So much of the humor is conveyed through narration and side comments, and also most adaptations haven’t stayed true enough to the source material.
I think it’s mostly difficult because it’s different. it CAN be adapted but it would take a lot more creativity than other works.
A lot of Pratchett’s appeal is not as much in his plot or other things that can be taken away from the prose, but in the way he writes his prose. It’s the actual narration of it, which does not translate to screen well.
They’re very exposition-heavy, and arguably the exposition is the funniest bits
Definately, the few Discworld novels that have been turned into movie & miniseries have mostly included a disembodied narrator for the exposition & footnotes.
I remember when this was posted in August, when this article was actually published.
There’s a passage from Small Gods that has lived rent free in my head for over 20 years, about how the first human Om found and his first prophet was very nearly a goatherd but by a chance of minor geography was a shepherd instead:
They have quite different ways of looking at the world, and the whole of history might have been different. For sheep are stupid, and have to be driven. But goats are intelligent, and need to be led.
…and for me, it’s like, short of just some flat voice over, how do you put that on screen? The concept, the idea, the delicious rhythm of the prose-and-near-poetry of it?
Yes exactly.
Here’s another quote from Small Gods and it’s one that lives rent free in my head about life in an authoritarian state:
Fear is a strange soil. It grows obedience like corn, which grow in straight lines to make weeding easier. But sometimes it grows the potatoes of defiance, which flourish underground.
Now, someone adapting this scene might do a sweeping footage over a corn field that zooms in on a faceless farmer trying to pull out a stubborn weed while a voiceover says the line. It’s possible that it might work, but there’s a good chance it won’t work as well as it does in my head when I read it. But I’m thinking it’s more likely that scenes like these are gonna be cut, and that’s an abomination unto Nuggan
Lol you just have a narrator
Have you all never seen any movies with a narrator?
I don’t understand
It’s generally considered that it’s bad filmmaking to use a narrator. People want to be shown things in a movie, not told them.
I really dislike that line. It is very popular and appears insightful, but Pratchett is completely wrong about sheep. He is taking his views on sheep from the UK (which is where he lives) where sheep are left on their own for most of the time as their is plentiful grazing and are occasionally rounded up and driven by the farmer. Middle-eastern shepherding where there is much less available grass the sheep are led by the shepherd from place to place. This is the kind that is referenced in the Bible. There has been enough research on sheep psychology to prove that they aren’t as stupid as people like to think, they are capable of pattern recognition and problem solving. Two flocks can meet and mingle, and then be separated just by them recognising which shepherd is theirs.
Akshully…!
Though not perfect, I did enjoy the Going Postal miniseries.
I really enjoyed the Hogfather adaptation Michele Dockery (known for Denton Abby) did a fantastic job as Susan. She plays unflappable really well
I thought it was great as well, I always find myself watching it around Christmas time. Plus Pratchett had a cameo in it! Always great to see.
Some books would adapt a lot better than others. The one that I’d really want to see, and which is very relevant, would be Small Gods which would make a very good mini-series.
Pretty simple to me, he’s an author full of paradoxes
Visually, the universe is incredibly goofy in appearance (and expensive to CGI) while feeling very alive and real
This is illuminated by prose that breaks the fourth wall when it is not deeply grounded and meaningful.
Personally the D&D movie got kinda close, even closer with better production.
And what you see is not what you get! Movies and tvshows rarely take the time to show you all the tropes, and then go “but actually, it’s a lot more complicated than that!”.
Like, in the making money adaptation, we never see reacher gilt being a deliberate construction of ‘evil business man’ by the man himself. It gets played pretty straight. Or, same movie, we see otto, looking like a spirit halloween vampire. Kinda weird, but okay. But we dont see the bit from Thud!, where vimes realises that that too is a very purposeful playing into harmless stereotypes.
Things like that means taking time, in a genre story, to built up expecations and then change things, while still being sincere. There’s no ironic fourth wall break, “well that just happened”, i cant believe we have to fight an evil wizard on top of a tower, thats such a clichee", the subversion is that the evil wizard is a kid with a shitty dad.
They are INCREDIBLY dependent on the narrator.
Narrators don’t do so well onscreen, especially not ever present ones.
And comedy in general struggles to jump mediums. Satire too.
Because the storytelling charm is so founded in the use of language by a witty and wise narrator. It’s not just about dialogue and description, it’s about extradiegetuc commentary - and short of having a constant voiceover, films can’t capture that in the same way.
Unpopular opinion answer: they have wonkey pacing and significant amounts of filler scenes.
I think I might be the only person who has enjoyed all of the Pratchett adaptations.
I really enjoyed the Sky adaptations too and wish there were more. I haven’t seen the amazing Maurice yet so haven’t got an opinion.
In my option I think what makes Pratchett hard to adapt in the current climate is that it needs to be made by British people (actors, writers, etc) or have a high proportion of input by Brits. I really think there’s something truly unfortunate happening with tv adaptations of books at the moment where they are made by a US studio for a generalised (aka US) audience and in doing so they lose what makes them so good and unique. They also seem to be simplifying a lot of tv programmes to the extent that they become generic mush. I think that this is a problem because big US based companies rather than smaller more independent studios (whether based in the US or anywhere else) are making tv that loses its character and nuance for the sake of generic money making. You see this a lot with things like, recently, The Witcher but also a lot of Japanese live action remakes.
Na I loved those. Still have them somewhere. And it’s Christmas soon so time to watch the hogfather (which is the best one).
It’s still not as good as the book though but I did like to see the characters come to life
Personally I think it’s a bit of third wall breaking by him narrating the story and speaking to you while he tells the story. Part of what makes discworld so funny is the fact that the narrator seems to be in on the joke of it all. And the footnotes. They’re have been some incredible attempts to bring it to the screen but you can’t see inside the person’s head while watching them play the character and a lot of what makes these stories funny are the characters thoughts.
A lot of his humour works best when you read it to yourself in your head, the way you personally find it funniest. Hearing it delivered by someone else often makes it fall flat.