Discussion:
[R] Hogfather Scotsman review
(too old to reply)
Daibhid Ceanaideach
2006-12-19 21:29:56 UTC
Permalink
At the end of a peice complaining about formulaic TV dramas of
the "Boyfriend/Best Friend/... From Hell" type, The Scotsman's
TV reviewer, Andrea Mullaney, concludes:

"Meanwhile, the concluding part of Sky One's ambitious and
lavish adaptation of Terry Pratchett's The Hogfather was just
as enjoyable as the first. The channel has never been known
for producing quality drama, but the attention to detail -
from the gorgeous sets to the subtle lighting - and a strong
cast mostly resisting the temptation to panto it up (though
Marc Warren's papery Mr Teatime voice was so weird as to
almost qualify him as being From Hell) made it as fine a
Christmas treat as any of the terrestrial channels will likely
turn out."
--
Dave
Official Absentee of EU Skiffeysoc
http://sesoc.eusa.ed.ac.uk/
"The need to compile lists is a personality disorder,
as is the need to assert the superiority of some things
over other things."
-Jeremy Hardy
Mark Foweraker
2006-12-19 22:33:09 UTC
Permalink
Post by Daibhid Ceanaideach
At the end of a peice complaining about formulaic TV dramas of
the "Boyfriend/Best Friend/... From Hell" type, The Scotsman's
"Meanwhile, the concluding part of Sky One's ambitious and
lavish adaptation of Terry Pratchett's The Hogfather was just
as enjoyable as the first. The channel has never been known
for producing quality drama, but the attention to detail -
from the gorgeous sets to the subtle lighting - and a strong
cast mostly resisting the temptation to panto it up (though
Marc Warren's papery Mr Teatime voice was so weird as to
almost qualify him as being From Hell) made it as fine a
Christmas treat as any of the terrestrial channels will likely
turn out."
Hurrah! Hurrah! Hurrah!

From most of the posts here you would have thought it was an
unmitigated disaster of the first order. In fact, based on most of what
is written here you would expect that none of the people involved in the
production would ever work again or have any involvement with Discworld,
especially that writer chap... thingy... er.. Tommy.. er.. ah.. Terry
something... Pilchard... er.. Pritchet... er.. oh whatever ;-)
Orjan Westin
2006-12-19 22:46:24 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mark Foweraker
From most of the posts here you would have thought it was an
unmitigated disaster of the first order. In fact, based on most of
what is written here you would expect that none of the people
involved in the production would ever work again or have any
involvement with Discworld,
Would you care to back that up? Just a rundown of posts that are wholly or
mostly positive (with small nitpicks like wanting to see the glingleglingle
fairy and so on), versus posts that thinks it was mostly bad.

Or should we wait for the media to gleefully report that "The fans hated
Hogfather" and prevent The Mob from ever work again, at least as far as the
Discworld is concerned?

Orjan
--
The Tale of Westala and Villtin
http://tale.cunobaros.com/
Fiction, Thoughts and Software
http://www.cunobaros.com/
Mark Foweraker
2006-12-19 23:47:09 UTC
Permalink
Post by Orjan Westin
Post by Mark Foweraker
From most of the posts here you would have thought it was an
unmitigated disaster of the first order. In fact, based on most of
what is written here you would expect that none of the people
involved in the production would ever work again or have any
involvement with Discworld,
Would you care to back that up? Just a rundown of posts that are wholly or
mostly positive (with small nitpicks like wanting to see the glingleglingle
fairy and so on), versus posts that thinks it was mostly bad.
Or should we wait for the media to gleefully report that "The fans hated
Hogfather" and prevent The Mob from ever work again, at least as far as the
Discworld is concerned?
Orjan
You may have mis-understood me. I thought it was very good, but I do
not recall any posts entilted.. "Wonderful adaptation".
For example in abp.
Hogfather the movie. "I can't help feeling that someone who does not
have any prior knowledge of the discworld would find it quite difficult
to follow."
and in afp
(Hogfather) Well, that was... a shame, and a waste of time.
"I held back from passing judgement until I had watched the whole thing,
but I got to say, I thought that the production was quite a shambles."

There are positive threads (just with Hogfather part 1 type titles) but
most of the 'action' (both agreeing and dissenting) seems to have been
in those threads.

YMMV but I find it depressing when a book is brought to the screen and
all people can say is 'I would have done X, I don't like Y, take it
away, waste of money and time'.
d***@gmail.com
2006-12-20 19:46:28 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mark Foweraker
YMMV but I find it depressing when a book is brought to the screen and
all people can say is 'I would have done X, I don't like Y, take it
away, waste of money and time'.
Don't be depressed. The only true failure for a project of this kind is
when it falls into the Vasty Deep and produces... not... even... a...
whisperrrrrr.....

(grin) This won't be Terry's problem.

(Nor ours, come 23/24 Dec.on E4.) _Again._ ;)

Best! D.
The Stainless Steel Cat
2006-12-20 21:10:39 UTC
Permalink
Post by d***@gmail.com
Post by Mark Foweraker
YMMV but I find it depressing when a book is brought to the screen and
all people can say is 'I would have done X, I don't like Y, take it
away, waste of money and time'.
Don't be depressed. The only true failure for a project of this kind is
when it falls into the Vasty Deep and produces... not... even... a...
whisperrrrrr.....
(grin) This won't be Terry's problem.
(Nor ours, come 23/24 Dec.on E4.) _Again._ ;)
That'll be The Sword of Xanten then. I see Mark Kermode described it as
"Ropy sword and sorcery nonsense..." which is as good a recommendation as
fulsome praise from someone I respect. He makes the same mistake later in
his review as one of the Hogfather reviewers did by assuming the story was
written to appeal to Lord of the Rings fans (Potter fans in the case of the
HF reviewer) instead of actually knowing something about the genre.

I'll be watching.

Cat.
--
Jazz-Loving Soul Mate and Tolerable Frog to CCA
Hi-yo-toh...
d***@gmail.com
2006-12-20 22:04:51 UTC
Permalink
Post by The Stainless Steel Cat
That'll be The Sword of Xanten then. I see Mark Kermode described it as
"Ropy sword and sorcery nonsense..." which is as good a recommendation as
fulsome praise from someone I respect. He makes the same mistake later in
his review as one of the Hogfather reviewers did by assuming the story was
written to appeal to Lord of the Rings fans (Potter fans in the case of the
HF reviewer) instead of actually knowing something about the genre.
(chuckle) At last count, "Ring of the Nibelungs" aka "Dark Kingdom" The
Dragon King" aka "Sword of Barften" aka (endless other names in endless
other markets( had earned many hundreds of millions of Euro in its
ninety+ markets worldwide, besides its Diva award in Germany for best
TV movie of the year, its massive ratings everywhere except the UK, etc
etc. It is (apparently in some markets) a crime to mine the same vein
that Tolkien did: some small minds can come to only one conclusion
faced with such data. But these are the same people who keep asking
Terry if he "stole" Hogswatch from Hogwarts. (Can we ask Rowling if she
stole it from Nigel Molesworth? Pleeeeeeease??) ;) ...Another data
point: the Ring was in development well before even LOTR 1 came out.
Our German co-production partners had been wanting a modern retelling
of the Nibelung myth for many years: pre-production started with our
first co-production partners in 1998. I was at the source of the Rhine,
as it happens, in Sedrun in Switzerland, when I got the call.
"Fellowship's" film version debuted in 2001, so their pre-prod would
have started around the same time ours did.

...We did OK on The Ring. Benno Fuermann is a bit of a plank, but
Kristanna Loken steals the whole thing: she worked out *hard* to be
Queen Brunnhild, and you would *not* want to be in a dark alley with
her if she was in a bad mood and had that spear. (She also tried to
steal Peter's sword at a press screening, but that's another story. He
got her phone number in exchange, so that turned out OK.) (chuckle)
Other than that, we did as well as any other writers who got rewritten
by a director with delusions of literacy in a second language. :)
And, as the saying goes, it looks good on our CV. I doubt Mark Kermode
has anything quite as, uh, filmic. "Those who can.." ;)

Best! D.

-- Diane Duane | The Owl Springs Partnership | Co. Wicklow, Ireland
http://www.dianeduane.com | http://www.youngwizards.com
Aleks A.-Lessmann
2006-12-22 08:32:00 UTC
Permalink
Post by d***@gmail.com
(chuckle) At last count, "Ring of the Nibelungs" aka "Dark Kingdom" The
Dragon King" aka "Sword of Barften" aka (endless other names in endless
"Die Nibelungen" as "The Dragon King"?!? Okeeee....
Post by d***@gmail.com
...We did OK on The Ring. Benno Fuermann is a bit of a plank, but
Yeah, there's a lot of better actors in Germany ATM. I suppose Fürmann's
got a great agent tho.

Kind regards
Aleks
Martyn Clapham
2006-12-20 23:14:25 UTC
Permalink
Post by The Stainless Steel Cat
Post by d***@gmail.com
Post by Mark Foweraker
YMMV but I find it depressing when a book is brought to the screen and
all people can say is 'I would have done X, I don't like Y, take it
away, waste of money and time'.
Don't be depressed. The only true failure for a project of this kind is
when it falls into the Vasty Deep and produces... not... even... a...
whisperrrrrr.....
(grin) This won't be Terry's problem.
(Nor ours, come 23/24 Dec.on E4.) _Again._ ;)
That'll be The Sword of Xanten then. I see Mark Kermode described it as
"Ropy sword and sorcery nonsense..." which is as good a recommendation as
fulsome praise from someone I respect. He makes the same mistake later in
his review as one of the Hogfather reviewers did by assuming the story was
written to appeal to Lord of the Rings fans (Potter fans in the case of the
HF reviewer) instead of actually knowing something about the genre.
I'll be watching.
Evan Leighton-Davis does the review on the E4 website and makes the same
mistakes. Berk!

Wonder if we should e-mail him a copy of Dianes follow-up to your
comments above? :-))

Mart.
--
Livejournal at http://pendlemac.livejournal.com
Caroline's afpersonal God of Misunderstandings & afpSlave to CCA.
IM stuff :- ICQ: 246971821 Yahoo, AIM or MSN: pendlemac
all via gateways to ***@myjabber.net
d***@gmail.com
2006-12-21 00:35:50 UTC
Permalink
Post by Martyn Clapham
Post by The Stainless Steel Cat
Post by d***@gmail.com
Post by Mark Foweraker
YMMV but I find it depressing when a book is brought to the screen and
all people can say is 'I would have done X, I don't like Y, take it
away, waste of money and time'.
Don't be depressed. The only true failure for a project of this kind is
when it falls into the Vasty Deep and produces... not... even... a...
whisperrrrrr.....
(grin) This won't be Terry's problem.
(Nor ours, come 23/24 Dec.on E4.) _Again._ ;)
That'll be The Sword of Xanten then. I see Mark Kermode described it as
"Ropy sword and sorcery nonsense..." which is as good a recommendation as
fulsome praise from someone I respect. He makes the same mistake later in
his review as one of the Hogfather reviewers did by assuming the story was
written to appeal to Lord of the Rings fans (Potter fans in the case of the
HF reviewer) instead of actually knowing something about the genre.
I'll be watching.
Evan Leighton-Davis does the review on the E4 website and makes the same
mistakes. Berk!
Wonder if we should e-mail him a copy of Dianes follow-up to your
comments above? :-))
Feel free, but please correct the screwed-up parentheses. And remove
the "Those who can't...." gibe if the critic has ever actually had a
screenplay produced. :)

Best! D.
Dragon Prince
2007-01-02 23:15:31 UTC
Permalink
Post by d***@gmail.com
Post by Martyn Clapham
Evan Leighton-Davis does the review on the E4 website and makes the same
mistakes. Berk!
Wonder if we should e-mail him a copy of Dianes follow-up to your
comments above? :-))
Feel free, but please correct the screwed-up parentheses. And remove
the "Those who can't...." gibe if the critic has ever actually had a
screenplay produced. :)
The only critic I listen to with total commitment is myself..

dp
--
Say what you like about dragons; they do help
Keep the leopard-clawed, lizard-bodied, eagle-winged,
author-headed Monster population under control.
The Flying Hamster
2006-12-23 22:04:50 UTC
Permalink
Post by The Stainless Steel Cat
Post by d***@gmail.com
(Nor ours, come 23/24 Dec.on E4.) _Again._ ;)
That'll be The Sword of Xanten then. I see Mark Kermode described it as
Yeah, but who listens to critics?
Post by The Stainless Steel Cat
"Ropy sword and sorcery nonsense..." which is as good a recommendation as
and after realising it's on DVD it's sat in my basket for the "postxmas
and birthday spend money on things I didn't get" order.
--
The Flying Hamster <***@korenwolf.net> http://www.korenwolf.net/
We're all in the gutter but some of us are looking at the stars (O Wilde)
Alec Cawley
2006-12-22 00:50:02 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mark Foweraker
You may have mis-understood me. I thought it was very good, but I do
not recall any posts entilted.. "Wonderful adaptation".
Which is *exactly* what Terry predicted to The Mob, and repeated at the
Con. He said words to the effect of "They will love it - and show you by
posting lists of all the things that you got wrong".

It just shows how well Terry knows his readers.
Esmeraldus
2006-12-22 02:13:16 UTC
Permalink
Post by Alec Cawley
Post by Mark Foweraker
You may have mis-understood me. I thought it was very good, but I
do not recall any posts entilted.. "Wonderful adaptation".
Which is *exactly* what Terry predicted to The Mob, and repeated at
the Con. He said words to the effect of "They will love it - and
show you by posting lists of all the things that you got wrong".
It just shows how well Terry knows his readers.
The only thing I anticipate not liking overmuch, when I see it, is how much
Teatime will remind me of Johhny Depp as Willy Wonka.
jester
2006-12-22 11:13:19 UTC
Permalink
On Thu, 21 Dec 2006 21:13:16 -0500, Esmeraldus
Post by Esmeraldus
The only thing I anticipate not liking overmuch, when I see it, is how much
Teatime will remind me of Johhny Depp as Willy Wonka.
On the other hand, when (if) I get round to seeing that particular film,
I'm now expecting to find Willy Wonka reminds me of Teatime.
8-)
--
Andy Brown
"A computer lets you make more mistakes faster than any invention in
human history... with the possible exception of handguns and tequila." - Anon.
Aidan Karley
2006-12-21 02:15:08 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mark Foweraker
From most of the posts here you would have thought it was an
unmitigated disaster of the first order.
"Underwhelmed" would be my one-word summary. Definitely not an
unmitigated disaster, but substantially flawed. Probably sufficiently
well-received that the "Powers That Be" (backed up by the *real*
Auditors) would see profit and kudos in making more Pratchett films,
but they definitely need considerable work.
My biggest gripe was that Death looked very definitely like a
man in a plastic mask with a couple of blue LEDs behind the eye
sockets. I don't know how much money was saved by not having *any*
movement of the lower jaw, but the cost in characterisation was high.
Perilously high.

Overall, you had to have an understanding of DW to understand
the film. Which my wife and daughter don't have. At all. So they didn't
understand the film. At all. And aren't minded to make any effort to
see any others. Any effort, at all. That's a perilously expensive
reaction, if it's repeated to a significant extent in the population.
--
Aidan Karley, FGS
Aberdeen, Scotland
Don't go towards the sandwiches!
jester
2006-12-21 06:42:47 UTC
Permalink
On Thu, 21 Dec 2006 02:15:08 GMT, Aidan Karley
<***@major.free.email.provider.invalid> wrote:
<snip>
Post by Aidan Karley
My biggest gripe was that Death looked very definitely like a
man in a plastic mask with a couple of blue LEDs behind the eye
sockets. I don't know how much money was saved by not having *any*
movement of the lower jaw, but the cost in characterisation was high.
Ah, now, this one came up when the animations appeared.
Ever seen He-Man and the Masters of the Universe (cartoon, not film)?

If you have a skull talking, and the jaw going up and down, it tends to
look like a bad ventriloquists dummy.

Besides, with no lungs, vocal cords or other fleshy bits, Death can't be
talking normally, so why should his jaw move?
--
Andy Brown
Wayne's World C Programming Style Guide:
A == B; !;
Aidan Karley
2006-12-22 00:23:33 UTC
Permalink
Post by jester
Ah, now, this one came up when the animations appeared.
Ever seen He-Man and the Masters of the Universe (cartoon, not film)?
Err, no. Was that in the decade and a half when I didn't have TV?
Who they?
Post by jester
If you have a skull talking, and the jaw going up and down, it tends to
look like a bad ventriloquists dummy.
Hmmm. Thinking back to when I rigged up a cardboard (anatomically
correct) skull for the amusement of various nephew and nieces - could be
a problem. Maybe not an insoluble problem - the articulation about a pin
joint looks totally different to the sliding joint of the only
ventriloquist's dummy I've looked at. But that articulation would make it
difficult to get a human in behind the skull to do the acting. Again, not
impossible. There's a lot of cowl there to hide an actor in.
Maybe the DVD will have enough of the models that *didn't* work to
convince me that it couldn't be done better.

But I see Pterry himself has the next reply in the queue, so I'll
move on.
--
Aidan Karley,
Aberdeen, Scotland
Don't go towards the sandwiches!
Lister
2006-12-22 08:21:23 UTC
Permalink
On Fri, 22 Dec 2006 00:23:33 GMT, Aidan Karley
Post by Aidan Karley
Post by jester
Ah, now, this one came up when the animations appeared.
Ever seen He-Man and the Masters of the Universe (cartoon, not film)?
Err, no. Was that in the decade and a half when I didn't have TV?
Who they?
1980's Merkin cartoon, rebroadcast in the UK
--
We're climbing up the sunshine mountains
Where the pretty brezes blow
We're climbing up the sunshine mountains
Faces all a-glow
Terry Pratchett
2006-12-22 17:15:26 UTC
Permalink
In message <***@major.free.email.provider.invalid>,
Aidan Karley <***@major.free.email.provider.invalid>
writes
Post by Aidan Karley
Post by jester
Ah, now, this one came up when the animations appeared.
Ever seen He-Man and the Masters of the Universe (cartoon, not film)?
Err, no. Was that in the decade and a half when I didn't have TV?
Who they?
Post by jester
If you have a skull talking, and the jaw going up and down, it tends to
look like a bad ventriloquists dummy.
Hmmm. Thinking back to when I rigged up a cardboard (anatomically
correct) skull for the amusement of various nephew and nieces - could be
a problem. Maybe not an insoluble problem - the articulation about a pin
joint looks totally different to the sliding joint of the only
ventriloquist's dummy I've looked at. But that articulation would make it
difficult to get a human in behind the skull to do the acting. Again, not
impossible. There's a lot of cowl there to hide an actor in.
Maybe the DVD will have enough of the models that *didn't* work to
convince me that it couldn't be done better.
Vadim told me that they tried a moving jaw and it was "absolutely
awful." I believe they also tried slight modifications to change the
skull's "expression", which also got dumped
--
Terry Pratchett
Daibhid Ceanaideach
2006-12-22 17:45:12 UTC
Permalink
The time: 22 Dec 2006. The place: alt.fan.pratchett. The
Post by Terry Pratchett
Vadim told me that they tried a moving jaw and it was
"absolutely
awful." I believe they also tried slight modifications to
change the skull's "expression", which also got dumped
Similarly, in the early days of the Spider-Man flick, they
were intending to change the width of the eyes to convey
Spidey's emotional state, something that happens in the comic
all the time. In live action it just looked freaky.
--
Dave
Official Absentee of EU Skiffeysoc
http://sesoc.eusa.ed.ac.uk/
"The only thing worse than being talked about
is having nothing to declare except my handbag."
-Oscar Wilde, according to Humphrey Lyttleton
The Flying Hamster
2006-12-23 22:02:34 UTC
Permalink
Post by Terry Pratchett
Vadim told me that they tried a moving jaw and it was "absolutely
awful." I believe they also tried slight modifications to change the
skull's "expression", which also got dumped
It didn't need any of that, like V all the expression was in the voice
and the acting. Who needs moving bits of flesh? :)
--
The Flying Hamster <***@korenwolf.net> http://www.korenwolf.net/
We're all in the gutter but some of us are looking at the stars (O Wilde)
mcv
2006-12-24 13:07:02 UTC
Permalink
Post by The Flying Hamster
Post by Terry Pratchett
Vadim told me that they tried a moving jaw and it was "absolutely
awful." I believe they also tried slight modifications to change the
skull's "expression", which also got dumped
It didn't need any of that, like V all the expression was in the voice
and the acting. Who needs moving bits of flesh? :)
Not just the voice, but also the camera angle, the position of the head,
shadow of the hood, etc. I was amazed how expressive a puppet with a
rigid face could be. Excellent job.


mcv.
--
Science is not the be-all and end-all of human existence. It's a tool.
A very powerful tool, but not the only tool. And if only that which
could be verified scientifically was considered real, then nearly all
of human experience would be not-real. -- Zachriel
Eric Jarvis
2006-12-24 13:11:40 UTC
Permalink
Post by mcv
Post by The Flying Hamster
Post by Terry Pratchett
Vadim told me that they tried a moving jaw and it was "absolutely
awful." I believe they also tried slight modifications to change the
skull's "expression", which also got dumped
It didn't need any of that, like V all the expression was in the voice
and the acting. Who needs moving bits of flesh? :)
Not just the voice, but also the camera angle, the position of the head,
shadow of the hood, etc. I was amazed how expressive a puppet with a
rigid face could be. Excellent job.
It wasn't a puppet. It was a Dutch actor in a costume and mask.

I agree that it was an excellent job though.
--
eric
www.ericjarvis.co.uk
"live fast, die only if strictly necessary"
mcv
2006-12-25 17:57:05 UTC
Permalink
Post by Eric Jarvis
Post by mcv
Post by The Flying Hamster
Post by Terry Pratchett
Vadim told me that they tried a moving jaw and it was "absolutely
awful." I believe they also tried slight modifications to change the
skull's "expression", which also got dumped
It didn't need any of that, like V all the expression was in the voice
and the acting. Who needs moving bits of flesh? :)
Not just the voice, but also the camera angle, the position of the head,
shadow of the hood, etc. I was amazed how expressive a puppet with a
rigid face could be. Excellent job.
It wasn't a puppet. It was a Dutch actor in a costume and mask.
I agree that it was an excellent job though.
It was? I thought I'd read here that it was a puppet. The tall Dutch
actor[1] sounds like an excellent choice, though. And makes me slightly
less impressed with the animatronics.


mcv.

[1] I forgot his name, but I'm sure somebody here hasn't.
--
Science is not the be-all and end-all of human existence. It's a tool.
A very powerful tool, but not the only tool. And if only that which
could be verified scientifically was considered real, then nearly all
of human experience would be not-real. -- Zachriel
Aidan Karley
2006-12-23 22:58:07 UTC
Permalink
Post by Terry Pratchett
Post by Aidan Karley
Maybe the DVD will have enough of the models that *didn't* work to
convince me that it couldn't be done better.
Vadim told me that they tried a moving jaw and it was "absolutely
awful." I believe they also tried slight modifications to change the
skull's "expression", which also got dumped
Hmm,
[/self puts on "pondering" expression, where the jaw goes sideways
until middle-lower incisors rest on either side of right-upper canine front
edge.]
Considering whether there are alternative ways of expressing emotion
that would be noticeable on a skull.
[/self shrugs, at which point my normal overbite is exagerrated by a
good half-centimeter.]
[/self stares off into distance, trying to think of other
expressions. Taps out tune to "Show me the way to go home", one tooth on
another.]
--
Aidan Karley,
Aberdeen, Scotland
Don't go towards the sandwiches!
Terry Pratchett
2006-12-24 12:07:39 UTC
Permalink
Post by Aidan Karley
[/self puts on "pondering" expression, where the jaw goes sideways
until middle-lower incisors rest on either side of right-upper canine front
edge.]
Considering whether there are alternative ways of expressing emotion
that would be noticeable on a skull.
Tone of voice and body language, which I think worked. Just prior to
the Little Match Girl scene, Death looked angry; during the conversation
about the robin and the Hogswatch card he looked exasperate, I swear.
--
Terry Pratchett
The Flying Hamster
2006-12-24 20:18:13 UTC
Permalink
Post by Terry Pratchett
Post by Aidan Karley
[/self puts on "pondering" expression, where the jaw goes sideways
until middle-lower incisors rest on either side of right-upper canine front
edge.]
Considering whether there are alternative ways of expressing emotion
that would be noticeable on a skull.
Tone of voice and body language, which I think worked. Just prior to
the Little Match Girl scene, Death looked angry; during the conversation
about the robin and the Hogswatch card he looked exasperate, I swear.
In short. It worked and worked well.
--
The Flying Hamster <***@korenwolf.net> http://www.korenwolf.net/
We're all in the gutter but some of us are looking at the stars (O Wilde)
Terry Pratchett
2006-12-21 10:58:34 UTC
Permalink
In message <***@major.free.email.provider.invalid>,
Aidan Karley <***@major.free.email.provider.invalid>
writes
Post by Aidan Karley
but they definitely need considerable work.
My biggest gripe was that Death looked very definitely like a
man in a plastic mask with a couple of blue LEDs behind the eye
sockets. I don't know how much money was saved by not having *any*
movement of the lower jaw, but the cost in characterisation was high.
Perilously high.
No, a flappy fake jaw would have completely ruined it-- as it has ruined
every attempt to make a talking skull.
Post by Aidan Karley
Overall, you had to have an understanding of DW to understand
the film. Which my wife and daughter don't have. At all. So they didn't
understand the film. At all. And aren't minded to make any effort to
see any others. Any effort, at all.
Other people will. Other people have. And much understanding of DW is
not required, to judge from experience.
--
Terry Pratchett
Robert Carnegie
2006-12-21 12:49:41 UTC
Permalink
Post by Terry Pratchett
No, a flappy fake jaw would have completely ruined it-- as it has ruined
every attempt to make a talking skull.
I think Morecambe and Wise got a laugh out of it, but I suppose you
don't want that.

Ray Harryhausen's, I don't recall getting chatty, but I'm not sure.
Echoey dislocated scary-voice would do it.

Practically, skulls and disembodied heads don't talk. And picking them
up to look for where the noise is coming from is an awful faux pas.

Hospital fantasy-comedy _Scrubs_ has done disembodied heads a few
times...

It's not even that Death actually is an articulated skeleton, it's just
a look, right? (Okay, I should tell that to the bees...) Someone told
us that Death used to do the thing where if you expect to be met by met
by a giant snake or owl or dung beetle then... but he found it didn't
seem to help. Whereas most people "get" the skeleton and you don't
have to do research and maintain a wardrobe department for every case.
Les Steel
2006-12-21 16:57:38 UTC
Permalink
Post by Terry Pratchett
Post by Aidan Karley
but they definitely need considerable work.
My biggest gripe was that Death looked very definitely like a
man in a plastic mask with a couple of blue LEDs behind the eye
sockets. I don't know how much money was saved by not having *any*
movement of the lower jaw, but the cost in characterisation was high.
Perilously high.
No, a flappy fake jaw would have completely ruined it-- as it has ruined
every attempt to make a talking skull.
Post by Aidan Karley
Overall, you had to have an understanding of DW to understand
the film. Which my wife and daughter don't have. At all. So they didn't
understand the film. At all. And aren't minded to make any effort to
see any others. Any effort, at all.
Other people will. Other people have. And much understanding of DW is
not required, to judge from experience.
--
Terry Pratchett
My wife has yet to read one of your books (oh the shame!) but she loved The
Hogfather and looks forward to more shows/films.
She is going to try starting (reading the books) with Guards! Guards! cos I
told her Nobby is in it and Coporal Carrot the 6 foot dwarf.
--
Les Steel

Looking forward to Hogswatch so I get to read Wintersmith
Aidan Karley
2006-12-22 00:23:33 UTC
Permalink
Post by Terry Pratchett
Post by Aidan Karley
the film. Which my wife and daughter don't have. At all. So they didn't
understand the film. At all. And aren't minded to make any effort to
see any others. Any effort, at all.
Other people will. Other people have. And much understanding of DW is
not required, to judge from experience.
So I see from other responses. Well, with neither of them having
English as a first language, I can't say I was surprised about that. The
wife started to tackle Hogsfather (ink-on-paper) last week, but it's slow
going.
Did anything Discworld ever get translated into Russian?
Step-daughter went up the wall when I managed to come up with a proper
translation of the last-but-one Potter book when she got permission to
come over. Can't find any entries for either "Pratchett" or "Discworld" on
my previous site for Russian books. Mind you, since I'm getting "Portrait
of Dorian Gray" coming up in the Children's books category ... maybe it's
not the best organised of sites (my Russian is pretty rudimentary).
--
Aidan Karley,
Aberdeen, Scotland
Don't go towards the sandwiches!
Daibhid Ceanaideach
2006-12-22 01:01:56 UTC
Permalink
The time: 22 Dec 2006. The place: alt.fan.pratchett. The
speaker: Aidan Karley
Post by Aidan Karley
Did anything Discworld ever get translated into
Russian?
Yep. The Wikipedia entries on the novels include lists of
their titles in various languages, and I assume someone who
speaks Russian[1] can get from that to a site from which they
can be ordered.

[1]I can say[2] "spaceba" and "dros vadanya", and that's about
it. And while I know the former is "thank you", I can't recall
if the latter is "hello" or "goodbye"...

[2]But probably not spell...
--
Dave
Official Absentee of EU Skiffeysoc
http://sesoc.eusa.ed.ac.uk/
"The only thing worse than being talked about
is having nothing to declare except my handbag."
-Oscar Wilde, according to Humphrey Lyttleton
Eric Jarvis
2006-12-22 01:46:53 UTC
Permalink
Post by Daibhid Ceanaideach
[1]I can say[2] "spaceba" and "dros vadanya", and that's about
it. And while I know the former is "thank you", I can't recall
if the latter is "hello" or "goodbye"...
Dosfedanya is an equivalent of goodbye.

My Russian is extremely rusty. When I was 19 I could read Pushkin in the
original, and now I'd struggle to hold a basic conversation. It's probably
all there somewhere in my memory, but I find that if I don't use a
language regularly it starts getting very difficult very fast.
--
eric
www.ericjarvis.co.uk
"live fast, die only if strictly necessary"
Aidan Karley
2006-12-23 01:36:48 UTC
Permalink
Post by Daibhid Ceanaideach
Yep. The Wikipedia entries on the novels include lists of
their titles in various languages, and I assume someone who
speaks Russian[1] can get from that to a site from which they
can be ordered.
Now why didn't I go to look at Wikipedia - while it's got it's
faults and un-evennesses, it should be sufficiently reliable for
something like this.
"??? ?????, ?????-??????" Oh dear - non-Unicode news client. Oh
well. "Ded Kaban, Santa-Kryachus", or something not too dissimilar.

Since the wife reckons she's getting her head more round the
book now, I'll probably try getting a different one. Probably TCoM, or
ER. Nope, no signs of either of them. Nor as recent as Monsterous
Regiment. This is obviously going to take considerably more searching.
Post by Daibhid Ceanaideach
[1]I can say[2] "spaceba" and "dros vadanya", and that's about
it. And while I know the former is "thank you", I can't recall
if the latter is "hello" or "goodbye"...
Don't even think about trying to spell them on USENET. Cyrillic
always comes out horribly for me.
"Dos vedanya" is "good bye". "Dobre dehn" for "good day"
(different details at different times of day, but the "dehn" variant
works for most civilised times of day. The other big think you're
missing is "pozhalista" (could also write it with "puz..." and be
adequate in pronunciation) - somewhere between "please" and "here is"
and a handful of other meetings. I describe it as a 'general social
lubricant'. Very useful word - people might think your Russian is
atrociously pronounced, but they won't think that you're rude.
--
Aidan Karley,
Aberdeen, Scotland
Don't go towards the sandwiches!
Len Oil
2006-12-23 00:46:12 UTC
Permalink
Post by Aidan Karley
Did anything Discworld ever get translated into Russian?
Checking in or around Colin Smythe's site[1] should give you the basic
details about any Russian (or other) translations that exist[2]. They
do for the ones I checked, though I didn't go through each and every
listing in this brief exploratory quest to establish the theme.

[1] http://www.colinsmythe.co.uk/discworldpages/dwindex.htm
[2] Officially sanctioned ones at least. I'm not sure if Terry has
suffered from unauthorised translations like Rowling did in China (IIRC).
Aidan Karley
2006-12-23 22:58:07 UTC
Permalink
Post by Len Oil
Post by Aidan Karley
Did anything Discworld ever get translated into Russian?
Checking in or around Colin Smythe's site[1] should give you the basic
I'm regretting clicking that link. There's some *bad* Java on
Colin's website that I had to put in a bug report to Mozilla about.
Don't know what he's doing, but it brings down firefox.
Rephrase that - earlier this week it would bring down firefox
hard - I put in a security update a day or so ago, which it only seems
to hang, not crash. 2 steps forward, one step back.
--
Aidan Karley,
Aberdeen, Scotland
Don't go towards the sandwiches!
Len Oil
2006-12-24 00:49:16 UTC
Permalink
Post by Aidan Karley
Post by Len Oil
Post by Aidan Karley
Did anything Discworld ever get translated into Russian?
Checking in or around Colin Smythe's site[1] should give you the basic
I'm regretting clicking that link. There's some *bad* Java on
Colin's website that I had to put in a bug report to Mozilla about.
Don't know what he's doing, but it brings down firefox.
Rephrase that - earlier this week it would bring down firefox
hard - I put in a security update a day or so ago, which it only seems
to hang, not crash. 2 steps forward, one step back.
It doesn't break my installation of Firefox, though I must admit that
I'm not /particularly/ enamoured of the styling/presentation. Apologies
if I've caused you any problems pointing to it.
Aidan Karley
2006-12-25 13:22:18 UTC
Permalink
Post by Len Oil
It doesn't break my installation of Firefox,
Hmmm. Could be the JVM then. I might worry about it tomorrow.
No, hang on, it doesn't hang IE using the same JVM, so it's not that.
Ach, whatever. I'm not going to worry about it tonight.
--
Aidan Karley,
Aberdeen, Scotland
Don't go towards the sandwiches!
Alec Cawley
2006-12-22 01:02:36 UTC
Permalink
Post by Terry Pratchett
No, a flappy fake jaw would have completely ruined it-- as it has ruined
every attempt to make a talking skull.
And be unrealistic, too. Watch how much people's jaw moves when they are
talking, as opposed to singing fortissimo. Hardly at all. All the
movement is is in the lips and tongue - which Death hasn't got. Most of
the articulation in the jaw is used for eating, not talking.
Daibhid Ceanaideach
2006-12-22 01:17:10 UTC
Permalink
The time: 22 Dec 2006. The place: alt.fan.pratchett. The
Post by Alec Cawley
Post by Terry Pratchett
No, a flappy fake jaw would have completely ruined it-- as
it has ruined every attempt to make a talking skull.
And be unrealistic, too. Watch how much people's jaw moves
when they are talking, as opposed to singing fortissimo.
Hardly at all. All the movement is is in the lips and
tongue - which Death hasn't got. Most of the articulation
in the jaw is used for eating, not talking.
That's it. I've never realised why the likes of Skeletor look
so completely ridiculous before[1], but you're exactly right.

[1]I mean, beyond the fact that he's a bright yellow skeleton
in a supervillain outfit, with the voice of Filmation's Ming
the Merciless...
--
Dave
Official Absentee of EU Skiffeysoc
http://sesoc.eusa.ed.ac.uk/
"The only thing worse than being talked about
is having nothing to declare except my handbag."
-Oscar Wilde, according to Humphrey Lyttleton
mcv
2006-12-22 16:04:38 UTC
Permalink
Post by Daibhid Ceanaideach
The time: 22 Dec 2006. The place: alt.fan.pratchett. The
Post by Alec Cawley
Post by Terry Pratchett
No, a flappy fake jaw would have completely ruined it-- as
it has ruined every attempt to make a talking skull.
And be unrealistic, too. Watch how much people's jaw moves
when they are talking, as opposed to singing fortissimo.
Hardly at all. All the movement is is in the lips and
tongue - which Death hasn't got. Most of the articulation
in the jaw is used for eating, not talking.
That's it. I've never realised why the likes of Skeletor look
so completely ridiculous before[1], but you're exactly right.
So a realistic skeleton would always have his mouth half open and
move it only very slightly up and down while talking? I've got the
feeling that some consonants, like 'm's and 'p's aren't going to
look very realistic.

Could it possibly be that talking skeletons simply aren't very
realistic?


mcv.
--
Science is not the be-all and end-all of human existence. It's a tool.
A very powerful tool, but not the only tool. And if only that which
could be verified scientifically was considered real, then nearly all
of human experience would be not-real. -- Zachriel
Richard Heathfield
2006-12-22 16:10:15 UTC
Permalink
mcv said:

<snip>
Post by mcv
Could it possibly be that talking skeletons simply aren't very
realistic?
NO.
--
Richard Heathfield
"Usenet is a strange place" - dmr 29/7/1999
http://www.cpax.org.uk
email: rjh at the above domain, - www.
Esmeraldus
2006-12-22 18:44:21 UTC
Permalink
Post by jester
<snip>
Post by mcv
Could it possibly be that talking skeletons simply aren't very
realistic?
NO.
Uh-oh, Richard's kicked it. Let's have a moment of silence.
--
Stacie, fourth swordswoman of the afpocalypse.
AFPMinister of Flexible Weapons & Bondage-happy predator
AFPMistress to peachy ashie passion & AFPDeliciousSnack to 8'FED
"If you can't be a good example, you'll just have to be a horrible
warning." Catherine Aird, _His Burial Too_
http://esmeraldus.blogspot.com/
Daibhid Ceanaideach
2006-12-22 16:12:02 UTC
Permalink
The time: 22 Dec 2006. The place: alt.fan.pratchett. The
Post by mcv
Post by Daibhid Ceanaideach
The time: 22 Dec 2006. The place: alt.fan.pratchett. The
Post by Alec Cawley
Post by Terry Pratchett
No, a flappy fake jaw would have completely ruined it--
as it has ruined every attempt to make a talking skull.
And be unrealistic, too. Watch how much people's jaw
moves when they are talking, as opposed to singing
fortissimo. Hardly at all. All the movement is is in the
lips and tongue - which Death hasn't got. Most of the
articulation in the jaw is used for eating, not talking.
That's it. I've never realised why the likes of Skeletor
look so completely ridiculous before[1], but you're
exactly right.
So a realistic skeleton would always have his mouth half
open and move it only very slightly up and down while
talking? I've got the feeling that some consonants, like
'm's and 'p's aren't going to look very realistic.
Could it possibly be that talking skeletons simply aren't
very realistic?
Yep, which is why it was a wise decision to ignore the whole
thing and just decide Death isn't actually talking, as such,
what with not having any vocal cords, and not have his mouth
move at all.
--
Dave
Official Absentee of EU Skiffeysoc
http://sesoc.eusa.ed.ac.uk/
"The only thing worse than being talked about
is having nothing to declare except my handbag."
-Oscar Wilde, according to Humphrey Lyttleton
Geoff Field
2006-12-23 01:31:56 UTC
Permalink
Post by Daibhid Ceanaideach
The time: 22 Dec 2006. The place: alt.fan.pratchett. The
Post by Daibhid Ceanaideach
The time: 22 Dec 2006. The place: alt.fan.pratchett. The
Post by Terry Pratchett
No, a flappy fake jaw would have completely ruined it--
as it has ruined every attempt to make a talking skull.
[snip the bits between - like a skeleton, in a way]
Post by Daibhid Ceanaideach
Yep, which is why it was a wise decision to ignore the whole
thing and just decide Death isn't actually talking, as such,
what with not having any vocal cords, and not have his mouth
move at all.
Plus, of course, Death's voice is often described as reaching
people's brains without the benefit of all that vibrating air
nonsense (or words to that effect).

Geoff
--
Geoff Field
Professional Geek,
Amateur Stage-Levelling Gauge
mcv
2006-12-23 22:04:26 UTC
Permalink
Post by Geoff Field
Post by Daibhid Ceanaideach
The time: 22 Dec 2006. The place: alt.fan.pratchett. The
Post by Daibhid Ceanaideach
The time: 22 Dec 2006. The place: alt.fan.pratchett. The
Post by Terry Pratchett
No, a flappy fake jaw would have completely ruined it--
as it has ruined every attempt to make a talking skull.
[snip the bits between - like a skeleton, in a way]
Post by Daibhid Ceanaideach
Yep, which is why it was a wise decision to ignore the whole
thing and just decide Death isn't actually talking, as such,
what with not having any vocal cords, and not have his mouth
move at all.
Plus, of course, Death's voice is often described as reaching
people's brains without the benefit of all that vibrating air
nonsense (or words to that effect).
What I'd like to know is, did Pratchett do that for this reason?
Did he decide that Death doesn't talk with sound because he doesn't
have lips and a tongue?


mcv.
--
Science is not the be-all and end-all of human existence. It's a tool.
A very powerful tool, but not the only tool. And if only that which
could be verified scientifically was considered real, then nearly all
of human experience would be not-real. -- Zachriel
Len Oil
2006-12-24 00:30:59 UTC
Permalink
Post by mcv
What I'd like to know is, did Pratchett do that for this reason?
Did he decide that Death doesn't talk with sound because he doesn't
have lips and a tongue?
I think it arises from the Logic Of The Discworld. Which is probably
largely up to Terry. Or, rather, how Terry's creations /are/.

Same with "If a druid believes he can pilot giant stones through the
air, and you are on said monolith, it's wise to leave him to it...", "A
sure sign you shouldn't eat a mushroom is the little windows and door in
its stem" and the like.

Of course, how he eats (/what he does with) curry isn't explained. ;)
Richard Bos
2006-12-28 01:32:26 UTC
Permalink
Post by Len Oil
Post by mcv
What I'd like to know is, did Pratchett do that for this reason?
Did he decide that Death doesn't talk with sound because he doesn't
have lips and a tongue?
Of course, how he eats (/what he does with) curry isn't explained. ;)
Well, he has the teeth, so eating is not the problem. Digesting is, but
he could just drop it on the floor. Makes a bit of a mess, though. The
real problem, however, is... why? He doesn't have any taste buds. Why on
earth would he prefer one dish to another?

Richard
Daibhid Ceanaideach
2006-12-28 01:42:21 UTC
Permalink
The time: 28 Dec 2006. The place: alt.fan.pratchett. The
Post by Richard Bos
Post by Len Oil
Post by mcv
What I'd like to know is, did Pratchett do that for this
reason? Did he decide that Death doesn't talk with sound
because he doesn't have lips and a tongue?
Of course, how he eats (/what he does with) curry isn't
explained. ;)
Well, he has the teeth, so eating is not the problem.
Digesting is, but he could just drop it on the floor. Makes
a bit of a mess, though. The real problem, however, is...
why? He doesn't have any taste buds. Why on earth would he
prefer one dish to another?
Why is it less likely that Death can taste curry without a
tongue than all the other things he can seemingly do without
the necessary bits (including keeping the bits he does have
together)?

(I aknowledge it *does* seem less likely, somehow, I'm just
not sure *why*.)
--
Dave
Official Absentee of EU Skiffeysoc
http://sesoc.eusa.ed.ac.uk/
"The only thing worse than being talked about
is having nothing to declare except my handbag."
-Oscar Wilde, according to Humphrey Lyttleton
naomi
2006-12-28 09:21:19 UTC
Permalink
Post by Daibhid Ceanaideach
The time: 28 Dec 2006. The place: alt.fan.pratchett. The
Post by Richard Bos
Post by Len Oil
Post by mcv
What I'd like to know is, did Pratchett do that for this
reason? Did he decide that Death doesn't talk with sound
because he doesn't have lips and a tongue?
Of course, how he eats (/what he does with) curry isn't
explained. ;)
Well, he has the teeth, so eating is not the problem.
Digesting is, but he could just drop it on the floor. Makes
a bit of a mess, though. The real problem, however, is...
why? He doesn't have any taste buds. Why on earth would he
prefer one dish to another?
Why is it less likely that Death can taste curry without a
tongue than all the other things he can seemingly do without
the necessary bits (including keeping the bits he does have
together)?
(I aknowledge it *does* seem less likely, somehow, I'm just
not sure *why*.)
--
Dave
My theory is is that if on the Disk belief=reality,
then if DEATH believes he can taste and eat, he can.

n
8'FED
2007-01-06 05:50:23 UTC
Permalink
Post by naomi
Post by Daibhid Ceanaideach
Why is it less likely that Death can taste curry without a
tongue than all the other things he can seemingly do without
the necessary bits (including keeping the bits he does have
together)?
(I aknowledge it *does* seem less likely, somehow, I'm just
not sure *why*.)
My theory is is that if on the Disk belief=reality,
then if DEATH believes he can taste and eat, he can.
My theory is that, basically, when all is said and done, the Discworld
is simply the wrong series for people who want everything in a book to
make sense and be capable of logical justification.... :-)

Adrian.
Daibhid Ceanaideach
2007-01-06 19:21:47 UTC
Permalink
The time: 06 Jan 2007. The place: alt.fan.pratchett. The
Post by 8'FED
My theory is that, basically, when all is said and done,
the Discworld is simply the wrong series for people who
want everything in a book to make sense and be capable of
logical justification.... :-)
I'd have said quite the reverse. Out of all the people who've
used Death on a pale horse, I think Pterry is the only one
who's asked the question "Does it need stabling, and if so,
where are the stables?". He's not the first person to ask why
trolls turn to stone (AFAIK that was Poul Anderson, who came
up with a different answer), but a large amount of humour has
been born out of the fact he did. The application of sense and
logical justification is, IMO, what makes Discworld Discworld,
rather than a generic fantasy universe.

In "Art of Discworld" Pterry calls his own approach "literally
childish", because adults suspend disbelief about such things,
while kids ask awkward questions, and says that swamp dragons
"like most things ... were developed by taking seriously
something not intended to be serious".
--
Dave
Official Absentee of EU Skiffeysoc
http://sesoc.eusa.ed.ac.uk/
"The only thing worse than being talked about
is having nothing to declare except my handbag."
-Oscar Wilde, according to Humphrey Lyttleton
8'FED
2007-01-07 00:03:03 UTC
Permalink
Post by Daibhid Ceanaideach
Post by 8'FED
My theory is that, basically, when all is said and done,
the Discworld is simply the wrong series for people who
want everything in a book to make sense and be capable of
logical justification.... :-)
I'd have said quite the reverse. Out of all the people who've
used Death on a pale horse, I think Pterry is the only one
who's asked the question "Does it need stabling, and if so,
where are the stables?".
Ah, but on Discworld, logic lives side-by-side with its opposite, and
while some things on the Discworld are logical, others are just jokes.
Some people might not like the inconsistency of a world that has, one
might say, taken up logic as a part-time occupation.

The keyword in my post above is "everything".

Adrian.

Anery
2006-12-28 10:21:51 UTC
Permalink
Arthur Hagen
2006-12-28 14:56:56 UTC
Permalink
Maybe it seems less likely because Death as a walking skeleton is a
well-established figure in our mythology, but his eating habits are
not.
You haven't figured out what the "devourer of souls" eats?
--
*Art
Daibhid Ceanaideach
2006-12-28 18:13:37 UTC
Permalink
The time: 28 Dec 2006. The place: alt.fan.pratchett. The
Post by Arthur Hagen
Maybe it seems less likely because Death as a walking
skeleton is a well-established figure in our mythology,
but his eating habits are not.
You haven't figured out what the "devourer of souls" eats?
Similar to the Eater of Socks, only different. And dyslexic...
--
Dave
Official Absentee of EU Skiffeysoc
http://sesoc.eusa.ed.ac.uk/
"The only thing worse than being talked about
is having nothing to declare except my handbag."
-Oscar Wilde, according to Humphrey Lyttleton
Anery
2006-12-29 09:49:19 UTC
Permalink
Lesley Weston
2006-12-28 15:55:12 UTC
Permalink
Post by Richard Bos
Post by Len Oil
Post by mcv
What I'd like to know is, did Pratchett do that for this reason?
Did he decide that Death doesn't talk with sound because he doesn't
have lips and a tongue?
Of course, how he eats (/what he does with) curry isn't explained. ;)
Well, he has the teeth, so eating is not the problem. Digesting is, but
he could just drop it on the floor. Makes a bit of a mess, though. The
real problem, however, is... why? He doesn't have any taste buds. Why on
earth would he prefer one dish to another?
His skeleton is articulated, which means that some of the soft tissue is
still there. It's possible to extract DNA from inside the teeth of
very-long-dead people, even Neanderthals, so perhaps the olfactory sensors
inside the bony part of the nose are still there, and they're what determine
taste.

Or perhaps he's an anthropomorphic personification.
--
Lesley Weston.

Brightly_coloured_blob is real, but I don't often check even the few bits
that get through Yahoo's filters. To reach me, use leswes att shaw dott ca,
changing spelling and spacing as required.
Paul Harman
2007-01-02 11:51:34 UTC
Permalink
Post by Richard Bos
Well, he has the teeth, so eating is not the problem. Digesting is, but
he could just drop it on the floor. Makes a bit of a mess, though. The
real problem, however, is... why? He doesn't have any taste buds. Why on
earth would he prefer one dish to another?
We have no idea how powerful curries might be, in a world with Wow-wow
sauce.

Paul
Lesley Weston
2006-12-23 00:57:45 UTC
Permalink
Post by Alec Cawley
Post by Terry Pratchett
No, a flappy fake jaw would have completely ruined it-- as it has ruined
every attempt to make a talking skull.
And be unrealistic, too. Watch how much people's jaw moves when they are
talking, as opposed to singing fortissimo. Hardly at all. All the
movement is is in the lips and tongue - which Death hasn't got. Most of
the articulation in the jaw is used for eating, not talking.
I'm surprised and pleased to hear that the Mob didn't fall into the trap of
making Death's jaw move. Unlike the people driving, in most movies that show
it, indicating that that's what they're doing by sawing the wheel from side
to side.
--
Lesley Weston.

Brightly_coloured_blob is real, but I don't often check even the few bits
that get through Yahoo's filters. To reach me, use leswes att shaw dott ca,
changing spelling and spacing as required.
Geoff Field
2006-12-23 01:34:03 UTC
Permalink
Post by Lesley Weston
Post by Alec Cawley
Post by Terry Pratchett
No, a flappy fake jaw would have completely ruined it-- as it has
ruined every attempt to make a talking skull.
And be unrealistic, too. Watch how much people's jaw moves when they
are talking, as opposed to singing fortissimo. Hardly at all. All the
movement is is in the lips and tongue - which Death hasn't got. Most
of the articulation in the jaw is used for eating, not talking.
I'm surprised and pleased to hear that the Mob didn't fall into the
trap of making Death's jaw move. Unlike the people driving, in most
movies that show it, indicating that that's what they're doing by
sawing the wheel from side to side.
You mean you *don't* drive like this all the time? ;-)

Mind you, if your steering box has had time to deteriorate enough,
there might be sufficient play to require this just to stop the car from
wandering across the lanes...

Geoff
--
Geoff Field
Professional Geek,
Amateur Stage-Levelling Gauge
Lesley Weston
2006-12-23 23:33:02 UTC
Permalink
Post by Geoff Field
Post by Lesley Weston
Post by Alec Cawley
Post by Terry Pratchett
No, a flappy fake jaw would have completely ruined it-- as it has
ruined every attempt to make a talking skull.
And be unrealistic, too. Watch how much people's jaw moves when they
are talking, as opposed to singing fortissimo. Hardly at all. All the
movement is is in the lips and tongue - which Death hasn't got. Most
of the articulation in the jaw is used for eating, not talking.
I'm surprised and pleased to hear that the Mob didn't fall into the
trap of making Death's jaw move. Unlike the people driving, in most
movies that show it, indicating that that's what they're doing by
sawing the wheel from side to side.
You mean you *don't* drive like this all the time? ;-)
Mind you, if your steering box has had time to deteriorate enough,
there might be sufficient play to require this just to stop the car from
wandering across the lanes...
The first vehicle that I ever owned was an old Post Office van that was
older than I was. It had been well made, which was how it was still running,
with rack and pinion steering, but something had happened over the years so
that in order to go straight forward, you had to hold the wheel at a fairly
sharp right turn at all times. I was quite happy with this, but other people
never seemed to want to drive my van.
--
Lesley Weston.

Brightly_coloured_blob is real, but I don't often check even the few bits
that get through Yahoo's filters. To reach me, use leswes att shaw dott ca,
changing spelling and spacing as required.
The Flying Hamster
2006-12-23 21:56:42 UTC
Permalink
Post by Alec Cawley
Post by Terry Pratchett
No, a flappy fake jaw would have completely ruined it-- as it has ruined
every attempt to make a talking skull.
And be unrealistic, too. Watch how much people's jaw moves when they are
talking, as opposed to singing fortissimo. Hardly at all. All the
The short and violent one just made the exact same point while reading
this thread.
--
The Flying Hamster <***@korenwolf.net> http://www.korenwolf.net/
We're all in the gutter but some of us are looking at the stars (O Wilde)
Fat Harris
2006-12-22 22:43:13 UTC
Permalink
Post by Terry Pratchett
Post by Aidan Karley
but they definitely need considerable work.
My biggest gripe was that Death looked very definitely like a
man in a plastic mask with a couple of blue LEDs behind the eye
sockets. I don't know how much money was saved by not having *any*
movement of the lower jaw, but the cost in characterisation was high.
Perilously high.
No, a flappy fake jaw would have completely ruined it-- as it has ruined
every attempt to make a talking skull.
i dunno, it worked for the Scotch Video skeleton...
Mark Foweraker
2006-12-22 23:04:34 UTC
Permalink
Post by Fat Harris
Post by Terry Pratchett
Post by Aidan Karley
but they definitely need considerable work.
My biggest gripe was that Death looked very definitely like a
man in a plastic mask with a couple of blue LEDs behind the eye
sockets. I don't know how much money was saved by not having *any*
movement of the lower jaw, but the cost in characterisation was high.
Perilously high.
No, a flappy fake jaw would have completely ruined it-- as it has
ruined every attempt to make a talking skull.
i dunno, it worked for the Scotch Video skeleton...
Who was a comic character!
Fat Harris
2006-12-22 23:47:51 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mark Foweraker
Post by Fat Harris
Post by Terry Pratchett
Post by Aidan Karley
but they definitely need considerable work.
My biggest gripe was that Death looked very definitely like a
man in a plastic mask with a couple of blue LEDs behind the eye
sockets. I don't know how much money was saved by not having *any*
movement of the lower jaw, but the cost in characterisation was high.
Perilously high.
No, a flappy fake jaw would have completely ruined it-- as it has
ruined every attempt to make a talking skull.
i dunno, it worked for the Scotch Video skeleton...
Who was a comic character!
He was an informative and instructional character, advising of the
beefits of Scotch video tape. Namely that they re-record and don't fade
away.
Kath
2006-12-23 11:49:19 UTC
Permalink
Post by Terry Pratchett
Post by Aidan Karley
but they definitely need considerable work.
My biggest gripe was that Death looked very definitely like a
man in a plastic mask with a couple of blue LEDs behind the eye
sockets. I don't know how much money was saved by not having *any*
movement of the lower jaw, but the cost in characterisation was high.
Perilously high.
No, a flappy fake jaw would have completely ruined it-- as it has ruined
every attempt to make a talking skull.
I thought, BICBW, that the whole point of Death's voice was that it
kinda arrived in your brain bypassing your ears? If so, then to my mind
the jaw *shouldn't* move.
Post by Terry Pratchett
Post by Aidan Karley
Overall, you had to have an understanding of DW to understand
the film. Which my wife and daughter don't have. At all. So they didn't
understand the film. At all. And aren't minded to make any effort to
see any others. Any effort, at all.
Other people will. Other people have. And much understanding of DW is
not required, to judge from experience.
Adrian & I thought at first that you would have to have a basic concept
of how the Discworld runs to get it, until I went into school the next
day and spoke to my Year 6 class. They had no idea, but well over half
of them had watched the programme and loved it. If it works for 10-11
year olds who are from a range of abilities and socio-economic
backgrounds, then it works for me!
--
Kath
Mal Franks
2006-12-21 15:17:48 UTC
Permalink
Post by Aidan Karley
Overall, you had to have an understanding of DW to understand
the film. Which my wife and daughter don't have. At all. So they didn't
understand the film. At all. And aren't minded to make any effort to
see any others. Any effort, at all.
OTH my wife who has only read up to Mort and my mother-in-law, who is
visiting us from the States this Christmas, and has never read a DW book
had no problems with it whatsoever and thoroughly enjoyed it.
Flo 'Irian' Schaetz
2006-12-25 18:22:13 UTC
Permalink
And thus spoke Aidan Karley...
Post by Aidan Karley
My biggest gripe was that Death looked very definitely like a
man in a plastic mask with a couple of blue LEDs behind the eye
sockets. I don't know how much money was saved by not having *any*
movement of the lower jaw, but the cost in characterisation was high.
Perilously high.
I tend to agree that the skull looked a little bit to much like plastic
for me, but I don't agree with the jaw thing: A moving jaw would look
rather stange and wouldn't have helped to make Death look like Death. As
was pointed out, he doesn't have lungs, a voice that simply IS there, is
much more convincing for me...

Anyway, I liked the film very much :-)

Flo
The Flying Hamster
2006-12-23 21:53:54 UTC
Permalink
On Tue, 19 Dec 2006 22:33:09 +0000, Mark Foweraker <***@hotmail.com> wrote:
[...]
Post by Mark Foweraker
From most of the posts here you would have thought it was an
unmitigated disaster of the first order. In fact, based on most of what
Nope, I'm a picky bugger looking for the wires holding up the ghosts
(the sort of person who, on a trip to DisneyLand, was looking out for
something which was broken and was throughly cheered at seeing a broken
doll in "It's a small world" somewhere around midnight[1]) so while
looking to enjoy it I also expect to find something "wrong".

The best I can manage is that Nobby didn't reach the heights needed to
carry a piece of paper to prove he was human and wishing they hadn't cut
Baccus getting what was coming to him.

Bloody brilliant.

So when are the Mob doing the next one (Soul Music? Thief of Time
perhaps of maybe Going Postal)

Mark

[1] Though some semtex around the speakers would have been better to
deal with that bloody "music".
--
The Flying Hamster <***@korenwolf.net> http://www.korenwolf.net/
We're all in the gutter but some of us are looking at the stars (O Wilde)
David Chapman
2006-12-22 19:14:39 UTC
Permalink
Post by Daibhid Ceanaideach
The Scotsman's
That's going to piss off Susan Mansfield, Arts writer for the Scotsman,
inveterate Pterry fan (and friend of mine).
Lister
2006-12-22 19:54:51 UTC
Permalink
On Fri, 22 Dec 2006 19:14:39 -0000, "David Chapman"
Post by David Chapman
Post by Daibhid Ceanaideach
The Scotsman's
That's going to piss off Susan Mansfield, Arts writer for the Scotsman,
inveterate Pterry fan (and friend of mine).
She should post here, perhaps she and Stacie could write lit crit :)
--
We're climbing up the sunshine mountains
Where the pretty brezes blow
We're climbing up the sunshine mountains
Faces all a-glow
Daibhid Ceanaideach
2006-12-22 20:17:06 UTC
Permalink
The time: 22 Dec 2006. The place: alt.fan.pratchett. The
From the Collected Witterings of Daibhid Ceanaideach,
Post by Daibhid Ceanaideach
The Scotsman's
That's going to piss off Susan Mansfield, Arts writer for
the Scotsman, inveterate Pterry fan (and friend of mine).
Er, why?
--
Dave
Official Absentee of EU Skiffeysoc
http://sesoc.eusa.ed.ac.uk/
"The only thing worse than being talked about
is having nothing to declare except my handbag."
-Oscar Wilde, according to Humphrey Lyttleton
David Chapman
2006-12-23 21:14:01 UTC
Permalink
Post by Daibhid Ceanaideach
The time: 22 Dec 2006. The place: alt.fan.pratchett. The
From the Collected Witterings of Daibhid Ceanaideach,
Post by Daibhid Ceanaideach
The Scotsman's
That's going to piss off Susan Mansfield, Arts writer for
the Scotsman, inveterate Pterry fan (and friend of mine).
Er, why?
I don't know - why *would* a Pterry fan who works in the right department of
a newspaper's journo pool get pissed off because someone else got the gig to
review a Pterry adaptation, especially when they have no Sky access?
Daibhid Ceanaideach
2006-12-23 21:27:01 UTC
Permalink
The time: 23 Dec 2006. The place: alt.fan.pratchett. The
From the Collected Witterings of Daibhid Ceanaideach,
Post by Daibhid Ceanaideach
The time: 22 Dec 2006. The place: alt.fan.pratchett. The
From the Collected Witterings of Daibhid Ceanaideach,
Post by Daibhid Ceanaideach
The Scotsman's
That's going to piss off Susan Mansfield, Arts writer for
the Scotsman, inveterate Pterry fan (and friend of mine).
Er, why?
I don't know - why *would* a Pterry fan who works in the
right department of a newspaper's journo pool get pissed
off because someone else got the gig to review a Pterry
adaptation, especially when they have no Sky access?
Right, sorry, I was looking at things from entirely the wrong
perspective, as usual (I thought it was something about what
the review *said*).
--
Dave
Official Absentee of EU Skiffeysoc
http://sesoc.eusa.ed.ac.uk/
"The only thing worse than being talked about
is having nothing to declare except my handbag."
-Oscar Wilde, according to Humphrey Lyttleton
Richard Bos
2006-12-28 01:32:26 UTC
Permalink
Post by David Chapman
Post by Daibhid Ceanaideach
The time: 22 Dec 2006. The place: alt.fan.pratchett. The
From the Collected Witterings of Daibhid Ceanaideach,
Post by Daibhid Ceanaideach
The Scotsman's
That's going to piss off Susan Mansfield, Arts writer for
the Scotsman, inveterate Pterry fan (and friend of mine).
Er, why?
I don't know - why *would* a Pterry fan who works in the right department of
a newspaper's journo pool get pissed off because someone else got the gig to
review a Pterry adaptation, especially when they have no Sky access?
But how is an Arts writer _more_ right to review a TV film than a TV
reviewer?

Richard
David Chapman
2006-12-28 18:16:20 UTC
Permalink
Post by Richard Bos
But how is an Arts writer _more_ right to review a TV film than a TV
reviewer?
It's all part of the same department.
Loading...