The Color of Magic

I loved the movie. I saw that people gave comments like "it didn't live up to the accuracy and quality of Hogfather", but what would you expect? Nothing is perfect, and I can't say as a big Discworld fan that I didn't have a lot of fun watching this movie.

I loved all the characters in it, even if they didn't look anything like I had them in my mind.. It is just so great to actually see a movie like this that I am more than willing to forgive little mistakes and changes and enjoy it for what it is.

Great scenery, really amazing, especially for a TV movie. Most of the CGI was very good (except the dragon). Loved the costumes and sets and also the acting was outstanding. All in all, I could not have hoped for anything better and am looking forward to the next adaption, the (currently) latest novel Going Postal. Could've used some CMOT though.. Still a 10 out of 10.

One thing I don't understand. Pratchett wrote quite a lot of Discworld novels, and some of them are simply begging to be put on the big screen. Most of the "Watch" novels for example. "Small Gods" as another. However, when Pratchett actually gets on the big (ok, small) screen, they seem to make the worst choices possible. First it was the "Hogfather", which is probably one of the most esoteric and confusing Discworld novels out there. Now they take the very first Discworld novels which - while perhaps being the funniest in the series - do not really present what Pratchett's work is all about. These early two novels are basically Terry taking a jab at (but also making homage) to a fantasy genre in general. Well, perhaps the entire Discworld series is like that, but in "Color of Magic" and "The light fantastic" this parody takes the front seat while a coherent story and characters sit in the back. And this works well in written form, but as a cinematic narrative it simply fails; clever jokes get cut, simplified and/or drowned in the overall chaos, the plot has to move quickly so it is nearly impossible to absorb everything that happens (let alone enjoy it) and overall it represents a rather frustrating experience, both for the Pratchett fans as well as the general audience.

The first thing that bothered me is the casting. Sean Austin is a fine Twoflower, even though I think it perhaps should have been cast by a more exotic-looking actor. David Jason, sadly, is a complete miss as Rincewind. This particularly bothers me since David is probably my favorite British actor; however he is just too likable to pull of a Rincewind. Someone like Rowan Atkinson channeling his Black Adder persona (but with less malice and much more cowardice) would be perfect. The thing is, you need to take pleasure in Rincewind constantly being put from one peril to the next; David's Rincewind is like a kooky old grandpa that you feel bad for when he gets thrown from a cliff, threatened or trampled on. And whenever he does something Rincewind-y (like taking off with Twoflower's gold), it actually feels out of character.

The rest of the cast is hit-or-miss. Death is horribly puppet-like - I endured him in Hogfather but here the rubber skull should really have been lees pronounced. Vetinari is on par (even though in those early Discworld novels he most probably wasn't the "Patrician", but that's fan service for you). Tim Curry overplays Trymon to the extreme, but I guess this is due to the bad direction - many characters seem to be overacting their bits probably to infuse a sense of lightness and silliness. Just check out the faces leader of the Krull makes while doing his speech; inexcusable.

However the biggest culprit is the plot. It is just too hectic, too chaotic and doesn't let the characters to develop or even establish themselves. This perhaps has a lot to with with (un)necessary exposition given by both the narrator and the characters - the plot hardly gets a chance to move along before the next bit of exposition has to get its turn.

It's not all bad however. There are some superb actors involved in this, the sets and effect look fantastic (especially for a TV movie). And even though I said Jason makes a bad Rincewind, it still is a joy to watch this fine actor doing his schtick. And it IS Pratchett, after all.

So I guess that bottom line I can give this a passing grade, but it's still a deeply disappointing venture. I hope they do "Guards! Guards!" next, and I hope they do it good.

Only 8 out of 10 because I would - of course - have loved to have everything in it ( I would also have liked a big "Lord of the Rings" budget and effort on this).

They have made a creditable effort to cram the most important bits in. I've watched it with someone who doesn't know the books and had, in fact, never heard of Terry Pratchett. It took him a while to get into the fun of things but he didn't need clarification on anything, so the story line cant' have been too hacked.

As TV productions go, "Colour of Magic" (and "Hogfather") are like watching filmed theatre; it is a stage setting rather than film scenery and the acting certainly is superb. The incidental moments with Death and Rincewind are great as is the scene with the Patrician ordering Rincewind to look after Twoflower. The magic sword, on the other hand, sounded like 'Eddie, the shipboard computer' from Douglas Adams' "Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy". And they have to improve the dragons before they start on 'Guards Guards'.

I loved it - every minute of it. And Terry Pratchett had a hand in it so it must reflect at least some of his ideas - he always impressed me as being quite a strong character.

I hope they'll make all of them!!!

Technically, this movie is very good. The effects are well done, with very high quality computer graphics for a "Made for TV" movie, that won't stand behind theatrical release movies. The outdoor scenes were all well produced, placing the actors in a "real" discworld. The customs and environment are in a child-movie style, because of the story's background (it came from a series of books made for children). But that doesn't mean low quality. It just adds to the comical overall feeling of the film. The actors followed this same comical/child-oriented line when playing their roles.

About the story, it never gets boring, and a lot of things happen to the main characters. They practically cross the world in a single adventure, including a journey in "outer space". Multiple parallel plots also take place. In the end, this 3-hour movie entertains you the whole time. The main motivation is very original: following the steps of the first tourist. And the world description is ironically fun.

This story has 2 main perspectives. From the Twoflower point of view, it's a story about having an open mind. One may have much fun and learn a lot when he keeps his mind open to new experiences. From the Rincewood point of view, it shows that one must have persistence; and also that, even in the face of failure, your value doesn't diminish. You're not defined by your failures and/or successes as perceived by the others.

In the end this is a family movie, worth watching by itself, and even more with your children (if you happen to have any).

Despite all the "bad" reviews posted here, I guess it all depends on your personal taste. I, for one, loved this movie! But like the tag line says: "It's a pigment of your(!) imagination"

No movie will ever be as good as it's book (or books in this case). However, they did a very good job trying to capture the essence of the books and put it all in this movie.

The movie won't please everyone as you can see from other reviews posted here, but like Sir Pratchett said: "If I've would have written these stories to be a movie, I would have written them very differently".

All in all a good movie which will certainly please most people, regardless if they are familiar with Terry Pratchett or not.