No it wouldn’t (IMHO). This thread is for all opinions and comments, not just positive ones, so you should feel free to give reasons why you did or didn’t like it.
However, you haven’t said anything at all about what you thought was wrong about it. You only speculated as to why what you thought was wrong turned out that way. (And it sounds to me like maybe you went into it prepared to dislike it.)
Speaking for myself, I wouldn’t consider that a thread shit, in any thread about an artistic work. I’m interested in reading your gripes, if you’re interested in posting them.
[Moderating]
The way I see it, a threadshit is a comment that implies that the thread shouldn’t even exist at all. This is a thread for discussing Amazon’s version of Good Omens, and people’s opinions of it. Someone saying that they didn’t like it, and explaining their reasons why, is an example of that sort of discussion. It is therefore appropriate material for this thread. An example of a threadshit would be something like “Why would anyone even watch that? TV is stupid, and everyone knows that angels aren’t real.”.
Well, I’m not going to threadshit, because I enjoyed the series quite a bit. I haven’t read the book. As someone else mentioned, the show had a very “Hitchiker’s Guide” vibe to it which suited the material perfectly.
OK, then.
The book relies heavily on the narration. Since it must be considered en ensemble piece, with so many different time periods, subplots and characters, the one unifying thing is in fact the narrator, which most certainly is not God. So that’s strike one.
And the plot line in the book in the book obviously hinges on quite a lot of exposition. The two most prominent Horsemen (War and Famine) get quite a lot of back story, at least as compared to Death and Pollution. I realize that giving all that back story for all the principal players would have made for a very clunky and un-watchable tv-series. Which is why it bugs me that there still is so much exposition and VO narration. It still makes it clunky, only less so. There’s simply too much telling and not enough showing.
It also follows the structure of the book very closely (as did AG), a structure which made sense for that medium, but not really for a tv series.
I think it would’ve benefited a lot from having had a screenwriter breaking it down into its components and then stitched them back together as a tv-series. As it now stands (and I’ve watched more of it), all the parts are there. Some are excellent, some additions are even brilliant (“I’m the fucking Archangel Gabriel”), but sadly, the sum of the parts are a far cry from what might’ve been.
Now, if I knew how, I’d be a well paid script doctor in Hollywood, so I shan’t try to come up with the solutions. I’m just a bit sad that it really felt like a filmed novel and not as tv series.
There were times I found Tennant’s performance a little too reminiscent of Bill Nighy in"Love Actually" but he definitely did a great job. Especially that scene with the plants. Jumpin’ Jehoshaphat that was creepy.
I loved the series, and laughed my arse off. Now I can’t wait to read the book.
[That guy mode] The book is better. [/That guy mode]
I find it odd that you think American Gods follows too close to the book when the book and series are so different that they barely can be called the same thing.
I’m finding I just may not be all that fond of Neil Gaiman’s stuff.
I kind of agree with Charlie Tan -
It was fun. I enjoyed it. But I’m not sure it was good. (I’m not saying it was bad) There’s a lot of stuff that was left in because it was funny on paper, but not necessarily funny on screen, and I wonder if it couldn’t have been done better by making better use of tv/film (for example, the baby switch. There was a big hallway with a bunch of doors. I would have preferred babies in carts and harried nuns everywhere. Not a voiceover about three card monte and green felt that was more interesting than the actual baby swap.) I’m also not sure about the narration in general.
Still enjoyed it. But I wonder what it could have been like with someone who was more prepared to “kill their darlings.”
Also -
I’m not sure it was bad casting, but it was odd casting. Also, how did everyone know that she was an American when she spoke without her saying “I’m American.” Her accent does not say “American*” to me.
*Note: Americans have all different looks and accents. There is nothing un-American about her accent. However, she does not use one of the accents that I would immediately note as stereotypically from a US city or region.
Definitely a Bill Nighy impression. More likely from a film called Still Crazy, but generally it was Nighy-ish throughout. I could see Tennant and Nighy playing old and young versions of each other in another film very easily.
No one can ever be too reminiscent of Bill Nighy.
But as I recall, his character in Still Crazy suffered from significant confidence issues; whereas in Love Actually he was badass throughout.
I might be wrong. It’s been a long time since I saw Still Crazy. Pretty sure it was a videocassette rental. I have the soundtrack on CD somewhere too.
Ah, I see Still Crazy is on Amazon Prime. I’ll have to watch it again.
This is exactly where I hit pause the first time. Not the cards, but when the VO started to explain how the non verbal winks and nods meant different things. It’s straight from the text. It was funny to read, but for me it made the flow of the story stall.
Re: American Gods. I only saw the first episode, but to me, it really was paint by the numbers from the text.
Someone upthread suggested that Gaiman himself should’ve done the VO. I would’ve been happier with that. He did an excellent job in that bonus episode of Lucifer. Though I think it would have been better if he were to assume the role of storyteller, rather than supreme ineffable being.
Don’t be ridiculous - everyone has an accent. If her’s wasn’t American, what was it? It certainly wasn’t any variety of English accent.
I’ve never seen the books, but in the show the narrator was god. There was a scene at the beginning of episode 3 where god speaks directly to Azariphile (Where’s the flaming sword I gave you?) and it’s the same voice: Frances McDormand.
EDIT: I see on IMDb that her role is listed as “Narrator / God”, so it’s possible they were meant to be two different characters. If so, that was a failure of the tv show because as presented, they were one and the same.
Wow, all this way and no mention of the ramped up homoromantic subtext between Aziraphale and Crowley? My two teenage yoai-loving daughters we practically screaming at the screen. Especially with Sheen’s ‘I don’t want to like you’ routine when he clearly likes Tennat’s Crowley.
Also, gutsy casting on some parts. Anathema, Pepper and such being cast in a way that contradicts the book and ignores race overall was good. Heck, Archangel Michael was played by a woman (Doon Mackichan). When it didn’t matter, it simply didn’t matter.
Also, for you Queen completists out there…In the last episode toward the end in the park? Hyde Park, I believe? Right before A and C are kidnapped and brought to justice? The brass band is playing ‘Lazing on a Sunday Afternoon’ from Queen’s ‘A Night at the Opera’. It’s a short piece and one of Freddie’s odder contributions but it fits the scene well.
At first, I thought it was supposed to be Greek. I couldn’t place it at all. I understand the townspeople figuring out “not British” after hearing her. I don’t understand how they made the leap to “American.”
Well, when Europeans I game with want English as a Second Language advice, I have to ask them US or British English - there are quite a number of ways to tell someone is not British - the first one is slang. Trunk/Boot, Cookie/Biscuit, Biscuit/Scone [more or less] Ass/Arse, Underwear, Tighty Whities, Briefs/Pants, Screw/Bang, Nuts/Barmy, Custom/Bespoke, N^gger rig, afro-engineer, improvise/bodge, the list is pretty much endless. Secondly is how and what they shop for grocerywise. Most brands are different, and where we would go for mayonnaise, a Brit may go for salad dressing, instead of A1 or some form of BBQ sauce, a Brit would probably ask for HP or brown sauce, we would ask for jam or jelly instead of preserves or conserves and I don’t think there are many of us who would go for random chutneys either though I adore a thin slice of a good cheddar with a thin slice of a tart apple held together with a smear of Maj Grey’s chutney. Thirdly is in the home - we say living room you say lounge, we say come in, you say go through or some variants of that. We offer coffee or soda almost automatically, and want drip coffee, you tend towards tea or instant coffee and use an electric kettle - we tend to use the type of kettle you put on the stove [or hob] and have dinner or supper when you have tea.
Why yes, I can fake being British online as long as I don’t have to do the accent, though I can understand light Glaswegian now =)
Most Americans can’t tell the difference between any of the accents of the former Empire, and when presented with any of them, will jump to the conclusion of “British accent”. I wouldn’t be surprised if Brits similarly jump to the conclusion that any unfamiliar accent must be American.