|
Taear posted:Yea I absolutely agree with you here. I hated the movie because they remake the earth at the end but it picks up at the moment it got destroyed. Like the whole point was they were remaking Earth but it wouldn’t be OUR Earth. Ugh.
|
#
?
Jun 23, 2019 02:02
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 25, 2024 13:33 |
|
|
This was cool and good and I didn't even expect it to be out yet, feels like it was just announced still. I think demon-eyes on crowley was kind of a goofy choice but not enough to be a big deal. Better than I expected. I'm putting this up there with LotR in terms of adaptations that are as good as their sources.
|
|
#
?
Jun 23, 2019 03:01
|
|
|
MokBa posted:That movie is so perfectly cast even with all the Americans that I have a hard time faulting it too badly. Plus good puppetry. Casting an actor from New York as Ford was absolutely on point with the books, even though Arthur thinks he's from Guildford. Ford's unexpurgated Guide article on the Earth says that the first thing any visitor should do is go to New York and become a cab driver, because nobody will care what you look like as long as you speak English. Evidently movie Ford learned by doing and picked up the accent.
|
|
#
?
Jun 23, 2019 14:08
|
|
|
Khanstant posted:This was cool and good and I didn't even expect it to be out yet, feels like it was just announced still. I think demon-eyes on crowley was kind of a goofy choice but not enough to be a big deal. Better than I expected. I'm putting this up there with LotR in terms of adaptations that are as good as their sources. I dig, but than again it gave him a reason to wear lennon shades constantly which is very on brand.
|
|
#
?
Jun 23, 2019 14:11
|
|
|
I think the only issue I had with Tennant is that he looked too slimy to be Crowley. I expected him to be more charming. Less estate agent and more lawyer, you don't like him but he sweeps you off your feet somehow.
|
|
#
?
Jun 23, 2019 15:28
|
|
|
Taear posted:I think the only issue I had with Tennant is that he looked too slimy to be Crowley. Jon Hamm as Crowley
|
|
#
?
Jun 23, 2019 15:33
|
|
|
Data Graham posted:Jon Hamm as Crowley You know what, yea absolutely.
|
|
#
?
Jun 23, 2019 15:44
|
|
|
The demons were well acted I thought. Beelzebub was loving excellent. Totally evil/spiteful/uncaring all in one go. Wish there was more of her. Hastur was good too.
|
|
#
?
Jun 23, 2019 16:45
|
|
|
Data Graham posted:Jon Hamm as Crowley Jon Hamm as Newt Jon Hamm as Shadwell
|
|
#
?
Jun 23, 2019 17:21
|
|
|
precision posted:Jon Hamm as Newt Jon Hamm as Madame Tracy.
|
|
#
?
Jun 23, 2019 17:36
|
|
|
precision posted:Jon Hamm as Newt Jedit posted:Jon Hamm as Madame Tracy. Jon Hamm as Anathema
|
|
#
?
Jun 23, 2019 18:02
|
|
|
I thought tenant was spot on personally but I could see it.
|
|
#
?
Jun 23, 2019 22:04
|
|
|
Just finished it. It rules, has a very Douglas Adams feel, which from what I understand is very Terry Pratchett (I've never read any of his books). Everything with Crowley and Aziraphale was great, everything else felt a little....BBC Sci Fi if you know what I mean. The horsemen of the apocalypse were maybe the cringiest part of it, but it is what it is. They did what they needed to. Would be cool if they could come back for another season. Aziraphale and Crowley hopping around in history is a show enough as is. Mike N Eich fucked around with this message at 00:42 on Jun 24, 2019 |
|
#
?
Jun 24, 2019 00:36
|
|
|
*Kicks in the door, dashes into room* Ok hear me out, the forces of heaven and hell want to change the past to make sure the Apocalypse happens, and Crowley and Aziraphale team up to stop them. And they have a magic car that can travel through time and transform into different shapes and please stop dialing 911 I'm almost finished.
|
|
#
?
Jun 24, 2019 02:12
|
|
|
I hope it doesn't come back. Gaiman is explicitly disinterested in showrunning again, he did the show because Terry wanted it to happen and he really didn't have a good time doing it, and honestly what's even the point? Even without Gaiman involved there's nothing left to say that needs or wants to be said. One and done.
|
|
#
?
Jun 24, 2019 02:21
|
|
|
Mike N Eich posted:Would be cool if they could come back for another season. Aziraphale and Crowley hopping around in history is a show enough as is.
|
|
#
?
Jun 24, 2019 03:19
|
|
|
I wouldn't want them to actually try to make an "Aziraphael and Crowley's Adventures Near Famous Events in History" TV show it's just that the beginning of episode 3 [4?] was far and away my favorite thing in the whole series. I think it just reminded me of why I liked Black Adder or Rozencrantz and Guildenstern are Dead.
qirex fucked around with this message at 06:34 on Jun 24, 2019 |
|
#
?
Jun 24, 2019 06:31
|
|
|
Az dancing the Gavotte is blessed and pure. Sheen stole the goddarn show for me.
|
|
#
?
Jun 24, 2019 10:29
|
|
|
Mike N Eich posted:Just finished it. It rules, has a very Douglas Adams feel, which from what I understand is very Terry Pratchett (I've never read any of his books). You should remedy that.
|
|
#
?
Jun 24, 2019 11:31
|
|
|
qirex posted:I wouldn't want them to actually try to make an "Aziraphael and Crowley's Adventures Near Famous Events in History" TV show it's just that the beginning of episode 3 [4?] was far and away my favorite thing in the whole series. I think it just reminded me of why I liked Black Adder or Rozencrantz and Guildenstern are Dead. Oh man, Tennant/Sheen for another adaptation of Ros and Guil please
|
|
#
?
Jun 24, 2019 16:44
|
|
|
I feel like this show should be 100% in my wheelhouse, but after the first 2 episodes I'm kind of struggling to maintain interest. The narration is just  , and so far it feels like 3-4 episodes of content stretched out to fill 6, which seems insane for a book that's like 500 pages long in paperback. I'm not sure if it's trying to set up a ton of threads that all pay off at the end or what, but it feels too much like work just to get to a couple good bits here and there.Does it get more funny/less funny/stay about the same? Is there some kind of great payoff at the end? e: I will say this, Agnes booby trapping herself for her burning at the stake did make my day. 
|
|
#
?
Jun 24, 2019 18:40
|
|
|
it picks up significantly after ep2
|
|
#
?
Jun 24, 2019 20:16
|
|
|
sean10mm posted:e: I will say this, Agnes booby trapping herself for her burning at the stake did make my day. Pretty rad shoutout to Anne Askew I should say.
|
|
#
?
Jun 24, 2019 20:19
|
|
|
Taear posted:I think the only issue I had with Tennant is that he looked too slimy to be Crowley.
|
|
#
?
Jun 24, 2019 20:25
|
|
|
FactsAreUseless posted:He's not really popular or successful or charismatic in the book. There's a reason he really only has one friend, and both he and Aziraphale are pretty explicitly lonely. well, duh. They're protagonists in what is 50% a gaiman novel. isolated social outcasts are his go-to archetype.
|
|
#
?
Jun 24, 2019 22:01
|
|
|
precision posted:Oh man, Tennant/Sheen for another adaptation of Ros and Guil please Natalie Walker, Internet darling, has got a fix for you https://mobile.twitter.com/nwalks/status/1134884181169901569
|
|
#
?
Jun 24, 2019 23:27
|
|
|
Mike N Eich posted:Just finished it. It rules, has a very Douglas Adams feel, which from what I understand is very Terry Pratchett (I've never read any of his books). I've read some Pratchett and he always seemed too cutesy for my taste. But mix him with the cynicism of Neil Gaiman and yeah you pretty much get Douglas Adams.
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2019 09:26
|
|
|
1glitch0 posted:I've read some Pratchett and he always seemed too cutesy for my taste. But mix him with the cynicism of Neil Gaiman and yeah you pretty much get Douglas Adams. Pratchett was way more serious than Adams. What were you reading?
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2019 09:41
|
|
|
Yeah, seriously. If you didn’t get Terry’s cynicism (and he uses much more varied strokes than Gaiman ever does), I feel like you really missed out.
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2019 10:04
|
|
|
I can see how you'd miss it for the wacky inversions of genre staples and plots where things generally work out for the better, but hoo boy once you find it. Adams was pretty serious, but stylistically more sardonically observant I'd call it. Gaiman actually strikes me as the least cynical of the three, it just seems that way on the surface because he's got the most serious style and darkest subject matter, whereas Pratchett's got the lightest style that buries a desperately bleak world view.
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2019 10:23
|
|
|
FactsAreUseless posted:He's not really popular or successful or charismatic in the book. There's a reason he really only has one friend, and both he and Aziraphale are pretty explicitly lonely. I always took that to be because they're immortal.
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2019 11:21
|
|
|
double nine posted:well, duh. They're protagonists in what is 50% a gaiman novel. isolated social outcasts are his go-to archetype. Neil and Terry used to say that the parts of the book that people assumed were written by one of them were actually written by the other
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2019 16:20
|
|
|
precision posted:Neil and Terry used to say that the parts of the book that people assumed were written by one of them were actually written by the other I refuse to believe that Gaiman didn't write the bit with all the maggots.
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2019 16:54
|
|
|
precision posted:Neil and Terry used to say that the parts of the book that people assumed were written by one of them were actually written by the other yeah but what do they know? pfft, writers.
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2019 17:25
|
|
|
precision posted:Neil and Terry used to say that the parts of the book that people assumed were written by one of them were actually written by the other Didn't they also say that everything went under so many revisions that they no longer remembered who wrote what? It was Gaiman's first novel, I could see Pratchett deflecting those sorts of questions so his friend could get some credit for the good parts of the book.
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2019 17:27
|
|
|
IIRC the big one was that Gaiman mostly wrote the Horsemen stuff, when people assumed because of Death that Terry had done
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2019 21:58
|
|
|
precision posted:Neil and Terry used to say that the parts of the book that people assumed were written by one of them were actually written by the other Reminds me of Blackadder; Ben Elton said people assumed that Richard Curtis was responsible for all the historical gags, while he did all the crude humor, when it was actually the other way around.
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2019 22:18
|
|
|
Just have to throw in a word for PG Wodehouse, who was the original master of the Pratchett/Adams voice. Might not be to everyone's taste as Bertie Wooster's worst threats are domineering aunts, potential engagements, and wayward silverware, but when he's good he's easily funnier than either of them. Code of the Woosters is a good intro starting point.
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2019 02:25
|
|
|
Disconnecticus posted:Just have to throw in a word for PG Wodehouse, who was the original master of the Pratchett/Adams voice. Might not be to everyone's taste as Bertie Wooster's worst threats are domineering aunts, potential engagements, and wayward silverware, but when he's good he's easily funnier than either of them. Code of the Woosters is a good intro starting point. I really need to read some of that, I absolutely adore the TV series with Laurie and Fry. The entire run of House whenever I'd see a preview with Hugh Laurie making some kind of grim, dour face all I could think of was Bertie Wooster with some gormless expression and giggle.
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2019 03:37
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 25, 2024 13:33 |
|
|
One Swell Foop posted:The working title was '668, The Neighbour of the Beast' IIRC.
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2019 13:47
|
|
