Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us money per month for bills, and since we don't believe in showing ads to our users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
 
  • Post
  • Reply
SiKboy
Oct 28, 2007

Oh no!😱

I totally forgot that the first episode was today til someone mentioned it on twitter. I thought it was pretty drat good (although Ian McShane will always be Lovejoy to me, which makes all his appearences on american TV hilarious). Casting didnt always exactly match what I had in my head, but was nonetheless all really great.

I really liked the book but havent read it in a while (since just before Anansi Boys was released) so only remember the broad strokes and favourite scenes. I'm slightly torn; The episode ended and I immediately thought "well poo poo, now I have to dig through boxes of books to find my copy and reread it", but then again I'm also enjoying the feeling of "Oh, yeah! I'd forgotten that!" and not being 100% sure of whats about to happen.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

SiKboy
Oct 28, 2007

Oh no!😱

precision posted:

The TV IV › American Gods: That's an almost adequate amount of penises.

SiKboy
Oct 28, 2007

Oh no!😱

Gyges posted:

He's thinking about being the face taking the gullible people's deposits, probably a good idea not to be on the bank's cameras.

Yeah, that was my take too; He's not hiding from Media, he's hiding from the added complication of his face showing up on the news once the theft is uncovered. I think Media was just watching him (or possibly Shadow), not watching to see if Wednesdays face is on camera.

SiKboy
Oct 28, 2007

Oh no!😱

jng2058 posted:

Its the comic book series that put Neil Gaiman on the map. The fact that American Gods by Neil Gaiman seems to be doing well as a TV series led some of our more optimistic fellow goons to suggest that Sandman could also be successfully adapted.

I disagree. :colbert:


I think you could successfully adapt it. But there's no way you could successfully faithfully adapt it. You'd need to take an attitude more like the adaptation of Lucifer, taking the bare bones of the concept and rebuild it as something that works for TV. Rabid fans would hate it, but the graphic novels as written just would not work on screen, and at least we'd get something watchable. Of course a faithful panel to screen adaptation might be at least an entertaining car crash.

SiKboy
Oct 28, 2007

Oh no!😱

Absolutely, I'm bang alongside changing things when the story changes medium. Books, films, comics, books and videogames are all different with different strengths and expectations. To me that's why they are called adaptations, because you actually have to do some work and actually adapt the thing. It's very rare that someone can just point a camera at a book and end up with a good visual work without at least tweaking it. Same way that you can have a great movie but if all you do to make it a novel is stick some linking paragraphs into the shooting script it'll be a terrible book.

But watching superfans lose their poo poo over minor changes from the source material in the transition between mediums is something of a hobby.

SiKboy
Oct 28, 2007

Oh no!😱

The eye has been getting progressively more noticable as the series progresses, they went out their way for the light to hit his eyes and reflect differently from each one (I'm assuming McShane is wearing a contact). Both eyes moves which real glass eyes dont do as far as I know, but theres really a limited amount they could do about that.

SiKboy
Oct 28, 2007

Oh no!😱

precision posted:

(which, after BBC's Neverwhere, who can blame him?)

Imma fight you. Fair warning.

SiKboy
Oct 28, 2007

Oh no!😱

That plainly says 3rd of October.

SiKboy
Oct 28, 2007

Oh no!😱

Vegetable posted:

Pretty ugly poster

Aw mate, don't be so down on yourself, you probably have good features too.

SiKboy
Oct 28, 2007

Oh no!😱

I liked season 1, I'm liking season 2, just a bit less than season 1. That is my lukewarm take. My feeling is that this season so far has been less.. I dunno, cohesive? Probably (at least partially) due to the behind the scenes shenanigans with changing showrunners and so on. Also, while the episode they ended S1 on was a good finale, I kind of feel like the pacing of this season would have been vastly improved by having the house on the rock stuff happen at the end of S1 (which I think had been the original plan?).

SiKboy
Oct 28, 2007

Oh no!😱

etalian posted:

Is it worth checking season 2 if I liked season 1 despite the rough spots?

If you liked Season 1 of a show, why on earth would you not check out Season 2? Even if a show has had a spectacular nosedive in quality (alas Sleepy hollow...) all you lose is a couple of hours. Its not a lifelong commitment, you can just stop watching when something gets poo poo.

SiKboy
Oct 28, 2007

Oh no!😱

etalian posted:

I assuming the famous season 1 penis doesn't have a cameo role in S2?

Tragically not so far, so I guess if you are only watching for the cock I see why you wouldnt have checked out the new episodes.

SiKboy
Oct 28, 2007

Oh no!😱

Dancer posted:

Weren't there like... a lot of S1 penises? There was penis in the cosmic mind-space, there was djinn fire-penis there was krav maga douche penis on the photo frame. Maybe a few others.

Friend of mine took a scientific approach to this. Results here:



Now, the results from episodes 7 and 8 aren't shown, but even with an incomplete data set we can conclude; Yes. There has been a quantitative reduction in onscreen penis for S2 thus far.

SiKboy
Oct 28, 2007

Oh no!😱

Do I wish more progress through the plot (of the book) had been made this season? Yes. Have I been enjoying the show anyway? Also yes.

I kinda feel like its mainly to do with behind the scenes fuckery meaning that the show has effectively been without a showrunner for most of the second season. One person in charge has a vision of how the show should go, what pace it should make it through the plot of the book. No-one really truly in charge and the instinct is going to be just to keep the wheels spinning, dragging feet on the overall plot so as to not rock the boat by moving through the next major plot point (which, if I'm totally honest I cant recall of the top of my head. I've not read the book in years and I remember the beginning through to the house on the rock fairly clearly, and I remember the end, but I'm super fuzzy on the whole middle of the story).

I feel like someone has to take the reigns and lay out a bare bones timeline for the writers room ("by the end of season X we should be at point Y in the overall narrative") and not fall into the trap of worrying about "But what happens if we finish the story of the book while we are still popular enough to get renewed and make more episodes?" because pretty much every adaptation I've ever seen where that was their concerned got cancelled long before finishing their narrative because people got bored of waiting for the plot to move forward.

But, the cast are still good, the writing of each individual episode is fine, I like the characters and the world. So I'm still enjoying the show and hope it continues. I just hope that it continues with a faster pace and clear sense of direction.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

SiKboy
Oct 28, 2007

Oh no!😱

I watched Neverwhere as it aired, and own it on DVD. Loved it then, love it now. The budget does show, but there is some creative use of what little they had*, and the cast are fantastic. Only thing it really suffers from in my eyes is the video quality is piss poor in that 1990s filmed cheaply on video way. Honestly as much as I love the story, I dont know I'd love a remake as much. I'm sure it would get the budget to actually have an impressive looking Great Beast of London and so on, but a) I think it would lose some of its charm and b) Theres no loving way you are beating the cast of the original. They nailed the casting first time. gently caress, the Marquis de Carabas is the reason that for the last 25+ years whenever the question "Who would you cast as the next Doctor?" is bandied about, I immediately say "Paterson Joseph".


*Full disclosure, I'm also a doctor who fan, so as much as I love expensive prestige TV I'm fully willing to accept a shoestring budget in my sci fi/fantasy.

Edit to add: Also, gently caress remaking something that was good already, make a sequel instead.

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • Post
  • Reply