It looked great, is based on fantastic source material which has some weird and wonderful ideas, and boasted an enviable cast who put in really great, interesting performances. So how come Terry Pratchett's Hogfather (Sky One, Sun 8pm) still managed to be really bad?
Well, before we get into the doom and gloom (and to be honest, there's not a lot of it, it's just that the thing that was bad spoilt the whole programme) let's have a bit of the story, because as I say, it's as strange and funny as fans of Terry Pratchett's books would expect.
In Discworld (the setting for Pratchett's most famous stories, which floats through space on the back of elephants on a giant turtle, of course) it is the night before Hogswatch. This is a holiday festival which looks, sounds smells and tastes just like our Christmas, and as such there is a Santa Claus character who goes by the name of the Hogfather. He doesn't say 'fuggedaboudit' in a New York accent, which would have been rather fun, but his sleigh is pulled by angry pigs, which I hear is the Mafia transport of choice. No wait that's just silly. Anyway, all is not well in Discworld, as someone wants the Hogfather dead, and assassin Mr Teatime (pronounced 'Tee-ah-tah-may' naturally) is just the man for the job. Death, a perfectly genial fella, realises he needs to save Hogswatch, and so dons the big red suit, grabs the reins, and heads off into the night sky...
All of which is quite fantastical and exciting. And there's more good stuff in terms of how the film looks: it's got a definite 'Series of Unfortunate Events' feel about it - all weird camera angles and moody lighting to match the dark humour. And we've even more good points too when it comes to the acting (I'm building this well, aren't I?) Mr. Teatime is played by Marc Warren, who can play anything - the cute geek in Doctor Who's brilliant 'Love and Monsters', cheeky chappie Danny in Hustle, and of course those eyes mean he's a brilliant villain (I'm looking forward to his Dracula, BBC1 28 December 2006, 9pm), which is useful here. Warren's Teatime is strange in the extreme - like a West Coast Uriah Heep. Honestly, think of Johnny Depp's Willy Wonka, but make him ten times weirder than he already is, and you're nearly there. Yup, Warren certainly stole the show, but he was ably supported by David Jason, Michelle Dockery and Nigel Planer.
Ok, I've put it off long enough. What was so bad as to outweigh all these positives? Well it can be summed up annoyingly simply: it was mind-numbingly boring. I don't just mean a bit slow, I mean shockingly dull. It was utterly devoid of life, pretty much the same as I was after about an hour. I don't even know how they managed it, when you think about it, to have all these good elements and then destroy them so completely, but they did. Such a shame.
If you're a glutton for punishment, part two is on Sky One tonight at 8pm. [annawaits]
I gave up watching the first part about 40 minutes in for reasons you mentioned, that is was just quite slow and dull, but ended up watching the second part and was sucked in, the second part was much better, it probably would have been better if it was one show, but you've got to appease the fanboys I suppose.
Maybe I should have given the second part a go, but I just couldn't face it! I agree that making it one show would probably have helped.
Oh! I loved it! But I thought Warren was crap - just ripping off Johnny Depp. I like him best in State of Play spitting blood.
Maybe I enjoyed it because I was crocheting throughout so that kept me occupied...
Glad to see that people still do a bit of crocheting... although... that has very little to do with this TV programme... but I didn't watch it...
Move along please, nothing to read here...
Mof
The first half was a little slow, the amount of exposition made that inevitable but DULL?
With all that humour? Nobby on the Hogfather's knee,
Susan killing the monster in the cellar.
It was not dull. If you saw the second half all would have been explained and it was wonderful.
I have recorded it to watch again as I am away at Hogswatch, I mean Christmas and I shall be buying the DVD so I can watch it again without the adverts!
OH DEAR. IT'S A SHAME YOU HAVEN'T SEEN PART TWO. ALL THE SET UPS IN PART ONE PAY OFF. EXPLAINING DISCWORLD TO NON-FANS (AND MY BOOK IS 20TH IN THE SERIES) INEVITABLY CAUSED PROBLEMS. THIS IS WHERE DICKENS GETS ALL THE BREAKS - HE CAN ASSUME WE UNDERSTAND VICTORIAN ENGLAND. BUT GIVEN THE IMPOSSIBLE TASK. I THINK VADIM DID RATHER WELL AND I SHALL BE LEAVING HIM AN EXTRA SUGAR PIG THIS HOGSWATCH.
THERE WAS SOMETHING ELSE - AH, YES,
HO! HO! HO!
The cast was terrific, but it was really 90 minutes' worth of story stretched out to fill three hours (without adverts), probably because Sky One wanted a two-night event instead of just one.
Sad that as a reviewer you could not be bothered to see the whole thing before making your point.
BUT DULL and LIFELESS it was not.
It will always be hard for anyone to transfer a book to the screen (small or big) even with the mega bucks available to Hollywood. And for the cost of this. I think a brilliant job was made. Yes some parts of the book are missing, OK the first part WAS a little slow. BUT considering that Terry's work relys on the narrative not action, the first part set the scene very well. I would still give this 10/10 and would happily tell many people to watch it.
Just have to be patient and wait for the DVD now.
And when it comes out, I promise to get it, and watch the second part. As I say, there were lots of positives, and if the second part was of a quicker pace then that's pretty much my only problem sorted!
Thanks for all the comments!
I thought it was really good throughout and will even forgive DEATH being given the House of Cards catch phrase. Dockery was excellent and Warren was a tour de force and deserves an Oscar or whatever for his brilliant Mr Teatime. Twyla had the best funny with the "trouser" joke.
Where to begin. I agree the pacing was very slow, with conversations subject to odd pauses which I guess is down to the editing. Some of the music seemed a bit twee too, and certainly wrong or out of place in most of the scenes. Lastly, some of the acting was good, but some of the others were awful. The wizards, including Mustrum Ridcully but especially Ponder Stibbons, were reciting the lines rather than acting. Tony Robinson was not good either, for the same reason. It seemed they were too pleased to be playing the part, and forgot to act.
And the Hogfather story is not a good intro to the Discworld. It seems it only got greenlit because it was a Christmas story and could be justified at Christmas.
If the next one is The Colour of Magic, it would only be to try and do them in order. Some of the Sam Vimes stories would be better, since there is less magic and better characterisation.
Would the reviewer dismiss Shakespeares plays after watching the first 5 minutes and not understanding them?
I just have to wait for the DVD to come out so I can watch an advert free version. The producers did a very good job without the bottomless money pit that Hollywood appears to be and some of Hollywoods results are far inferior to this.
I disagree about the wizards, Dave, I thought they were the best things in it! But you're right about Tony Robinson - he was disappointing. I found Warren ripping off Johnny Depp quite embarrassing, but everyone else seems to have loved it, so I'll accept defeat there.
I understand why everyone felt there were too many long and strange pauses and silences, but then I wonder if it's just not what we're used to. It's like when they stick loads of extra, unnecessary dialogue over Miyazaki cartoons when they dub them into english because western audiences just aren't used to having quiet bits in films.
couldn't agree with the author's analysis more. all the ingredients were right, but the whole was disappointing.
couldn't agree with the author's analysis more. all the ingredients were right, but the whole was disappointing.
It was crap, fancy using the same music as harry potter: teatime hahhaa chocolate factory and throw in dell boy and you have the makeings of a dogs dinner..
I liked it on the whole but thought that Marc Warren's characterisation of Teatime was shockingly bad, bad, BAD... what was with the foe american accent?! And as for taking off Jonny Depp's Willy Wonka, well, did anyone really like the 2006 version anyway? What was he thinking?
On the subject of Marc Warren's characterisation, I was immediately reminded of Michael J. Pollard rather than Johnny Depp. As for the rest of the production I was generally impressed with the art direction - though it may have veered toward the Dickensian a little too much, the acting was good but let down terribly by either the director or editor or both (Under orders?) The.... strange pauses were very peculiar and there seemed to be a few too many scene setting FX too. What seemed really odd to me was that if the bits missing from the book had been present there would have been no reason to s-t-r-e-t-c-h out the material so obviously. A great try, let down by those... pauses.