Jon Hamm is an amnesiac archangel lost in Soho in <em>Good Omens</em> S2 trailer
- Thread starter JournalBot
- Start date
Unsure about this. I liked the original well enough, but it didn't exactly leave me wanting more; it felt complete, and a lot of it was devoted to fan service. Nothing wrong with that, but I'm not a huge Prachett fan.
It's good, though, that Gaiman is involved. I generally like his work. And Tennant is awesome, especially in a setting like this where he can dig in and chew scenery.
Will probably give it a look when it debuts.
It's good, though, that Gaiman is involved. I generally like his work. And Tennant is awesome, especially in a setting like this where he can dig in and chew scenery.
Will probably give it a look when it debuts.
Upvote
24
(29
/
-5)
I’ll put this onto the “hesitantly hopeful” category. I enjoyed season one. Tenannt and Sheen were great. However, the track record of tv shows going “beyond the book” is decidedly mixed. I know, as mentioned in the article, Pratchett and Gaiman had long talked about a sequel. Hopefully they had fleshed it out enough before Pratchett’s death to do the book and the first season justice.
Upvote
75
(75
/
0)
Thanks for the write-up and review of the first season. I remember the casting was incredible! Americans put British accents into impenetrable evil imperial bureaucracies, but the British put glib, businessy, vaguely evangelical All-American Hamm into Heaven's bureaucracy - when it's going to be thwarted. And the angel/demon cold war-style frenemy relationship was very well done.
Upvote
32
(34
/
-2)
IncorrigibleTroll
Ars Tribunus Angusticlavius
Sheen and Tennant bouncing off each other is a delight, but adaptations that go beyond their source material don't have the best track record. Apprehension increases...
Upvote
21
(25
/
-4)
Definitely agree. Although having one of the original authors involved helps soothe some of that, especially if he's being honest about already working out general plot idea/points with Pratchett years ago.
Upvote
24
(24
/
0)
IncorrigibleTroll
Ars Tribunus Angusticlavius
I don't understand why people click into articles on entertainment topics they don't enjoy. It's not like it's crucial need-to-know information, or some political topic that will impact your life. Speaking from experience, obsessing over entertainment you hate is a good way to make yourself miserable for no good reason. Also, it comes across as trite and obnoxious in its own right.
There's more entertainment material available to us than at any point in history; you should be able to find something you like. Try spending your mental energies on that instead of sourpussing about the stuff you don't. The world's shitty enough as it is, no need to make it worse by bringing the misery into your escapism.
Ugh, and now you've gone and made me sound like some sort of cheery optimist. Not cool. Not cool at all.
Upvote
88
(90
/
-2)
Sheen and Tennant's characters were excellently fleshed out in Season One, and they both absolutely nailed the performances and had perfect chemistry. I really liked the first season, and didn't feel like it needed more, but I'm more than happy to check this out. It's the kind of story that's far more about how the individual characters interact with each other than the plot itself, and with so many returning, I think this has good odds of being worth watching.
Upvote
26
(26
/
0)
The only issue I have is that I'm pretty sure Discworld was eight or nine books in by the time Good Omens was written.
Upvote
22
(22
/
0)
Did that first season kill your dog or something? 3 posts to tell people you didn’t care for a tv show.
Upvote
59
(60
/
-1)
I assume this is in reference to this bit from the article.
Neil's blog post put it a little differently:
https://journal.neilgaiman.com/2021/06/really-bloody-excellent-omens.html
The first Discworld book was published in 1983, The first issue of Sandman was January 1989, the Good Omens sequel was plotted in 1989, and the Good Omens novel was released in 1990.
So I think the article author misinterpreted what Neil wrote. Actually both Sandman and Discworld were first published before Good Omens, and even before the sequel was plotted, but they hadn't yet become the massive successes they became shortly after Good Omens.
Upvote
49
(49
/
0)
They do click such articles and pour comments to remember the world a practical definition of a trite and obnoxious behavior.
What a delight it is to trigger an audience for self-serving satisfaction ! Nothing like perpetual smirk, sacarsm and condescendence to enjoy the day.
/s (of course)
As of the subject, I'm looking forward to the comedy, S1 was good and faithful to the material, with great acting.
Upvote
11
(11
/
0)
I don't know why, but there's something about "didn't you have a flaming sword?" from the first series that still gives me the giggles.
I must admit I'd have loved to see Anathema Device return for the second series.
I must admit I'd have loved to see Anathema Device return for the second series.
Upvote
30
(30
/
0)
Hard Thoughts
Ars Scholae Palatinae
To say that Pratchett had light comic sensibilities is to undersell the work of a man who in my opinion hard-carried good omens; the Discworld series shows off plenty of deep thought. Gaiman is much less to my taste.
But perhaps that is neither here nor there, and I will give this a look.
But perhaps that is neither here nor there, and I will give this a look.
Upvote
15
(15
/
0)
Tennant and Sheen's performances and on-screen chemistry were clearly the heart of why the first season worked so well--you can't go too far wrong with those guys. At the same time, it's hard to imagine what they're going to follow saving the world from Apocalypse with. But who knows, maybe they'll come up with something good.
Upvote
15
(15
/
0)
I get everyone's hesitancy regarding this season not being book based, but Gaiman isn't a bullshitter. If he says that both he and Pratchett developed the story, I have full confidence this season will be great. Another +1 for the cast of S1 coming back. And I'm a stan for Hamm.
Upvote
33
(33
/
0)
IncorrigibleTroll
Ars Tribunus Angusticlavius
Oh, I fully intend to give it a watch with an open mind, and I want it to be good. But until then, I can't help but worry about the quality. Gaiman's involvement isn't necessarily an indication that everything is fine; American Gods really went off the rails after the first season too, and that hadn't even run out of book.
Upvote
12
(12
/
0)
Are the right-wing nutters going to get their panties all wet about "satanism" and try to cancel it, all over again?
Upvote
12
(13
/
-1)
I also liked that the first season was a very solid one-and-done and I just kinda feel like doing a second season retroactively cheapens that.
Upvote
1
(5
/
-4)
No and yes. The right-wing nutters are incapable of getting wet unless firearms are involved.
Upvote
7
(11
/
-4)
ducatisymphony
Ars Scholae Palatinae
I understand those who express apprehension as the first season didn't necessarily suggest or need a sequel but I am giddy about this as I just want to see more of the interaction between Sheen/Tennant. An engrossing story line is icing on the cake for me.
As for those expressing outright hostility....grow up and learn to ignore entertainment that doesn't suit your tastes. Nobody cares what you think.
As for those expressing outright hostility....grow up and learn to ignore entertainment that doesn't suit your tastes. Nobody cares what you think.
Upvote
15
(16
/
-1)
Upvote
8
(8
/
0)
I've never read any Pratchett-books and I don't even know who Gaiman is, so none of this fan service you claim was there landed for me and yet I thoroughly enjoyed the show. Perhaps it's because I am coming from an entirely different background in a sense, but I, for one, am fully excited for a new season of the show.
Upvote
24
(24
/
0)
Yes, I was reading those descriptions of the two people involved, and trying to figure out which one was supposed to be which. Anyone who brushes off Terry Pratchett as just "light comic sensibility" has missed a lot.
I've tried reading Gaiman multiple times, and he just seems to be trying too hard, most of the time. Terry Pratchett I miss every day, though I never met him.
Upvote
19
(20
/
-1)
Man, I still don’t know. Pratchett was mainly writing funny bits, his actual scenes were where that really sang. Gaiman always struck me as a big picture guy. That’s why they complemented themselves well.
If we had lost Gaiman rather than Pratchett, Pratchett could have filled in the meat. Instead we have something Gaiman was skilled at (skeleton treatment) and none of Pratchett (small scenes).
It will probably be good either way, I’m just a little wistfully sad about Pratchett having minimal fingerprints on it.
If we had lost Gaiman rather than Pratchett, Pratchett could have filled in the meat. Instead we have something Gaiman was skilled at (skeleton treatment) and none of Pratchett (small scenes).
It will probably be good either way, I’m just a little wistfully sad about Pratchett having minimal fingerprints on it.
Upvote
13
(13
/
0)
Returning to read a book after seeing a screen adaptation can work both ways.
In this case, I would highly recommend the book. As the discword has had a few TV adaptions I had already read the books, so no opportunity to read first.
LOTR however, I had read a few times before the movie, which is why despite all the compromise P. Jackson made, it turned out very much better than I thought it could be.
TLDR; Words are very powerful all on their own...
Upvote
13
(13
/
0)
The book was way better than the TV series. I think some lead roles may have been miscast.
Oh, christ... And I'm a "the book was better" guy now? Shit.
Upvote
17
(17
/
0)
You've likely heard of at least a few of the things he's written, from adaptations if nothing else: in addition to Good Omens and American Gods (already mentioned), there's also the Sandman comics, Stardust, and Coraline.
Upvote
11
(11
/
0)
Upvote
-3
(0
/
-3)
The TV series was fine, IMO. It didn't measure up to the book, but I never expect an adaptation to.
I definitely wouldn't recommend anyone watch it, though, because they picked the single most "downer ending" moment in the entire book to cancel the show on.
Upvote
4
(5
/
-1)