State of the Game

I think a lot of it was down to Gaiman himself... As Mr Pratchett could not be there to advise, Neil took it on his shoulders to make sure that the adaptation was as truthful to the original as can be expected in a screenplay. He was definitely instrumental in stating that if they tried to mess with it in any way, or tried to remove any of Pratchett's work, he would have been happy to pull the plug...

Or so I heard...
you heard true. It is entirely a way of Neil honouring STP (including season 2 which Neil had the only surviving notes for the sequel book)
 
You took the words right out of my mouth there :)
Now that I think about it: One of the sillier complaints in the Amazon reviews (although I was not in the slightest surprised that some twits who'd completely failed to understand it would whine about it) was that Aziraphael was "too gay".

I mean, seriously???

One of my favorite metaphors of absolutely all time was when he's described in the book as "gayer than a tree full of monkeys on nitrous oxides." Not only did it make me spew my drink laughing, it was also a perfect example, to me at least, of how you can be hilariously funny while not being offensive or insulting in the least. I might be wrong on that and, if I am, I apologize. But my point is, it was perfectly true to the book. Not to mention that his character wouldn't have worked at all if he hadn't been written/acted exactly like that.
 
I get a feeling we're talking shop now, which, although I can do so endlessly (much to the chagrin of anybody around me) is entirely too serious so...

Can anybody explain to me why G-d made a perfect Eden, telling Adam and Eve they could have anything there, only they could't touch THAT particular tree and then expect them to not immediately go for it? I mean, He does know us humans better than anybody, right?

Edit: I'm a Christian. I just always wondered about this :)
Comes down to teaching your children about boundaries. How do you do that without actually having a boundary your kids can actually decide of their own free will to cross. If you put them in a padded room until they grow up (apart from you getting arrested) they will never know that fire can burn. Once they did, they learned another valuable lesson - consequences!
 
Comes down to teaching your children about boundaries. How do you do that without actually having a boundary your kids can actually decide of their own free will to cross. If you put them in a padded room until they grow up (apart from you getting arrested) they will never know that fire can burn. Once they did, they learned another valuable lesson - consequences!

also comes down to the story is fiction written by someone with an imagination that had to deal with not knowing how anything in the real world actually worked with a population that is a fraction of today's so nobody was there to tell them their story sucked.
 
Comes down to teaching your children about boundaries. How do you do that without actually having a boundary your kids can actually decide of their own free will to cross. If you put them in a padded room until they grow up (apart from you getting arrested) they will never know that fire can burn. Once they did, they learned another valuable lesson - consequences!
That's very true, but it leaves the fun out of it, which is terribly off topic ;)

Doesn't mean you're wrong, though :)
 
Two cups given out in the same week
UEFA-Euro-Cup-2020-Finals-Italy-vs-England.png

Stanley_Cup,_2015.jpg

I prefer the latter.
 
Back
Top Bottom