You won't be disappointed!

Such a frustrating disappointment

From my favorite movies..

There's no way I can possibly love it entirely but I just think its ridiculously bad, but enjoyable at the same time.

It is a 2 episode television mini-series adapted from a fantasy novel of the same name. If you have already seen 'The Lord of the Rings' and 'Harry Potter' films, then won't get excited while watching it. But it is not a bad film, that made par with the television quality. Visually acceptable, but the performances and locations were good.It was a decent story, but mostly clichéd. Inspired by middle age about the understanding of the earth and the universe. The world is flat and circular, where different kingdoms across all the continents about verge to discover something new. In this tale set in somewhere where a tourist and an expelled wizard to team up for the sightseeing, but end up in a long unexpected adventure where they face various dangers and overcoming it brings an end to the narration.The film characters were awesome, the imaginations were brilliant. It might be an ideal film for children, but for the grown up it is not much effective. I'm not doubting the Terry Pratchett's creation, but only this series. A couple of seasons television series would be a good idea, but should not compromise for the graphics. While 'Game of Thrones' making a big, why can't this. Hope my wish comes true very soon.6½/10

I've never been able to read Terry Pratchett's books, mostly because they were too ... British. All those large words and phrasing that seems to always say more than one can possibly understand. So I was grateful for a chance to grasp a little of what all this Discworld business is all about.The film is clearly a TV movie, the special effects are simple and either completely CGI or weird mashups (like the fire breathing dragon bit), but that never bothered me because the acting was great, the story fun and the people in it clearly enjoying every moment of its making.Bottom line: like the old Shakespeare plays that BBC was doing and I gobbled up as a young child or like Doctor Who or any other of those shows that Brits do, which are cheaply done, but with a lot of soul, I really liked it. I am looking forward to watching Hogfather, next.

I love the books - full of humour, action, and a laff-a-minute. This production is anything but. It is sloooooow, it is baaaaaaad, it is boooooooring. Even the "action" scenes are sloooow and ponderous.The casting is abysmal (I mean - grandpappy David Jason as Rincewind? Come ON!!!) Even the actors that *could* have been good make their best to outbad each other - Tim Curry vies for the Ham of the Year Award; Jeremy Irons, who could have made a *fabulous* Patrician if he only tried, turns what should have been a cold and calculating character into an effeminate fop with a speech impediment; and Sean Astin simply ruins every scene he is in (which is virtually the entire movie) by mustering all the acting skills of a grade school pageant.All in all - simply shockingly BAD! I really had to steel myself not to turn it off after 30 minutes.This is not a movie for watching, this a movie for lying down and AVOIDING!

Mr. Pratchett's books tend to be a bit nudge-nudge/wink-wink for my tastes. A little bit of Hitchhiker's Guide humor (or should that be humour?) goes a long way for us far less punny Yanks. So I've never read the book(s) that spawned this nearly 4-hour TV movie (seen last week on the ION Network in the U.S.).I didn't read the IMDb comments until after viewing, but I had the same bipolar "This is great" feeling during some scenes, and "This really sux" disdain during others. The cheesy budget constraints are a frequent stumbling block, as is the British tendency to keep speeding up scenes to fast-motion ala Benny Hill/Goodies/Python/BadNews/YoungOnes/etc. Poor substitute for genuine chuckles, which should have been aplenty, given the ludicrousness of the fantasy genre – An earlier comment mentions deviations from the book that "didn't make sense," but I disagree with most of the incidents he mentions. For instance, when the walking wardrobe (nice visual, but usually sped up like a Benny Hill chase-scene) seeks out Cohen the Barbarian to help his master, I just assumed the wardrobe – described as "fiercely protective of its owner" – recognized it needed heroic help to get Frodo's pal --- I mean the Worst Wizard's pal – out of his increasingly dangerous predicaments.And I certainly don't think we needed any more pit stops along the road to the distant finale, no matter how entertaining or troll-filled those pitsops may have been in the books.Tim Curry chews up all his scenes, and even seems to be paying tribute to (or gently mocking) several past roles with several sly bits of dialogue and inflection that harken back to Legend, Times Square, Annie, Spamalot, the Shout, and even Rocky and a couple of his cartoon villains.I didn't know Christopher Lee was Death until after viewing but, wow, his scenes were among the best! I loved how he just pops up out of nowhere whenever someone's life is on the line, seemingly caught in the middle of whatever he was doing at the time and becoming increasing bitter that his sharpened scythe is only scooping up uncredited extras and no marquee stars. You can tell much of what little budget there was went into tinting and partly animating his sequences, each of them terrific. I actually laughed aloud when our intrepid Tourist said, on the reaper's own monochromatic porchstep, "How often does one get to be at Death's door?" So the movie seems to be a low-budget but fairly accurate TV transcription of Pratchett's usual entry-level teen fiction take on the fantasy genre. Yeah, it's boneheaded at times, but at least the low common denominator it aims for is usually a funny denominator. To paraphrase the late Don Thompson, If you LIKE that sort of thing, this is that sort of thing.