# The Watch TV series



## Harpo (Oct 31, 2018)

BBC AMERICA GREENLIGHTS ORIGINAL SCRIPTED SERIES THE WATCH


----------



## Vince W (Oct 31, 2018)

I was about to post this very thing.


----------



## Narkalui (Nov 1, 2018)

Finally


----------



## The Big Peat (Nov 12, 2018)

Huh. Well, no pressure there. 

I see Rhianna is involved, which makes me feel a tad less skeptical.


----------



## Robert Zwilling (Nov 12, 2018)

Any ideas on where it might be possible to see.


----------



## Narkalui (Nov 12, 2018)

BBC 1 I'd guess...


----------



## Vince W (Nov 12, 2018)

I imagine a streaming service of some sort will also be involved.


----------



## Narkalui (Nov 13, 2018)

Netflix probably


----------



## Vince W (Nov 13, 2018)

Good Omens is going to be on Amazon Prime, so I wouldn't count them out.


----------



## REBerg (Jan 8, 2021)

This premiered with double episodes Jan. 3 on BBC America. Streaming rights have apparently been secured by AMC.

Weird show, so, of course, I like it.


----------



## REBerg (Jan 11, 2021)

Somewhere, in a distant secondhand dimension.
The opening screen of episode one says it all.


----------



## Pyan (Jan 11, 2021)

Ratings don't seem to be particularly good - it's running at 4.4/10 on *IMDb*, just 12% audience score at *Rotten Tomatoes**,* and there are some other rather negative reviews out there.

The Watch Review: BBC America's Discworld Series Is All Style, No Substance
The Watch muddles Terry Pratchett’s Discworld with ‘edgy’ humor

The general view seems to be that if it had been pitched as a completely new series, it may have been okay - but Pterry it ain't, and Rhianna was wise to distance herself from it.


----------



## REBerg (Jan 11, 2021)

I guess it just requires a peculiar sense of humor, which I possess in abundance.


----------



## pogopossum (Jan 14, 2021)

It's on BBC America in the US, which I no longer subscribe to. Three episodes so far.

I admit that I have a perverse interest in it. Probably not sufficient to pay a subscription fee. Wait for a library DVD?

Neil Gaiman, a friend and colleague of Pratchett's, but not a shrinking violet re perverse characters, compared the series to "Batman if he's now a news reporter in a yellow trenchcoat with a pet bat"

From a friend of Pratchett's.
"---The Watch is a show "influenced by the stories of Terry Pratchett" with characters with the same names as those in the beloved Watch Series of Discworld the set design is punk heavy graffitied and almost no mention of the wider discworld. The actors work hard under the heavy mascara makeup and some good performances are seen (again given the strangely distorted scripts)

If you can divorce this show from any connection to the books it can be enjoyable on its own terms as something set on a parallel universe on a different world from those of Pratchet's creations I think it can be interesting to watch.

The Pratchett family has distanced themselves from the production saying all input from the family production group had ended with Terry’s death."


----------



## REBerg (Jan 14, 2021)

pogopossum said:


> If you can divorce this show from any connection to the books it can be enjoyable on its own terms as something set on a parallel universe on a different world from those of Pratchet's creations I think it can be interesting to watch.


No marriage, no divorce necessary.
I'm grateful to print for spawning visual versions, but I've never felt a need for comparison. Each medium can stand or fall on its own merits.


----------



## RLBeers (Jan 14, 2021)

The ratings likely reflect the wide divide between this series and the books. It never fails to amaze that the producers of TV series based on a book or books seem to believe they know better than the reading audience that made the author buckets of cash.


----------



## .matthew. (Jan 14, 2021)

REBerg said:


> No marriage, no divorce necessary.
> I'm grateful to print for spawning visual versions, but I've never felt a need for comparison. Each medium can stand or fall on its own merits.


I think the issue with this one in particular is that they now have the IP, meaning we'll never see a good adaptation of one of the best series.

Either that or how they've made a horrible trash show based on a beloved series.

Or maybe how they used the name and IP and did something completely different with it? Like why get it in the first place? They could have written this exact show, changed the names, and nobody would have thought it had anything to do with Pratchett, including copyright lawyers 

But I do agree in part, it has no connection to the books and I won't think less of the books because of it.


----------



## Khuratokh (Jan 24, 2021)

I tried to keep an open mind, but they changed a number of things that made it painful to watch.

4 changes in particular. 

Here Angua the werewolf's backstory is that she was cast out for being a werewolf.
Meanwhile in the books, every single member of her rich and powerful family is one.  

Carrot, while looking more like his book counterpart than anyone else here, is a teensy bit too short and wiry, but they keep in his adoptive Dwarvish parents.
The show having now firmly established Dwarves as a species, they introduce us to Cheery Littlebottom, the transgender Dwarf, who is taller and bulkier than Carrot. Just as Carrot is about to comment on the obvious discrepancy, Cheery says: "Dwarves come in all sizes". See, that doesn't just change things from the books, that doesn't work thematically, as it renders Carrot's struggle within Dwarf society utterly pointless.

And then there's Lady Sybil Ramkin, in the books she's a force of nature, built like a Wagnerian valkyrie. Always looking for the best in people and one of the few on a first-name basis with patrician Vetinari. Dedicated to the welfare of swamp- dragons. 
In the show she's a wafer thin, cynical, vigilante. 
It's at that point I realised that this "edgy" reimagening is less progressive than the 35 year old book it was based on.

Oh, and Death cracks jokes now.


----------



## Alex The G and T (Jan 24, 2021)

REgarding characetization:

Vimes is over the top as some sort of Popeye/Mad Max mashup.  Fun, for this show; but rather too much to be the Pterry character.
Carrot fits
I actually like how Angua looks and acts.
Detritus, I never pictured him quite so mountainous.
The Androgynous Vetenari pisses me off.  I had *him* pegged as a more Julius Caesar sort.The "M" hairdo on Ziggy Stardust-sans-makeup look doesn't work for me on any level.

And, yes DEATH is far too personable and fails to speak in ALL CAPS; more like a hollow reverb.


----------



## .matthew. (Jan 24, 2021)

I agree with everything you said... except...



Khuratokh said:


> Oh, and Death cracks jokes now.



Because of one of my favourite Death moments...


> "I believe in reincarnation," [Bjorn] said.
> I KNOW.
> "I tried to live a good life. Does that help?"
> THAT’S NOT UP TO ME. Death coughed. OF COURSE... SINCE YOU BELIEVE IN REINCARNATION... YOU’LL BE BJORN AGAIN.


----------



## Pyan (Apr 4, 2021)

Here's the viewing figures for the first (and possibly only) season. Downward all the way, apart from that slight recovery for E.6. 


DateEpisodeViewers (mil)% change1/3/202101-010.2741/3/202101-020.2740.00%1/10/202101-030.248-9.49%1/17/202101-040.242-2.42%1/24/202101-050.185-23.55%1/31/202101-060.23325.95%2/7/202101-070.143-38.63%2/14/202101-080.130-9.09%Season average0.216
_Source: Neilson_


----------



## .matthew. (Apr 5, 2021)

Wow, less than half of the initial viewers tuned in for the finale... of an 8 episode season as well...


----------



## BAYLOR (Apr 5, 2021)

.matthew. said:


> I agree with everything you said... except...
> 
> 
> 
> Because of one of my favourite Death moments...



That is really bad play on words and,  funny as hell .


----------



## .matthew. (Apr 5, 2021)

BAYLOR said:


> That is really bad play on words and,  funny as hell .


Yes, I hate puns, and I curse Pratchett's name whenever he makes me laugh at one. He strikes just the right balance between horribly cheesy and genuinely intelligent too funny not to laugh...


----------



## paranoid marvin (Apr 5, 2021)

pyan said:


> Here's the viewing figures for the first (and possibly only) season. Downward all the way, apart from that slight recovery for E.6.
> 
> 
> DateEpisodeViewers (mil)% change1/3/202101-010.2741/3/202101-020.2740.00%1/10/202101-030.248-9.49%1/17/202101-040.242-2.42%1/24/202101-050.185-23.55%1/31/202101-060.23325.95%2/7/202101-070.143-38.63%2/14/202101-080.130-9.09%Season average0.216
> _Source: Neilson_



Is this the number of viewers in America? If so, isn't that really, really bad? I'm surprised they didn't pull the programme before the season even completed.

It's a shame, because the Sky adaptations of The Hogfather, The Colour of Magic and (to a lesser extent) Going Postal were all rather good, and even the 2 animated films were well done. (at least until people realised what had been done to Terry's characters)

I suspect that the series would do rather better on this side of the pond.


----------



## .matthew. (Apr 5, 2021)

paranoid marvin said:


> I suspect that the series would do rather better on this side of the pond.


I suspect that *a* series would do rather better on this side of the pond... just not in its current form.


----------



## paranoid marvin (Apr 5, 2021)

.matthew. said:


> I suspect that *a* series would do rather better on this side of the pond... just not in its current form.




My post got a little muddled, the 

(at least until people realised what had been done to Terry's characters)

should have come at the end. But I do think that his show if presented on the Beeb in the UK would get far more than 250,000 viewers, if only for the first episode to see if it was as bad as they say. Tbh I would have thought that would have been true in the US also. Also the other Pratchett shows that have been shown in the UK all seem to have done very well.

It does make you wonder just what possessed them to make the show in this way; would feedback from the public not have made them have a serious rethink? I only hope that it doesn't put anyone else off doing a tv (or even movie) Discworld story, as Terry's work doesn't deserve such an ignominious end.


----------



## Pyan (Apr 5, 2021)

It seems to be a case of "It's my artistic vision, _daahling_ - let's change the size, gender and species of the characters, not to mention the _story,_ because of _course_ I know better what the viewers want than the silly old author who's _only_ sold 70 million books..."


----------



## Glaysher (Apr 6, 2021)

pyan said:


> It seems to be a case of "It's my artistic vision, _daahling_ - let's change the size, gender and species of the characters, not to mention the _story,_ because of _course_ I know better what the viewers want than the silly old author who's _only_ sold 70 million books..."


I'm less upset in general about changes to the story than changes to the characters.  Changes to the story can be for a better fit for the medium and to allow those familiar with the books to be surprised.  Changes to the characters (at least the main characters) makes me wonder if they wanted to adapt the source material at all.


----------



## .matthew. (Apr 6, 2021)

On the adaptation of Mort.



> The Mort Film:
> 
> A production company was put together and there was US and Scandinavian and
> European involvement, and I wrote a couple of script drafts which wet down
> ...


----------



## paranoid marvin (Apr 6, 2021)

Glaysher said:


> I'm less upset in general about changes to the story than changes to the characters.  Changes to the story can be for a better fit for the medium and to allow those familiar with the books to be surprised.  Changes to the characters (at least the main characters) makes me wonder if they wanted to adapt the source material at all.




This happened quite a lot with video games back in the day. Get a rubbish game, stick a film/tv/brand licence on it, and then try to sell it on the back of it. It usually worked back then, one of the most infamous being World Cup Carnival.


----------



## hitmouse (Jul 4, 2021)

This has just appeared on iPlayer. Not sure if it will play in BBC terrestrial.

I have watched the first 3 episodes. There is always going to be a bit of an objectivity problem having read the books, but I am not overly dogmatic about the stylistic changes per se, and reimagining this as an 80s crusty/new romantic vibe is curious but not necessarily fatal in itself.

Overall I find the series muddled and misguided. The recharacterisation of the main players does not work very well. In the novels the plot is carried along by Vimes cynical approach to the realities of life and his burning anger for fairness. Here he is just a hollowed out gurning sot. Carcer is no longer a frightening psychopath. Similarly the others, and the humour of the dynamic is subsequently lost.

I imagine that someone who has not read the books will find the story incoherent and confusing. Pratchett fans will understand the story and find it all very disappointing.


----------



## Danny McG (Jul 4, 2021)

hitmouse said:


> This has just appeared on iPlayer


Indeed it has, I went to check as soon as I saw your comment.
I might try it in a week or two, but it doesn't sound too promising, going by a lot of the comments in this thread.


----------



## Mon0Zer0 (Jul 5, 2021)

I've watched the first episode so far and I'm not hating it, which was unexpected. I don't like it but I don't hate it either. 

The worst crime is its lack of wit or charm, so it's not even remotely discworld or Terry Pratchett and suffers from "Modern Doctor Who writer's syndrome" or just "BBC writer's syndrome". It's like it's written by someone who doesn't like Pratchett and doesn't understand what Pratchett was riffing off and just wanted to write a 70's cop show.

As it's own thing it can't decide if it's cyberpunk or fantasy, and I don't really care about any of the characters or the plot. 

I quite like the actor playing Vimes, I just don't like him playing Vimes. The rest are stock BBC ex-Brit school actors who haven't learned to emote yet.


----------



## hitmouse (Jul 5, 2021)

Mon0Zer0 said:


> I've watched the first episode so far and I'm not hating it, which was unexpected. I don't like it but I don't hate it either.
> 
> The worst crime is its lack of wit or charm, so it's not even remotely discworld or Terry Pratchett and suffers from "Modern Doctor Who writer's syndrome" or just "BBC writer's syndrome". It's like it's written by someone who doesn't like Pratchett and doesn't understand what Pratchett was riffing off and just wanted to write a 70's cop show.
> 
> ...


Is this a BBC production?

I don't hate it either, just rather disappointed. I don't have a problem with "interpretation" but, as you say, I don't think the people who made this really understand the source material. They have totally rewritten a stonkingly good story (probably with the best intentions) to reflect a different set of messages, and it all ends up a bit of mess and really odd.

ps. I quite like the modern Doctor Who. More to the point, so do my kids.


----------



## Mon0Zer0 (Jul 5, 2021)

hitmouse said:


> Is this a BBC production?


BBC America, I think. Simon Allen is the writer and he was on New Tricks and The Interceptor.



> ps. I quite like the modern Doctor Who. More to the point, so do my kids.



Yeah, I'm just being a grumpy old fart, lol. It was ok up to Ecclestone and Tennant had a few good shows, but I think the writing has suffered since the departure of Russel T Davies. The last two doctors have had terrible scripts to work from.


----------



## paranoid marvin (Jul 5, 2021)

W


hitmouse said:


> This has just appeared on iPlayer. Not sure if it will play in BBC terrestrial.
> 
> I have watched the first 3 episodes. There is always going to be a bit of an objectivity problem having read the books, but I am not overly dogmatic about the stylistic changes per se, and reimagining this as an 80s crusty/new romantic vibe is curious but not necessarily fatal in itself.
> 
> ...



I think this just about sums it up. I watched about the first 10 minutes of the first episode then flicked through to the end. Most of the characters are fine, but the one - the most important one in Vimes, is totally messed up. This is perhaps closer to how Vimes was when he first appeared in Guards! Guards! , but not by the time of Night Watch (when I assume this story is set).

I have no issue with the actor playing Vimes, but the way he plays him makes every scene I have watched him in an embarrassing one.

The other tweaks to actors I'm fine with. Carrot could do with beefing up a bit , Death doesn't look quite right and Ankh Morpork seems to resemble Blade runner's LA. I'm fine with all of this, but giving Vimes the persona of Nobby Nobbs is baffling to say the least.


The thing is, between the first Watch novel and Night Watch, there were a number of stories that grew the team together, and matured them into much more rounded characters. It would have been very interesting for the show to go in that direction; show what the Watch was , and what it was to become. In fact Guard. 

And as mentioned above, I'm really not sure where a newcomer to DW would even begin to get to grips with what on earth was going on.

One final thing - and perhaps the worst thing - is that the jokes aren't funny. Not that TP was always funny , but they aren't the kind of jokes Pratchett would have told, and they just aren't very funny.


----------



## Mon0Zer0 (Jul 5, 2021)

paranoid marvin said:


> I think this just about sums it up. I watched about the first 10 minutes of the first episode then flicked through to the end. Most of the characters are fine, but the one - the most important one in Vimes, is totally messed up. This is perhaps closer to how Vimes was when he first appeared in Guards! Guards! , but not by the time of Night Watch (when I assume this story is set).



It's Guards! Guards!


----------



## HareBrain (Jul 5, 2021)

Mon0Zer0 said:


> The last two doctors have had terrible scripts to work from.


If you have five hours YES FIVE HOURS to spare, I found this an entertaining and interesting breakdown of what is wrong with the writing on the last two series. It's especially good on character. I haven't seen The Watch, but I wouldn't mind betting some of the issues are the same.


----------



## paranoid marvin (Jul 5, 2021)

Mon0Zer0 said:


> It's Guards! Guards!




Yes, from the admittedly little I've seen of it, there do appear to be a number of elements from Guards! Guards! , with the introduction of Lady Sybil and a dragon. But on the other hand, he already has a fully-formed team (eg Angua is already there) and Carcer Dunn is the villain of Night Watch.

I would have liked to have seen the development of the characters and the gathering of the team through a number of adventures before culminating in Night Watch, but it is what it is. Guards! Guards! is a much lighter and funnier storyline than Night Watch , so definitely makes for a better tv show. 

It's just a pity that we never got a chance to see it by the gang who did Hogfather, Going Postal and Colour of Magic for Sky. Whilst not perfect, the Discworld was captured very well. But then again, Sir Terry was around to make sure that everything was done the way he wanted it. Whilst the watching eye of the author is always a good thing, it certainly was of benefit with those shows.


----------



## CupofJoe (Jul 6, 2021)

I've seen the first four episodes. Once I got into my head that only the names and vague characters are taken from STP, then I began to enjoy them. They are not great, but they are entertaining. I thought the look of the Librarian was disappointing but acceptable. There doesn't seem to be the budget for lots of CGI.
I'm still looking forward to a more faithful rendition of any of the Discworld stories [apart from the short film Troll Bridge - which I liked] but that time may have come and gone.


----------



## nixie (Aug 4, 2021)

OK, I decided to give this a whirl. There should be a disclaimer at the beginning of each episode.

ANY RESEMBLENCE TO TERRY PRATCHETT'S DISC WORLD IS COINCIDENTAL AND SHOULD BE IGNORED.

I didn't hate it, I disassociated from the books and viewed it as a show in its own right, chased away boredom for a while.


----------



## althea (Aug 6, 2021)

I had a thorough review from my daughter in law and I definitely won't be watching it.


----------



## Biskit (Aug 20, 2021)

This is now currently showing on BBC2. We tried watching the first episode today.
Forget that it bears no resemblance to actual Pratchett or Discworld...
Actually, just forget it. We got about five minutes in and gave up. 

It's like cheap chocolate. It doesn't taste like chocolate, doesn't even taste very nice, and if you're going to have the calories, spend the extra on getting the decent stuff.


----------



## M. Robert Gibson (Aug 20, 2021)

I haven't got around to watching it yet.  From what I've read on here and elsewhere, it's best to forget it claims to have anything to do with PTerry, and just watch it as a bit of fantasy.
Mind you, I've heard even then it's not worth it, but I'll try anything once, except incest and folk-dancing*

* to paraphrase Thomas Beecham


----------



## hitmouse (Aug 20, 2021)

Yeah, its just a mess. Really disappointing regardless of the Pratchett connection.


----------



## TheEndIsNigh (Aug 20, 2021)

I found it refreshingly good.

Never been a fan of P's endings. I always got the feeling he gave up after 3/4 of the book and rushed to the end.

If you disregard any connection to the other stuff and accept it for what it is, then I think it works.

Better than the D.J. attempts IMO


----------



## The Big Peat (Aug 20, 2021)

I tried watching the first one and gave up after ten minutes as bad television.

Then I tried watching the second one which I heard was better, and it was better television but it was still incredibly jarring to someone who hadn't divorced it from Pratchett.


----------



## TheEndIsNigh (Aug 21, 2021)

@The Big Peat

Forget the P versions.

If this had just been made as a fantasy series you'd be lapping it up. It's like those "Spin offs" of LOR of which there have been many. Everyone compares it to LOR, but LOR wasn't the first "fantasy adventure land"

Take out Death (not a P original concept) and references to certain "goings on" and you're left with a fresh new fantasy series. If anyone can accept the defiling of Doctor True* of late, surely they can supress any similarities to one fantasy story has to another.









						Before The Fellowship: 4 Fantasy Books Written BEFORE Lord Of The Rings - AmReading
					

By this time, most fans of epic fantasy novels have read J.R.R Tolkien’s classic Lord of The Rings trilogy. Published in the mid-20th century, The Lord of The Rings has become one of the most popular and influential fantasy trilogies of all time. Who can forget the fantastic journey of Frodo...



					www.amreading.com
				




I bet when old T first published his door stopper, people were comparing it to what had gone before in a similar way to what happens with his books now.

I actually read "The Worm Ouroboros" in my youth and found it acceptable. I hadn't realised it was pre LOR at the time because I waded** through LOR years earlier. I did wonder why it didn't have the usual "best thing since LOR" tag that so often gets thrown into book reviews since the 60's but I was a student when I read it and such complicated double thoughts were of little import compared to the student bars and their "attractions".


I actually think "The Watch" it's better, certainly than any of the "endorsed" versions.

* By defiling I'm referencing the story content, not the cast members- perfectly happy there.
** I say waded through, but obviously anyone who actually reads *every* word therein needs to get out more IMO, or find a hobby-t. I'd say there's about 90% of the books that still remain a mystery to me. Such as who begat Gerimina, third son of King Dwaftferly. Let the Dwaftferly's rest in peace I say.


----------



## Elckerlyc (Aug 21, 2021)

The Watch is "Inspired by characters created by Sir Terry Pratchett." And that is the problem.
It aren't just the characters who are (a tad more than just) 'inspired by', it is also the plot, which is more 'based on' than it is 'inspired by.'
That makes it almost impossible to watch The Watch totally disconnected from our beloved Discworld. It is jarring. It doesn't has the feel as a homage, more like abuse.

Taken on its own it could have been a fantastical fantastic new series. But for people who know and appreciate Discworld it is jarring. And for people who are unfamiliar with the setting and characters it's just weirdness all around, because without the foreknowledge of Discworld many elements remain just that, weird.


----------



## The Big Peat (Aug 21, 2021)

TheEndIsNigh said:


> @The Big Peat
> 
> Forget the P versions.
> 
> If this had just been made as a fantasy series you'd be lapping it up. It's like those "Spin offs" of LOR of which there have been many. Everyone compares it to LOR, but LOR wasn't the first "fantasy adventure land"



You know, I think when I say something is just bad TV, I know my tastes better than you. So no, I wouldn't have been lapping it up. Without the Pratchett connection I wouldn't have watched beyond ten minutes if I'd ever watched at all.


----------



## paranoid marvin (Aug 21, 2021)

Elckerlyc said:


> The Watch is "Inspired by characters created by Sir Terry Pratchett." And that is the problem.
> It aren't just the characters who are (a tad more than just) 'inspired by', it is also the plot, which is more 'based on' than it is 'inspired by.'
> That makes it almost impossible to watch The Watch totally disconnected from our beloved Discworld. It is jarring. It doesn't has the feel as a homage, more like abuse.
> 
> Taken on its own it could have been a fantastical fantastic new series. But for people who know and appreciate Discworld it is jarring. And for people who are unfamiliar with the setting and characters it's just weirdness all around, because without the foreknowledge of Discworld many elements remain just that, weird.




Yes it feels like a tv series that was originally based on Pratchett's Discworld; but when the final article was shown to the relevant parties, the makers were forced to change it to 'inspired by' so that those in control of Pratchett's IP could disassociate themselves as much as possible from it.

It's the same characters in the same roles in an amalgamation of a couple of TP's books (Guards! Guards! and Night Watch). That (imho) isn't a description of 'inspired by'.  For me the reason that the story doesn't make much sense is that you are combining two completely different books, and characters at very different stages of their development.

Also whilst TP could be quite hit and miss at times, none of his style of humour is present in this tv show. And (for me) it just wasn't funny at all.

As I've mentioned previously, I just wish they'd stuck with the Guards! Guards! storyline (which is a perfectly good story and doesn't need embroidering), and developed the characters. With incorporating Night Watch into the story, it really leaves the series nowhere to go in terms of character or team development.


----------



## paranoid marvin (Aug 21, 2021)

Imagine a tv show 'inspired' by Tolkien's Middle-earth, where a drunken old wizard called Gandalf (who has a powerful ring) takes a bunch of teenagers on a quest to kill a dragon. Along the way Sauron turns up and tries to take his ring back. That's what this tv show feels like to me.

Also I do wonder if anyone unfamiliar with Discworld would have a clue what was going on?


----------



## Biskit (Aug 21, 2021)

The Big Peat said:


> You know, I think when I say something is just bad TV, I know my tastes better than you. So no, I wouldn't have been lapping it up. Without the Pratchett connection I wouldn't have watched beyond ten minutes if I'd ever watched at all.


This was our problem with it. Whoever put the script together was doing it by the numbers, adding one stereotype after another but unlike Pratchett, had no idea how to use stereotypes well.

I also noticed that there was humour, which is a bad thing. I'm suppose to laugh, or at least chuckle, not think "oh look, it's a joke."

When we gave up it wasn't because it was such an awful adaptation of Pratchett but because it was just tedious.


----------



## .matthew. (Aug 21, 2021)

paranoid marvin said:


> As I've mentioned previously, I just wish they'd stuck with the Guards! Guards! storyline (which is a perfectly good story and doesn't need embroidering), and developed the characters. With incorporating Night Watch into the story, it really leaves the series nowhere to go in terms of character or team development.


Yes, they should have done it book by book and introduced characters over the seasons rather than including them all in a mashup right off the bat.


----------



## HareBrain (Aug 21, 2021)

I'm not a Pratchett fan, so I like to think I gave it a fair go, free of expectation or prejudice. And I was really keen to find a series to fill a few hours. But though it showed snatches of promise in the first fifteen minutes, it just wasn't good enough.


----------

