Terry Pratchett's Colour Of Magic Logo

Hey! I know! This is a really old review for the color of magic, but I’ve not seen it till now, though it was released at least last year (2008), possible before, I could check it up on the old IMDB, but that’d be too organised. Instead, I’m going to review this Terry Pratchett classic as I’ve seen it, which is now. I’ve read the books, listened to the audio-books, and now I’m watching the TV/Film adaptation. By the way, the English is “the colour of magic” and I’m English, so there! :)

It’s not going to be the longest review because I’m not into that kind of guff that goes into a lot of reviews. I’ll be honest, I know my subject, I’m a keen reader of Pratchett and the first two novels in the Discworld series are very well known to me and close to my heart. There have, to my knowledge, only been two significant TV adapations, the first being The Hogfather, a piffle of an adaptation that, although diversionary, was almost certainly a very bad choice for turning into a TV/Film because it required too much pre-knowledge of the Discworld. As such it came across as a very weak half-joke. Not great for Pratchett fans.
However, this review is about “The Colour of Magic”, which is a TV/Film so incorporating the novel “The Light Fantastic” – the first two Discworld novels written by Terry and very rich in humor, humour and the many legs of the Sapient Pearwood suitcase.

Overall I think it comes across without too much splendour. The quality of the production is very, very high, I’m certainly impressed with the amount of effort put into it, I would simply suggest that it needs, absolutely NEEDS to be a Hollywood production with the cast and money that will truly enable it to become what it ought to be. I mean, look, it doesn’t need to be a Lord of the Rings (3 films, 4 hours each, fantastic BUT not THIS) but it does need a decent treatment. I love David Jason (actually, I love anyone with firstname/lastname variations that can be all turn-aroundy) but really he’s not best suited to this kind of production. Actually thought that Sean Astin was a very good Twoflower, almost because his performance is at least charismatic rather than actually being that brilliant. Christopher Lee as Death is inspired, in future books when Death gets more of a character that’ll be absolutely brilliant in my head as the voice of Death.

To be fair, if you’re considering buying the DVD or Blu-Ray of this I’d say: Yeah, go for it! Why not, the worst you’ll get is a poor adaptation of an excellent story, which at the end of it is still a pretty good fun story to spend your time with.

Overall score: 6/10. Seriously, if you’ve no idea then… you’ll have no idea. Please read the book, or listen to the audio-book. Don’t rely on TV/Film adapations of Discworld books to become your only knowledge of a genius like Terry Pratchett’s work.

, , ,

The 4 requeried words

An odd one this, when trying to find out about various competitions running on the internet, I came across one in parrticular for the 4 requeried words which was an attempt to make sure that anyone who was reading the intenret for this phrase was going to be above other people in the search results for the phrase and that phrase was the four required words.

The 4 requeried words

So what are the four required words? Well, I don’t think there are any, as such. It’s all just a mish-mash of sentences devoted to trying to get somewhere without having to do any real work or having to make a jot of sense. If sense comes in jots, which I’m not sure about.

What I am sure about is that it’s all a bit of a swiss cheese of a situation.

Woo! I’ve just launched a single page website about the zodiac on a domain I registered through Godaddy auctions. Nothing at all special, the domain doesn’t have any particular attached kudos, but I wanted to run the experiment to see how well it did compared to a “blank” domain purchase.

The URL is www.zodiac4u.com – simple enough, quite easy to remember and ripe for content. At this point it’s just the one page, setting out a kind of mission statement about what I want to do with the site. Effectively I want to giveĀ people personalised horoscopes so at some point I’ll create a full enquiry form. Horoscopes are a particular pleasure of mine.

So the Godaddy thing – yeah, it’s alright. I’ve done it before, bought the expired domain name www.nottheonion.com – this did have some kudos with existing pages which I replicated (not content wise, just page name wise). It seemed to do very well for that reason, already has a pagerank (I think 2). I think it’s worth checking it out – it’s not as cheap as buying a domain name from scratch but with so few decent .coms available these days it’s a decent solution.

For anyone looking for SEO reasons, I also did a fair amount of research today about purchasing .net domains instead of .coms – my feeling is that seriously – it’s not worth it. If you can’t get the .com you want, unless your site has a particular reason to be particularly geo-centric (eg. .co.uk because the site is about the UK), you’re stuffed. My advice would be to keep looking, keep dancing around the domain registration places typing in keywords that kinda match, making sure your eventual URL isn’t going to be super massive.
The other thing to keep in mind, of course, is that at first of course you’re unlikely to get a high percentage of “type-in” traffic – that is, traffic from people typing your domain name straight into the address bar. Instead people are going to be searching for your site and that’s how they’ll find you. But DO people bookmark? In my experience, no, they don’t. Instead they remember the domain name and search for that!! If you haven’t got the .com, you’re scuppered! Definitely, buy the .com, not the .net (well, BOTH, if you can get the .com).

, ,