The BBC has been working on a new adaptation of Terry Pratchett’s Discworld series, The Watch, and now we know when to expect it: January 2021, according to BBC America.
The series is about a specific part of Pratchett’s Discworld: It follows the Ankh-Morpork City Watch, which appeared in a number of the late author’s stories, such as Feet of Clay, The Fifth Elephant, Guards! Guards!, Jingo, Men at Arms, Night Watch, Snuff, Theatre of Cruelty, and Thud!. The series will feature Richard Dormer as Sam Vimes, the Watch’s commander, as well as Sam Adewunmi (Doctor Who) as Carcer Dun, Marama Corlette (The City and The City) as Corporal Angua, Adam Hugill (Pennysworth) as Carrot Ironfoundersson, Jo Eaton-Kent (The Romanoffs) as Constable Cheery, and Lara Rossi (Robin Hood) as Lady Sybil Ramkin.
Buy the Book
Across the Green Grass Fields
According to BBC America, the “modern and inclusive” series will be about “an unlikely group of misfits,” who have to “find the guts to save the world, surprising even themselves in the process. The comedic yet thrilling series pits trolls, werewolves, wizards and other improbable heroes against an evil plot to resurrect a great dragon which would lead to the destruction of life as they know it.”
The series will debut sometime in January 2021 and will run for eight episodes. It’s attracted some controversy from fans, Pratchett’s estate, and even his daughter, over perceived changes from the original source material (which, in addition to certain character changes, does not seem concerned about matching Pratchett in terms of storytelling or tone).
The series isn’t the only project coming from Pratchett’s works—the BBC is developing an “absolutely faithful” Discworld series, while Neil Gaiman says that it’s likely that Amazon will continue Good Omens in some form.
I’ve never quite seen as much hostility towards a project from people ostensibly involved in it (although in reality they were manoeuvred off the project years ago). Rhianna Pratchett and Rob Wilkins are two of the most laidback, nicest and coolest people around and they’re both clearly furious about the direction the project has gone in. Not the “inclusiveness” angle which I’m sure is not the issue (Discworld was extremely progressive already), but the fact that the second they got the rights in 2018, BBC America seems to have taken the view that they’re going to be doing 100% their thing with a 100% original story with 100% original characters who only have the same names as in the books and screw everything else.
There’s also the issue here with the producers tripping themselves over in an attempt to come across as trendy. Sybil Ramkin is a late thirty/early fortysomething, rotund woman not in the first flush of youth who nevertheless kicks arse and takes names, and eventually wins over Vimes with her personality, kindness and indefatigability. That’s actually a much harder character to make work than “sexy young Discworld Catwoman,” which is what they’ve gone for. If you want to have her as a different ethnicity, fine and I don’t think Pratchett would have given one toss about it. Meera Syal fifteen years ago would have been exceptional in the role, to start with. But making her this kind of vigilante superhero is just an unfathomable decision.
Likewise making Cheery a human and giving them Carrot’s background is…weird. What is Carrot’s background now? Why turn a character already rooted into feminism and fighting the patriarchy into a statement on non-binary gender choices? Pratchett wrote a whole book about the distinctions of gender as a concept (Monstrous Regiment), so inserting this statement into the show with unrelated characters seems unnecessary.
Also, cutting Nobby and Colon is like announcing you’re adapting LotR and then immediately cutting Merry & Pippin, or Legolas & Gimli. Completely inexplicable.
Just about the only good choice they’ve made so far is casting Anna Chancellor as Vetinari. That’s inspired. Everything else is just insipid.
#1 beat me to it and said it better than I could. Kudos!
@1: I haven’t been closely following the development of The Watch, but that sounds all sorts of awful. And that horrible generic promo photo…
@1. Werthead
Add me to the list of those that agree with you.
PS. That’s supposed to be Sybil? No, no, no, I love Sybil and that’s not her
Looked at photo. Okay, there’s Vimes, the badass is front is Angua… went to IMDB and got very confused. There’s an actor with the roll of “Oook.” I lost all interest at that point, but Angua is made up like a methhead and Sybil is ridiculously wrong. Apparently “inclusive” doesn’t include body shape.
I’m out… this looks absolutely awful.
Jesus. I wish they wouldn’t make this.
Ok. Time to reread the books again.
Worst. Adaption. Ever.
Wait! What?
Cherry is a human?
Why?
The whole point of her character is a dwarf “coming out” as female.
Someday studios will learn that there are better ways to adapt massively popular works of fiction.
It continues to amaze me that so many studios make the same expensive mistake- Eragon, Percy Jackson, A Wrinkle in Time, Avatar: the Last Airbender, and now, Artemis Fowl. Take a popular book (or animated series), make a poorly-written, high budget, in-name-only film, which then (often) flops and decreases the chances of any further adaptations.
Is it really that hard for writers, producers, etc., to trust that a massively successful story might be worth faithfully adapting?
I was really looking forward to this when it was announced, but I will definitely not be watching it now.
If I remember correctly, she doesn’t literally kick any arse, which the creators of this adaptation seem to find dull.
I think you’re right there. Lady Ramkin is an affectionate portrait of the sort of “Ladies who Organise” that a reporter on a local ‘paper would be familiar with. They’re the people who run the Riding for the Disabled or the Dog’s Home and rope people in – often kicking and screaming – to any number of charitable events by sheer force of will.
Sadly that’s the sort of woman that your average right-on BBC producer curls their lip at.
@10,
The problem is that as currently constructed, Hollywood, BBC, etc are almost guaranteed to make mistakes like this. Its institutional at this point. Creatives (directors, producers, etc) don’t like to take projects unless they get to create. Hence, you get massive changes. The sad thing is that most of the time the creation would have been decent to pretty good to excellent if they had just avoided using the name, settings, etc of the original property and made their own movie, TV show, etc. But, the money people won’t fork over cash for “original” creations, so you get drek.
I must make a point of remembering the names of the producers and directors on this project, so I’ll know not to bother with anything else they ever have a hand in, like EVER. Some things are unacceptable. S
I started reading Discworld during quarantine and am now around 15 books in, from different threads like Rincewind and Death and so on. So far, I have found the Watch novels to be the most enjoyable, and even as I was reading I thought to myself what a good adaptation this would make on the screen. Imagine my elation when I heard that such an adaptation was already in the making!
But sadly this is not what I was looking for. Sure, this can be a good series, but it won’t be a Discworld series. Maybe they are aiming for something in the lines of Watchmen, but I don’t see that happening because Pratchett’s material does not call for nor requires a “spiritual” successor. What I see is a generic “everyone’s a badass” promo photo and a generic mainstream-progressive dynamics. But I’ll be looking forward to it nonetheless. Let’s hope for the best!
@11: You remember a bit incorrectly. Sybil held Vimes up at crossbow-point, stood up an arrest squad of goons on her doorstop and then attacked them with a broadsword, broke out of a castle held by werewolves, and, of course, has spent a significant chunk of her life raising animals that will explode when looked at funny.
Apparently for BBC America, inclusiveness stops with any female character that is not size 0.
That should be all the information you need to discard this series.
@11, @12: I meant more metaphorically, Sybil often comes up with solutions to problems, provides support to the characters but calls them on their flaws etc. Although @16 also points out that she does get her hands dirty when required.
What does this remind me of? Oh, yes! The 2004 television adaptation of Ursula Le Guin’s Earthsea books. Still shuddering…
I wish they’d take Pratchett’s name off this. Change the names of the characters and nobody’d suspect for a minute it was connected to the Watch books.
I understand the emotional attachment that fans and especially the family have, but I also understand the BBC’s move to make something different. I’ve seen a lot of production teams claim “faithful adaptations” in my years and many of them deviate in tone, storyline and even names of main characters. It’s business and part of the risk of making money off of your art.
Personally, I have mixed feelings about Pratchett’s work, so this to me is exciting. I love the worlds that he has built, but don’t find his humor appealing within the stories framed in those worlds. Don’t get me wrong, I enjoy a lot of mainstream BBC content and enjoy other authors like Gaiman and Adams, so I don’t think it’s a culture thing being someone from North America. I find Pratchett funny, but a lot of the stuff he writes feels absurd to the point that it detracts from the story for me.
Making something more serious has me interested and I will probably read the source material if I enjoy the series. I’ve read a few of his novels and watched most of the content that has been filmed. This series may get me interested in revisiting his work. Maybe that’s what the BBC is hoping for…
Sounds usual BBC PC crap,
Getting rid of Nobby knobs and Colon is pathetic
Cast looks nothing like in books, absolute car crash on way, disgusting BBC
For a start I think Tor should do it’s homework.
It’s not Terry Pratchett’s The Watch.
It’s just The Watch.
It’s inspired by characters created by Terry Pratchett… not an adaptation at all.
As for Terry Pratchett’s estate not having creative control, there is a full timeline of why and how over at the only decent place to get news about Terry’s works – Discworld Monthly.
https://discworldmonthly.co.uk/terrypratchett_thewatchseries.php
Miranda Hart would have been a great choice for Sybil
This looks awful. Why did they even call it The Watch? Or Discworld?
Why is everyone brooding and sexy? Has anyone producing ever read the books?
Oh, BBC America, that explains everything.
Hard PASS
Yeah.
I’m a huge fan of Discworld, I’ve been collecting and reading the books for 25 years now.
I’m deeply disturbed at the direction this has gone.
As much as I will end up watching this, and I will try to keep an open mind, because it is (on the surface at least) an adaptation.
Yes, I’ve heard that it’s inspired by, and not based on Sir Terry’s work, and that is a part of what bothers me.
But even if it does turn out to be entertaining in its own right, it won’t be Discworld.
They’ve changed far, far too much.
@21 Al
Why make a Terry Pratchett adaption for people who dont really like Pratchett? To me this makes no sense at all.
@24. Rusty
Bad Rusty!!!!!!!!! Now I want that soooooo much!!!!
‘I understand the emotional attachment that fans and especially the family have, but I also understand the BBC’s move to make something different’??? The DO something different. Write your own comedy fantasy and make it. Don’t vandalise someone else’s (amazing, funny, brilliant) stories.
From what I see of the casting and the change of background stories, this is a total travesty.
They should have in large letters under the titles ‘This series pays a passing and cursory nod towards the work of Terry Pratchett’.