I'm not going to reblog Neil Gaiman's thing about how S2's episodes "don't have any fat on them" but I DO have some (spoilery) reactions to that below the cut-
OK so I already did another post here where I gave my impressions of the writing- but Gaiman mentioning this actually reminded me of something that I didn't put in there at all but kind of wish I had.
Because honestly, I don't think that the episodes not having any fat on them is a good thing.
Here's the thing- Good Omens, the book and the first season of the TV show, is a bunch of set pieces that loosely come together into a plot. The TV show less so, maybe- there's more of an effort to create a narrative- but fundamentally it's a bunch of ridiculous stuff all strung together to create the Apocalypse. (Like, there's a reason why book fans were so upset when the Four Other Horsemen of the Apocalypse didn't show up in the show- they did literally nothing for the plot but they were absolutely hilarious.)
So far, in the first 2 episodes of S2, I have to agree with Gaiman that there's no fat on them. And I think that's one of the things that kind of threw me. EVERYTHING that has happened thus far has felt like it's something that's probably going to lead to something else, like it's connective tissue for the upcoming story that will presumably make more sense later- and while there's plenty of entertainment and humor and sweetness, it's all to the point. You have to be paying attention, you have to take everything seriously (even if it's something that by rights feels inherently unserious) because it could matter later.
In S1, you didn't have to think too carefully about why a telemarketer is being eaten by maggots or even why there's still a witchfinder in the 21st century (for the show) because fundamentally it doesn't REALLY matter. Something will all come together at the end and in the meantime you can just enjoy it in the spirit in which it's given, which is of course an insane one. Each scene is just fun on its own. (I think this is in some ways truer in the book than the show- there were a lot of these scenes that I don't think worked on the show- but that was more about the execution than the concept.)
The fat in S1 was the good part, really. The plot wasn't all that important- it was all the moments along the way.
The closest thing to fat (to continue to use the metaphor) in S2, so far, is the minisode. It's the only thing where it doesn't necessarily feel like you'll be tested on it later. And it's also easily the best part of those episodes! You can just watch it and take all the ridiculousness for granted because it doesn't really matter. It's there to draw out the characters, it's there to give the world more color, and it's there to entertain.
Not that S2 isn't also there to entertain- it very much is, but it doesn't really have time to. It can be silly and random in the way that the book and S1 are, but instead of those being random throwaway moments (like Newt blacking out all of Dorking in the book- which signifies that his tech-unsavviness may be relevant to the plot later but is really mostly just there to entertain because it's so out-there), they are intrinsically tied into whatever the plot will turn out to be. That's really clear, even though we don't actually know yet exactly what the plot is going to be! The leanness of the plot is immediately evident.
I think, so far, that the main negative consequence is that it makes it so much harder to suspend disbelief. When you have a ridiculous moment in a throwaway scene, that's worldbuilding- it shows that this is the kind of world where ridiculous things happen, and then when a particular ridiculous moment ends up being important to the plot, that's fine because it's part of a whole constellation of ridiculous things in this ridiculous world- they've already deconstructed our sense of disbelief. When all you're getting is plot, when something a bit crazy happens you're like "oh, hang on, that doesn't make sense, that's a bit farfetched."
I think that that's one of the things that, so far, is giving "fanfic vibes" to the first two episodes. Maggie and Nina get locked into the cafe? In their first episode?! When we know that they're going to get together?!?! That's ridiculous. In the book and to a lesser degree S1, where like five other ridiculous things would have already happened that aren't heavily signaled to be important to the plot (Gabriel doesn't count because we know he's important to the plot too), this would just be one more ridiculous thing. In S2, it feels like something we need to suspend disbelief for because we haven't really had it suspended for us yet.
Everything I write about Good Omens here is going to come down to John Finnemore in the end because I can't help myself lol, but honestly, my first thought was "well he's really into plotting, so maybe this is part of that." But- he's also done nine and a bit seasons of a sketch show. While he was writing this he was also writing a season of JFSP (the sublime S9) where there was very minimal plot but everything was propelled by character building sketches, very much in the spirit of Good Omens. He knows exactly the power of random ridiculous moments to build the world and explain its ludicrousness. When him being a writer was announced, I saw so many people say "he's definitely got a bonkers enough brain to do this" except that it turns out that, while true, his bonkers sketch-writing brain doesn't really have a lot to do here.
That, plus the fact that I'd be really surprised from everything that I've heard over the last 2ish years if Gaiman wasn't the first and final voice behind everything written for this season, leads me to the conclusion that the issue might just be that S2 may be, as a group effort, over-plotted for its length. There's little room to breathe and live in the world. There are barely any humans, and as such there's not much time to remember that the story is set in a world where humans matter, which, as I pointed out in my previous post, is something that was really important in Good Omens the book and S1. It just doesn't have any fat.
Now- I should be clear- as I said with the other post, it is way too early to tell if GO2 is good or not, because all of the stuff in E1-2 was clearly building up to other things that haven't happened yet. I actually think S2 probably will be good. The above may not be "issues" per se. But I do think that talking about the original Good Omens like the "fat" is the problem kind of misses the point of why so many people liked it- and leaves GO2 with a pretty big burden to overcome in order to convince viewers that it is a continuation of the same world and same story they loved in S1.
I am once again asking the Good Omens fandom to listen to John Finnemore's Souvenir Programme on BBC Sounds.
It's gloriously silly, brilliantly funny, and will give you a sense of who Neil has brought on board to write GO2.
S1-8 are a typical sketch show, and S9 follows the same characters throughout the whole series. S9 contains one of my favourite characters ever: a sweet, happy, loving, eccentric, intelligent, asexual storyteller.
I'll repeat that:
John Finnemore has already written and voiced a CANONICALLY ASEXUAL CHARACTER! And he's lovely!
imo John has a great track record for LGBT+ representation in his writing. There's been a variety of queer characters throughout the whole show, all written well. I honestly couldn't be happier that he's written with Neil for GO2, I can't wait to see what they do together with Aziraphale and Crowley.
GOOD PEOPLE: DID SERIES 2 OF GOOD OMENS FILL YOU WITH FEELINGS OF MELANCHOLY?
Then I bring you the GOOD NEWS and a tonic to soothe your pain. ‘lo, embrace an opportunity for laughter and joy and yea queer romance as well.
Put into your ears, without cost, JOHN FINNEMORE’S SOUVENIR PROGRAMME: SERIES 9.
John Finnemore was Neil Gaiman’s co-writer on this series, as well as the writer of the Job story in the second episode, “A Companion to Owls”. If you watched the second series, you have already enjoyed the writing of John Finnemore, the rhythm of his dialogue, some of his approach to characterization and the nature of his jokes!
Yes, John Finnemore is the writer of the hit radio sitcom CABIN PRESSURE, but if you want to feel good about love and family and also queerness, what you want is JOHN FINNEMORE’S SOUVENIR PROGRAMME: SERIES 9. Yes, it is a sketch comedy show. No, it doesn’t have an overarching plot. But the sketches in each episode are events in the life of one character, told in reverse chronological order, each character the member of one family, building the shape of a family history with blocks made of jokes about the benefits of lockdown, tattoos, songs, magpies, history, Teenage Mutant Ninja (Hero) Turtles, coming out, scrabble, restaurant behaviour, ghost stories, and passport applications.
Listen to it and then listen to it again. You will laugh laughter and feel feelings.
John Finnemore returns with a one-off edition of his Souvenir Programme, joined as ever by his cast of Margaret Cabourn-Smith, Simon Kane, Lawry Lewin and Carrie Quinlan, as well as composer Susannah Pearse at the piano and cellist Sally Stares on the drum.
This forty-five minute special sees a palaeontologist try to not lose his head, a husband try to explain why he’s going to Milan, and the world’s top golfer getting a surprise. We also hear from a member of the silent majority and our regular interviewer hears from someone else. And… well, since you ask him for a story about an amazing journey…
Why is my character smug? (a meme I wish to encourage others to share in...)
Endeavour edition:
E. Morse: I have solved a crime using classical music, historical, and/or literary references, and made an arrogant don look silly.
Fred Thursday: I have contributed to solving a crime using my knowledge of Italian, natural history, and/or poetry, thus subverting class-based expectations. And/or Morse has done something clever. And/or something bad has happened to a fascist.
Dr Max DeBryn: I just made an even better one-liner than usual. I have also mildly grossed out Morse. And I am still the best-dressed person in Oxford.
Peter Jakes: Do I need a reason? Tsk.
Joan Thursday: I have made one of my father’s detective’s ears go red. And I stole the last truffle. And I’m able to do much more good as a social worker than the police detectives I am entirely surrounded by.
Reginald Bright: someone underestimated me and my team, and they now greatly regret this.
Shirley Trewlove: I am yet again the most competent person in Oxford. I would be more smug if anyone outside my immediate team actually recognised this...
Some other characters I love edition:
Mathias Barneville: I have fixed something for the company in a way that personally advantages me and makes my colleagues look foolish. I deny that I now feel physically unwell.
Douglas Richardson: I have fixed something for the company in a way that makes me look terrific and I am now eating the majority of the cheese tray. I deny that I am also now basking in a team-dad glow.
Carolyn Knapp-Shappey: Douglas saved the day but then had to admit that he was wrong about something. This is going to make me happy for weeks.
Aziraphale: *beams enigmatically*
Sam Gamgee: I made stew in the middle of the wilderness. It’s delicious.
Elena Alvarez: some excellent social and environmental justice success has occurred. *does victory dance*
Uncle Newt: well, since you asked me for a tale about why I am smug...
So, anyone who has read this: why is *your* comfort character smug? :D
Hello out there, all 20 or so of you who care about the 9th series of John Finnemore's Souvenir Programme! Does anyone know if there are series 9 transcripts anywhere? Because I don't want to leave this world, but it's only 3 hours long, and I can't write or draw. So maybe I will do transcripts? but only if no one else has done them. Someone let me know?