The Color of Magic

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!!!

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.

Not as bad as some on this site say. I am a huge Terry Pratchett fan, I have read all the Discworld books and few of his other books. While this movie/TV special doesn't really live up to the books, it isn't half bad. I enjoyed revisiting the story with some pretty snazzy special effects- even if some of the subtle humor was lost (or was it just very very subtle?) I have to admit that many of the jokes in the books I probably miss. I know sometimes it takes 10 pages before I realize he's just made a joke, which makes me feel stupid, and then I laugh at myself for being stupid. Sometimes I don't even catch them till the second reading! This movie/TV show (or whatever it is) doesn't really have that feeling.

If you are a fan of Terry, i say you should watch it, if your not.. then go buy one of his books and read that before deciding to watch the movie.

I haven't read any of the DiscWorld books, and I know you are going to say i should. For a TV series, I found it surprisingly enjoyable. It looks beautiful, but I do agree that most of it lacks magic. The special effects, while overblown in places, aren't actually that bad, considering the track records of slapdash effects in TV series. Try the Chronicles of Narnia, very good, and faithful to the books, but the effects tend to let them down. As for the performances, what can i say? Very good indeed! David Jason, Britain's funniest living actor, gives a very funny performance of Rincewind, considering he wanted to do that role for years, though he may have been duller than what Pratchett intended. Sean Astin, of Lord of the Rings fame, is also a nice contrast to Jason's Rincewind. It's true that some of the humour is forced, but the chemistry between the two men compensate. Tim Curry was an inspired choice for Trymon, and he did a superb job, showing off his versatility, bringing back fond memories of his performances in films like Legend, the Three Musketeers and It. He wasn't too frightening, or campy, just in between.Christopher Lee was great as Death, great lines.("that's when they'll be taking my mask off" and "I think I've had another near-Rincewind experience")The script had its downsides but was overall very funny. It is evident that the adaptation is unfaithful to the books, because I felt it could have done a little more with the ending, which was rather disappointing. Overall, an uneven but enjoyable adaptation of Terry Prachett, who actually liked the changes for once. Try telling Stephen King that! 7.5/10 Bethany Cox

Vadim Jean's second adaptation of Terry Pratchett's longrunning Discworld series of comedic fantasy novels cannot compare to the first, though it is not really his fault. The series adapts Pratchtt's first two novels, The Colour of Magic and The Light Fantastic, which together form a loose single narrative. Set on a typical fantasy realm, replete with trolls, dwarfs and demons, they are, effectively, a parody of the hero's quest, in that the hero, an untalented "wizzard" named Rincewind, has no intention either of being heroic or of going on a quest but ends up fighting monsters, riding dragons and trying to save the world anyway. He is assisted by his "sidekick" Twoflower, who seems only dimply aware that he isn't on a packaged holiday. And that, without mentioning specifics, is the entire plot. Along the way, several fantasy (or perhaps D&D) conventions, such as talking swords, scantily-clad, Heavy Metal-style warrior women, and raging loin-clothed barbarians, are duly referenced and lambasted.

After the relative success of Hogfather in 2006, Vadim Jean decided to take the series in a surprising direction: backwards. Correctly in my view, he chose perhaps the archetypal novel in Pratchett's canon to adapt first. Hogfather was Pratchett at his absolute height, mixing adventure with philosophical commentary and existential humour, the most mature expression of such Discworldly themes of imagination vs. reality, the power of myth vs rationality, and the dichotomy of "the falling angel and the rising ape". "The Colour of Magic" and "The Light Fantastic" were written 25 years ago, when Pratchett was still finding his feet as a writer. As such, they lack some of the sophistication one comes to expect from the series. The books' humour, which would eventually become character and situation-driven, here operates on the level of broad parody, lampooning the absurdities of many fantasy and fairy tale conventions. The characterisation, which would become far more complex in later novels, is as broad as a wall, with Twofower the naive Asian tourist and Rincewind the cowardly non-hero. In a move that was either very wise or bewilderingly silly, Jean decided to cast Sean Astin as Twoflower, even though in the books he is East Asian in appearance. Perhaps this was done to lessen the racial stereotype, but if so, that doesn't reflect well on the source material. His decision to cast the elderly David Jason as Rincewind, who in the books is a youngish man with a scraggly attempt at a beard, is less explicable, other than Jean was simply grateful that Jason wanted to do another series with him.

But if the plot is slight, the actors certainly give it their all. Astin plays Twoflower with just the right kind of naivete, while Jason, though miscast, creates a Rincewind that is suitably cynical and craven. For Pratchett fans, a number of pleasing retcons have been incorporated: The Librarian becomes an orangutan much earlier; Death is now his fully-evolved, pleasantly bemused self, and the Patrician is unquestionably Vetinari, here played by Jeremy Irons- a nod to Pratchett saying that a good actor for Vetinari would be "that guy from Die Hard", ie Alan Rickman.

In summary, I think Pratchett fans will find pleasure in it, but others should probably stay away.