have
>> tried to shoehorn in,

> That's disappointing - it sounds like they've chopped up the books and
> then tried to stick their favourite bits back together, which is
> always going to be an awkward tricky job...

Well, without going into details, one of the characters is involved in a
pre-planned murder. One of the characters who would never in a million
years be involved in actual murder.


--
Oh, the sweet wine of youth goes sour over time Seems like the more
that you lose, the more you ache to find

[Matthieu Weber]

Le Fri, 30 Jul 2021 14:35:47 -0000 (UTC), Lewis
<g.k...@kreme.dont-email.me> a écrit:

> In message <slrnsg77st...@minikone.weber.fi.eu.org> Matthieu
> Weber <mwe...@eispammia.free.fr.invalid> wrote:
>> Le Thu, 29 Jul 2021 16:59:12 -0700 (PDT), Henry Nebrensky
>> <tort...@gmail.com> a écrit:
>>> Has anyone braved this yet, or are we all hanging back, waiting for
>>> someone else to go in[*] first?
>
>> When I saw that the series existed I thougt ‘Great!’, then I read
>> something on the Web and thought ‘Probably not worth my time’.
>
> I watched the first two episodes. There were things I liked about it
> (the look, especially). Everything else felt very much like it was not
> Discworld, it was not Vimes, it was not Angua, It was not Cheery. Carrot
> came off as dim and stupid instead of naive and good.

But if you try to ignore the forcibly-inserted Discworld theme, does the
story make sense ? Are the characters likeable (even if they are not the
ones you are supposed to expect)?

>>> The PVR reports the whole series is available on iPlayer until next
>>> year; weird as I've not spotted it on the actual telly! From the
>>> trailers, it's definitely "inspired by" Discworld rather than "based
>>> on".
>
>> It does not mean it's bad, it may even be good, but it probably has as
>> much to do with Discworld as Robert Downey Jr.'s Sherlock Holmes films
>> have to do with Doyle's stories.
>
> I'd say less than that.

Is that even possible ? :)

>>> * and more to the point, come back out again.
>
>> So my opinion on the subject is ‘don't bother’. But then again you don't
>> have to do what I say :)
>
> I have no interest in watching the rest of it. I only watched the second
> episode in the faint hope that the first episode suffered prom
> "pilot-itis" and that maybe they'd improved once they stared shooting
> the actual series.

So I supposed it did not improve after the second episode.

[Lewis]

In message <slrnsg85p1...@minikone.weber.fi.eu.org> Matthieu Weber <mwe...@eispammia.free.fr.invalid> wrote:
> Le Fri, 30 Jul 2021 14:35:47 -0000 (UTC), Lewis
> <g.k...@kreme.dont-email.me> a écrit:
>> In message <slrnsg77st...@minikone.weber.fi.eu.org> Matthieu
>> Weber <mwe...@eispammia.free.fr.invalid> wrote:
>>> Le Thu, 29 Jul 2021 16:59:12 -0700 (PDT), Henry Nebrensky
>>> <tort...@gmail.com> a écrit:
>>>> Has anyone braved this yet, or are we all hanging back, waiting for
>>>> someone else to go in[*] first?
>>
>>> When I saw that the series existed I thougt ‘Great!’, then I read
>>> something on the Web and thought ‘Probably not worth my time’.
>>
>> I watched the first two episodes. There were things I liked about it
>> (the look, especially). Everything else felt very much like it was not
>> Discworld, it was not Vimes, it was not Angua, It was not Cheery. Carrot
>> came off as dim and stupid instead of naive and good.

> But if you try to ignore the forcibly-inserted Discworld theme, does the
> story make sense ?

Without spoiling, I didn't think so. The actors are fine though.

> Are the characters likeable

Nope.

> (even if they are not the ones you are supposed to expect)?

If you make a Sherlock Holmes movie where Homes is a being Victor
Frankenstein is it a Sherlock Holmes movie?

>>> It does not mean it's bad, it may even be good, but it probably has as
>>> much to do with Discworld as Robert Downey Jr.'s Sherlock Holmes films
>>> have to do with Doyle's stories.
>>
>> I'd say less than that.

> Is that even possible ? :)

>>>> * and more to the point, come back out again.
>>
>>> So my opinion on the subject is ‘don't bother’. But then again you don't
>>> have to do what I say :)
>>
>> I have no interest in watching the rest of it. I only watched the second
>> episode in the faint hope that the first episode suffered prom
>> "pilot-itis" and that maybe they'd improved once they stared shooting
>> the actual series.

> So I supposed it did not improve after the second episode.

I didn't think so. I don't know anyone else who watched more than I did,
so I don't have anyone saying anything like "oh, it gets better" or
anything. the only other people I know who watched it at all stopped at
the first episode, some before finishing it.

--
'Everything will be all right. From History's point of view, that is.
There really isn't any other.'

[real_gri...@yahoo.co.uk]

30 July 2021 at 21:02, Lewis wrote:
Re: The Watch (BBC) (at least in part)

>>> I have no interest in watching the rest of it. I only watched the second
>>> episode in the faint hope that the first episode suffered prom
>>> "pilot-itis" and that maybe they'd improved once they stared shooting
>>> the actual series.

>> So I supposed it did not improve after the second episode.

>I didn't think so. I don't know anyone else who watched more than I did,
>so I don't have anyone saying anything like "oh, it gets better" or
>anything. the only other people I know who watched it at all stopped at
>the first episode, some before finishing it.

I watched all 8, I thought it just had to improve, I was wrong, if I knew
nothing of the discworld would I have liked it more? doubt I would have
bothered at all

[Matthieu Weber]

Le Fri, 30 Jul 2021 21:02:30 -0000 (UTC), Lewis

<g.k...@kreme.dont-email.me> a écrit:
> In message <slrnsg85p1...@minikone.weber.fi.eu.org> Matthieu
> Weber <mwe...@eispammia.free.fr.invalid> wrote:
>> Le Fri, 30 Jul 2021 14:35:47 -0000 (UTC), Lewis
>> <g.k...@kreme.dont-email.me> a écrit:
>>> In message <slrnsg77st...@minikone.weber.fi.eu.org> Matthieu
>>> Weber <mwe...@eispammia.free.fr.invalid> wrote:
>>>> Le Thu, 29 Jul 2021 16:59:12 -0700 (PDT), Henry Nebrensky
>>>> <tort...@gmail.com> a écrit:
>>>>> Has anyone braved this yet, or are we all hanging back, waiting for
>>>>> someone else to go in[*] first?
>>>
>>>> When I saw that the series existed I thougt ‘Great!’, then I read
>>>> something on the Web and thought ‘Probably not worth my time’.
>>>
>>> I watched the first two episodes. There were things I liked about it
>>> (the look, especially). Everything else felt very much like it was not
>>> Discworld, it was not Vimes, it was not Angua, It was not Cheery. Carrot
>>> came off as dim and stupid instead of naive and good.
>
>> But if you try to ignore the forcibly-inserted Discworld theme, does the
>> story make sense ?
>
> Without spoiling, I didn't think so. The actors are fine though.

That's maybe the sad part. Whatever the quality of the film or series,
the actors are almost always good. I wonder how they feel knowing they
took part in something that is no good :(

>> Are the characters likeable
>
> Nope.
>
>> (even if they are not the ones you are supposed to expect)?
>
> If you make a Sherlock Holmes movie where Homes is a being Victor
> Frankenstein is it a Sherlock Holmes movie?

No, but it could still be a good detective story. Even if the main
character is called David Williams instead of Sherlock Holmes, it could
be a good detectve story. But according to what someone else wrote on
this thread, this is not even the case.

>> So I supposed it did not improve after the second episode.
>
> I didn't think so. I don't know anyone else who watched more than I did,
> so I don't have anyone saying anything like "oh, it gets better" or
> anything. the only other people I know who watched it at all stopped at
> the first episode, some before finishing it.

According to Wikipedia, the critics agree with you: ‘… a 'tonal mess'
and stated, "the show's generic worldbuilding, one-dimensional
characterizations and lack of consistent wit will disappoint the kind of
niche audience it’s trying to attract."’ or still ‘the plots are
crushingly rote and uninvolving’.

And there's a funny one from Neil Gaiman, who compared the series to
‘Batman if he's now a news reporter in a yellow trenchcoat with a pet
bat’ :)

[Matthew Hambley]

On 30/07/2021 00:59, Henry Nebrensky wrote:
> Has anyone braved this yet, or are we all hanging back, waiting for
> someone else to go in[*] first?
>
> The PVR reports the whole series is available on iPlayer until next
> year; weird as I've not spotted it on the actual telly! From the
> trailers, it's definitely "inspired by" Discworld rather than "based
> on".

I had a lot of fun with it. It's loosely the plot of "Guards! Guards!"
mashed up with "Night Watch." It's got a great high-magic cyberpunk
aesthetic which I enjoyed.

Captain Vimes is a little more Captain Sparrow than we're used to seeing
him but I thought it worked as a characterisation. Cheery is pushed
forward and centre with much more to do. Nobby and Colon are absent
presumed missing but some things have to give when you're converting a
novel to a screen play.

Overall it's a bit more absurdist than Discworld normally is. I got a
Might Boosh vibe from time to time. I think that's partly since music is
an important aspect to the story. That and Cheery looking a bit like
Noel Fielding.

I wasn't completely sold on their portrayal of the Patrician as they
were a bit too much tyrant and not quite enough ruthlessly pragmatic.
They took Death in a different direction as well which didn't quite land
for me either. He came across as a bit whiny.

Still, plenty to recommend it, just go into it understanding that it's
an adaptation, not a transliteration.

--
(\/)atthew

[Peter]

Matthew Hambley <ne...@aether.me.uk> wrote in news:se9jfe$gp3$1@dont-
email.me:

>
> Captain Vimes is a little more Captain Sparrow than we're used to seeing
> him but I thought it worked as a characterisation. Cheery is pushed
> forward and centre with much more to do. Nobby and Colon are absent
> presumed missing but some things have to give when you're converting a
> novel to a screen play.
>
> Overall it's a bit more absurdist than Discworld normally is. I got a
> Might Boosh vibe from time to time. I think that's partly since music is
> an important aspect to the story. That and Cheery looking a bit like
> Noel Fielding.
>
> I wasn't completely sold on their portrayal of the Patrician as they
> were a bit too much tyrant and not quite enough ruthlessly pragmatic.
> They took Death in a different direction as well which didn't quite land
> for me either. He came across as a bit whiny.
>
> Still, plenty to recommend it, just go into it understanding that it's
> an adaptation, not a transliteration.

This was pretty much my take on it - I enjoyed it despite the differences,
except for the Patrician. I'm not sure Nobby and Colon were completely
missing - I thought the two gnomes with their bizzare conversation stood in
for them.

--
Peter
-----

[Matthew Hambley]

On 03/08/2021 12:16, Peter wrote:
> Matthew Hambley <ne...@aether.me.uk> wrote in news:se9jfe$gp3$1@dont-
> email.me:
>>
>> Captain Vimes is a little more Captain Sparrow than we're used to seeing
>> him but I thought it worked as a characterisation. Cheery is pushed
>> forward and centre with much more to do. Nobby and Colon are absent
>> presumed missing but some things have to give when you're converting a
>> novel to a screen play.

[snip]

> This was pretty much my take on it - I enjoyed it despite the differences,
> except for the Patrician. I'm not sure Nobby and Colon were completely
> missing - I thought the two gnomes with their bizzare conversation stood in
> for them.

Do you mean the creatures working for the antagonist? I think they were
goblins but they do have a little of the Colon and Nobs about them.

--
(\/)atthew

[Peter]

Matthew Hambley <ne...@aether.me.uk> wrote in

news:seh46k$30k$1...@dont-email.me:

Goblins! That's what I meant to say.

--
Peter
-----

[Henry Nebrensky]

On Friday, 30 July 2021 at 12:24:42 UTC+1, Matthieu Weber wrote:
> Le Fri, 30 Jul 2021 08:35:26 +0100, real_gri...@yahoo.co.uk
> <real_gri...@yahoo.co.uk> a écrit:
> > 29 July 2021 at 16:59, Henry Nebrensky wrote:
> > The Watch (BBC) (at least in part)

...

> > If you think of it as Rocky Horror Picture show does DiscWorld you
> > would not be far off

> That does not mean it's bad. If you watch it and ignore the fact that it
> claims to be an adaptation of Dicworld, is it enjoyable ? It's like a
> pizza with pineapple: it's not bad to eat, as long as you don't claim
> it's a proper variety of pizza.

My version of that analogy - which, like the British Rail trains it's
based on, may not travel - is that it's like the "mini-pizzas" they used
to sell in the buffet car on InterCity services: it's tomato, cheese and
oregano all on a flat pastry base; but the only way they had to heat it up
was to use a microwave to steam it in its carton. Assessment on the basis
of how well it matched a stereotypical Italian delicacy was fundamentally
futile. OTOH, if the question was "which hot snack do I want to take back
to my seat?" then the plain Italian-style cheese and tomato tartlets were
definitely the winning option.

Anyway, a late follow-up: I got sufficiently curious and did try to watch
on iPlayer, but hit a major flaw straight in: the modern anti-oldie sound
mix. A muttered conversation between a gruff-voiced Vimes and Death.
Couldn't make out a word.

My usual response would be to jump back and replay at increasing volume
until I work out what's being said, but that doesn't work with the crude
iPlayer controls as I keep jumping 10 mins into the past and anyway not a
viable option for an entire conversation.

Plan B is to turn on the subtitles, which I do actually use quite often.
Intriguingly, the subtitles for The Watch are a subtly abridged version of
what's actually said, and I ended up paying more attention to the
differences than the actual content. So, I gave up on the iPlayer version
and decided to instead let the PVR record the broadcast set which I may or
may not ever bother with before the disk fills up, and binge-watched
"Missions" instead.

In brief, re. TW I liked the setting, and I liked the goblins. I can manage
e.g. the female Vetinari - just chalked her up to the underlying weirdness of
the place. Not a fan of the protagonists - the characters don't quite make
sense. Angua's is the only one that seemed vaguely coherent.

> > CMOT Female and in a wheel chair

Hm. I parsed "Throat" and "snitch" and got a Watergate vibe instead.
Completely missed the Dibbler reference!

Hth

Henry

[Robert Carnegie]

On Tuesday, 24 August 2021 at 12:08:24 UTC+1, Henry Nebrensky wrote:
> On Friday, 30 July 2021 at 12:24:42 UTC+1, Matthieu Weber wrote:
> > Le Fri, 30 Jul 2021 08:35:26 +0100, real_gri...@yahoo.co.uk
> > <real_gri...@yahoo.co.uk> a écrit:

> > > CMOT Female and in a wheel chair
>
> Hm. I parsed "Throat" and "snitch" and got a Watergate vibe instead.
> Completely missed the Dibbler reference!

Certain discreet signs having been exchanged
that a meeting is required, you make your secret
rendezvous with Dibb Throat, who sells you
a sausage inna bun.

[Armcie]

On Saturday, August 28, 2021 at 11:27:55 AM UTC+1, Robert Carnegie wrote:
> > Completely missed the Dibbler reference!
> Certain discreet signs having been exchanged
> that a meeting is required, you make your secret
> rendezvous with Dibb Throat, who sells you
> a sausage inna bun.

Throat did not share Dibbler's personality, motivations, appearance, or plot role. There was no point in the character *being* Dibbler. If it had turned out that the illicit substance she'd been pushing was junk food then that would have been funny, relevant to some of the pushes against high fat/salt food and have been plausible from the Dibbler we know and, if not love, at least know not to buy sausages from.