Terrible acting, screenplay and direction.

It's hard to see any effort in the film. There's no comedy to speak of, no real drama and, worst of all.

This is a must-see and one of the best documentaries - and films - of this year.

The film creates a perfect balance between action and depth of basic needs, in the midst of an infertile atmosphere.

I'm a big fan of Terry Pratchett novels. I've read about thirty of them and I love them. "Going Postal" was among my favorites.The film renders the plot quite faithfully most of the time. Most of the characters are very similar to their novel counterparts. Richard Coyle (whom you may know from TV comedy show "Coupling") does a very good performance as Moist von Lipwig, the new postmaster and Charles Dance (the doctor from "Alien 3") is fantastic as lord Havelock Vetinari.You haven't read the book? You get a decent comedy with many funny quips and one liners. There is some fantasy (fantastic creatures like werewolf, banshee and golems) and some magic, but most of the plot revolves around humans and their emotions: love, hate, greed, vengeance. The story is about the Post Office of Ankh Morpork. People have forgotten about Post Office in times of "Clacks" (something like telegraphy). But there are some who want Post Office running again and a lifelong conman Moist von Lipwig is conned into trying to run it.Of course the movie misses many of the novels subtle humorous details, but is fun enough to watch.

... to make all the changes? I'm not saying I was completely disappointed. It is a Discworld adaption and as such it was pretty much impossible to make something entirely bad. But apart from necessary or adequate changes such as removal of the sorting machine were all the differences really needed? The last Flashback was so... no... it is supposed to be a comedy but I don't think this was supposed to be comical. I would have much preferred the postman initiation over all the flashbacks which really didn't serve any real purpose. (I know what purpose it was supposed to serve, yet it didn't. The viewers aren't morons and neither is Moist. No need to drop an anvil.)The depiction of the golems was... good enough, I'd assume. I always imagines them otherwise but that's up to personal taste.The actors I liked quite well. I loved Coyle back when he was Jeff and he is a great Lipvig as well. Adora Belle and Vetinari also were for the mo part well depicted, except for the changes to Adora's character. Though, Gilt suffered badly from the adaption. I won't blame it on the actor, I guess he did what he was told to do. But the evil genius con man became such a pathetic little worm... No I just didn't like it.Also, I'm looking forward to what they will be doing with the Making Money adaption due to the changes in Angua's plot line. Way to make life difficult for yourself.Anyway, it's not a bad movie per se, but... I would not recommend it if you read Going Postal, or plan to do so. Then it is more sad than enjoyable, or at least to me it was, sadly.

I begin this review wondering if 2/10 might be a little too generous. As quite a hardcore Pratchett fan for over 12 years, I don't know why I put myself through this kind of experience, I really don't. This TV movie was just excruciating to sit through, as I watched characters that I have know and loved for many years be desecrated, dumbed down, sexed up or just downright murdered. Sacrilege. I think everyone understands that one cannot transcribe a book word for word, action for action onto the big or small screen. Obviously it takes a lot of work and effort trying to achieve a film adaptation of a great piece of literature. But seriously? There is no excuse for such lack of attention to detail, to the storyline, to the attitudes, appearances and mannerisms of the characters, to the general hubbub that makes Ankh- Morpork Ankh-Morpork. Some of this has been mentioned already by other reviewers so perhaps I shouldn't dwell, but a blond Vetinari? A chubby and snide Drumknott? Rubber-like homogeneous golems? a fawning Adora Belle Dearheart? And where is the life and hustle and bustle of the city? The interactive crowds, not to mention the lack of species diversity?I should try and balance this with something positive, right? It was a spirited attempt at Moist von Lipwig, I admit, and you can't fault an actor for a poor script or a pants director. Sargeant Angua looked awesome, for 2 seconds before she changed into a werewolf in a crowded bar, which obviously, is completely out of character. Stanley was almost spot on! and some of the visual effects were't half bad.But the thing about Pratchett, and it's far too important to overlook when adapting his books, is that he crafts such amazing, intricate characters, beautiful running narratives and delicate witticisms that one is awed by his magic, and the life that his books take on inside ones head. Anything short of complete dedication to his intent is simply an insult. This adaptation was lazy, unspirited, rushed and complacent to obviously commercial interests. This makes me very sad. I felt largely the same way about the previous two adaptations - I really can't understand any Pratchett fan being happy with the Hogfather or the Colour of Magic, and certainly not this. It is a shame that those of us truly enamoured with Pratchett's work should be sold out for a wider (dare I say less sophisticated?) audience.Until Tim Burton directs a discworld movie, and all the actors, screenwriters, make-up artists and costume designers are contracted to read the entire discworld series at least three times over before daring to make an appearance on set, I think I'll be giving any screen adaptation of Pratchett a wide berth.

I've only come to the Discworld fairly recently and 'Going Postal' was the first book I read. I've found it one of the most enjoyable books in the series, and Moist Von Lipwig is by far and away my favourite character. So I had a vested interest in this, Sky's third adaptation of a Terry Pratchett novel.After the first episode aired, I was in raptures. It was well filmed, the script was good, it had remained fairly faithful to the plot and it appeared to be well cast (although all the way through I expected Richard Coyle to jump into the TARDIS as there's something very Doctor Who-ish about his performance. And I thought Adora Belle Dearheart wasn't written very well at all). The second episode, however, was very disappointing. It seemed that the writers had read half of 'Going Postal' and then left their copy on the bus so had to resort to making the end of the story up. I cannot understand why they would change it so drastically. There's artistic license, and then there's sheer stupidity.I guess we cannot expect any better from the writers. For a screenplay to be 100% true to the book, Pratchett would have to write it himself and now that's never going to happen. I would have liked to have seen them have a crack at 'Making Money' but their ending of 'Going Postal' hardly segues smoothly into the following book.I prefer 'Hogfather', but 'Going Postal' is still very entertaining. You just have to try to forget ever having read the book.