Members of the dominant culture thrown off when a pivotal character is portrayed as not being a member of the dominant culture?
I mean I don’t know why that character has to have any particular accent or can’t have any particular accent. I don’t know why it’s so distracting for that character to have that accent. It’s a bizarre complaint.
Not to pile on too much, but yeah, I didn’t understand the complaints about her accent either.
To me it was weird that the people in the town heard her accent and said “American.”
It was not her accent, it was the other characters’ reaction to her accent that threw me. Had they not remarked on it, I likely would not have given it a thought.
It was also not my major issue with the show (which, again, I enjoyed).
And weight in stone. (I think a stone is 14 pounds?).
Of course, Crowley had been around for centuries in which distance was measured in miles, vs a few decades where it was measured in km - and the old Bentley would surely have had its gauges in MPH vs KPH - so even without knowing what you said about MPH, it’s not a surprise.
I liked it. I’ve not read anything by either author, so I can’t comment on it from an adaptation standpoint, but I thought it was good.
In general I think there were perhaps a few too many characters. I loved both angels and would have loved 6 episodes of nothing but them. A lot of the other characters either didn’t have enough back story, or too much time was spent on the back story for what you actually got out of it. Like the witch background I think could have been edited a bit more heavily to just take up less time. The witchfinder sergeant stuff and the horsemen stuff made me feel like we were taking time away from the main story. I bet you could get a version of this story that mostly or completely cuts them out, with more focus on the angels/heaven/hell, and it’d be great instead of “good.”
If I re-watch, I’d probably skip over witches and horsemen.
Yes and no.
I can’t really quantify know how well it translates in the TV series, since I can’t watch it without having knowledge of the book ; but the gist of the Them bits, and the witch stuff, and even the Horsemen stuff (although that aspect hinges on the Other Horsemen, which aren’t in the show) is to emphasize and contrast the more grounded, human, humane, and “silly but kind” nature of humanity as opposed to the extremes and the absolutes of angels, demons and God.
Azzy and Crowley are in fact part of that, too - their entire characterization is that since they’ve been tooling around humanity for thousands of years, they’ve become human-ish and removed from the Great Plan. In a sense, Pratchett & Gaiman wrote like modern Tolkiens : the LOTR is all about primeval, extreme forces locked in pre-ordained apocalyptic clashes of epic proportions due to godly decrees and all-powerful individuals or immortals and such ; all trumped by the existence of hobbits who just like eating, gardening, smoking pot and generally not doing overly much. Which are not only more relatable, but in the end morally superior to the “angels”. As well, both Tolkien and Pratchett’s oeuvres are basically odes to rural Britishness (and/or lampooning of rural British quibbles).
The same theme permeates all of the witchfinder stuff, between the Sergeant’s ostensibly intransigent moral decrees (but really completely corrupt and soft on the hooker next door) and Pulsifer’s just being sort of a well-meaning doofus. And of course, the Sergeant being a) an incredibly incompetent, backwards fuck-up and b) the entire extent of both Crowley and Azzy’s “special forces” at the same time is hilarious. The witch arc is more of the same : “it’s better to be human and not know things and generally make it up as you go along than it is to own absolute truth/knowledge”.
Spatial Inter Dimensional Real-time All-purpose Transport
It’s a bigger on the inside troop transport but not a time machine.
Used in the 2nd Doctor’s Wargames episode, which was Troughton’s last story as the Doctor.
To the topic at hand, my wife and I loved it! We would also watch a show based only on Tennant and Sheen as their characters going through the ages!
I know acting can be subjective but I don’t understand the dislike of Adria Arjona as Anathema. My introduction to her was Emerald City and I thought she did fine there and here.
Michael McKean, who I adore, was the weird one to me with his accent. But as I can’t pick them out, I’m not one to talk.
(I do love it when anyone says the really long Welch town name. Tennant said it on Graham Norton but then someone else said it on a different talk show and it sounded a LOT more fluid by a native speaker. It’s fun either way!)
Loved the use of Queen and I did recognize the songs!
Loved his car!
I thought someone else said that Tennant was doing a weird walk, like a rock star crossed with a diva, and after I noticed it, I saw it but it worked for me. Again, he’s the demon, out having fun and enjoying life. I think the dance A did was the first time we saw him do something on his own without C? Otherwise, he stayed out of the way and did the miracles as needed. That worked well to me and why C seemed more in touch with humanity than A.
If anything, I’d be more curious how they got their jobs? How did they know something needed to happen here or there? I don’t know if that was intrinsic to being an angel and demon? Yet, C had to be given the anti-christ. Still fun to ponder this.
ETA: I suppose it could be phone or when either of them make reports. However, I do think something there was screwy because it was 1600 when C suggested they do their own things, or both do nothing. I did think it weird, then, that they did ANY reports after that? It worked for the show but could be interesting to find out more. Not that I will read the book, though.
What I did think the show did well was A and C’s bromance.
I agree, at times the kid’s could be wooden, but again, what do you do.
Fun discussion! Thanks!
Off topic again:
American Gods. I have liked AG but it can get confusing. I think Donar the Great was the best episode in that it clearly gives us answers that are important without giving anything away. Then the next episode is confusing.
That turned me off Legion. First season of that is David realizing that he isn’t losing his mind and things are happening. That story/plot comes to head and David gets answers. But second season of Legion puts us right back there instead of moving forward? I wasn’t interested going backward and revisiting that so I stopped watching it.
AG seems to suffer from that as well. It’s like writers forget that there is a HUGE difference between their characters being confused or unsure of things and the audience being that way. Sometimes, you do want to keep the reader guessing, such as a mystery. But most of the time, things have to be clear to the reader, even if that means given something away, imo.
AG is right on that line. They make Shadow question things and then he believes at the end of an episode only not to believe the next one. While AG works and I enjoy it, it could go Legion at any point and turn me off.
To slightly get back to it, Good Omens worked, in part, due to the narrator making things clear to us when we needed it to be cleared up. Worked really well, in fact.
Again, great discussion! Thanks!
I’m pretty sure I’ve seen Michael Sheen doing that, maybe on one of those Vanity Fair YouTube videos.
[ol]
[li]Pedant nitpick: Welsh[/li][li]When? I missed that and I’d like to pay attention to it![/li][/ol]
I’ve never read the book. I loved the miniseries. I thought it quite well-done. It was far more subtle than anything Douglas Adams would have done, but it did have the same “vibe”, which was a stylistic choice, of course. That was fine with me; I wasn’t expecting that it would be a television show version of the events of the book.
Oops. Sorry about that. Welsh. Got it.
Found it! Well, not the David Tennant one. Not sure where that is. It was Naomi Watts on Colbert.
Youtube just served it up to me out of the blue:
[quote=“TruCelt, post:154, topic:834796”]
Youtube just served it up to me out of the blue:
[/QUOTE]Ha!
I just finished it, and enjoyed it immensely.
IMDB Trivia notes that Terry Gilliam had almost managed to make it in 2002, as a film starring Robin Williams as Aziraphel and Johnny Depp as Crowley. But that was the point when people stopped going to see Johnny in movies, so it didn’t work out. This was probably better.
Robin Williams would have been an *awful *Azzy. I like the man and he was a great actor, but I don’t think he’s ever been in the same room as “prim and fussy” in his lifetime.
Wanna marry me or be my platonic life partner ? First to win the lottery calls the other 
Yeah, Depp could work as Crowley, but Robin Williams would have been about the worst Azariphale possible.
[quote=“TruCelt, post:154, topic:834796”]
Youtube just served it up to me out of the blue:
[/QUOTE] And thanks to that little link, I found [this one](https://youtu.be/nche6PwDBjQ), which is a wonderful set of mini-interviews with various actors (Tennant and Sheen, Hamm and Adria, and Miranda Richardson by her self).And Adria sounds to me just like she did in Good Omens, which is standard broadcast American English. (I was more than a bit confused when people wanted to know how all the UK residents knew she was American, because, to me, that’s what she sounded like.)