In the series, when Aziraphale mentions the Other Side, the angels seem baffled and worried. Then when he points downward, they seem relieved that he means Hell, and begin to show contempt for Aziraphale. I now think that Gabriel and the others were afraid that Aziraphale had discovered a new faction within Heaven, and that there would be another war they hadn't been expecting.
SPOILERS Discussion of Good Omens, the series
- Thread starter Dotsie
- Start date
To be fair, in 1991 they seem to have been going for a general body type and a level of ability, more than picking specific actors for the roles. I recall that Terry said he was dubious when Tennant was chosen to play Nobby, but that Tennant had "achieved Nobbiness" at the end of his part in Hogfather.
I don't think it would have worked as a double role. I think that would have reduced it to the level of a skit. I'm actually glad it took this long, because the SFX people had to invent how to do what was needed.
I don't think it would have worked as a double role. I think that would have reduced it to the level of a skit. I'm actually glad it took this long, because the SFX people had to invent how to do what was needed.
It is confusing when apparently unrelated actors have similar names. Nicholas Tennant, yes. (Though I think David Tennant could have done it well too.) IMO the moment of true Nobbiness that Nicholas achieved was the very last facial expression, just as he said "_Some_ people wouldn't understand the spirit of Hogswatch if it hit them in the gob" (from memory, probably not quite exact).
As used in the series, the word "obviously" is a tip-off that something is false or at least non-obvious in some way.
It's used mainly in Episode 1, first when Crowley says they just sent him up to make some trouble, not specifically about the apple. Aziraphale says "Obviously. You're a demon, it's what you do." It seems like a simple statement, but there were long discussions historically about the concept of the "Fortunate Fall" where eating the apple was vitally necessary to the Plan. Making that particular trouble turns out to have been the right thing to do.
Aziraphale next uses it ironically, when Gabriel claims that he never sullies his celestial body with gross matter while standing there wearing a cashmere suit. "Obviously. Nice suit."
He's unconsciously ironic when he tells Crowley that "Obviously" Heaven will win. It's nowhere near obvious; at best it's a 50-50 chance.
Gabriel tells Aziraphale that his efforts to influence the Antichrist are obviously doomed to failure. He is both ironically right and completely wrong. Aziraphale is working on the wrong kid (though I head-canon that Warlock was improved by the attempt), but Adam could be influenced. He was influenced toward the light by his parents and friends, and that was strong enough to let him turn away from his origin.
When Crowley notices that Adam has named Dog, Aziraphale is doubtful. Crowley asks, "Would I lie to you?" and Aziraphale repeats the first usage identically: "Obviously. You're a demon, it's what you do." After 6,000 years and eleven years of working together closely, he still doesn't entirely trust Crowley, yet Crowley isn't lying. I don't recall offhand a single instance when Crowley ever lied to Aziraphale.
It's used again in Episode 3 when they argue about holy water in 1862, and Crowley says "I don't need you." Aziraphale says "The feeling is mutual. Obviously." Crowley repeats "Obviously." They're both wrong, but they don't, apparently, talk about it again for 105 years, despite having made up in 1941.
[ETA: OOPS, I missed one in Episode 3, Hard Times:
1601:
Az: You are up to no good.
Cr: Obviously.
This one is harder to shove into my theory. Crowley is there to try to get Aziraphale to work the Arrangement again, and succeeds. There is one odd bit: at that moment, Crowley is to Aziraphale's right, instead of left. That usually signifies that Crowley is actually more in the right than Aziraphale is. Aziraphale does succumb to the temptation to avoid work, and loses the coin-toss to boot. But he also makes puppy-eyes at Crowley, who volunteers to help Shakespeare, so Crowley actually is eventually "up to good" (assuming you like the play).]
Another character uses the word. (Two if you count when in Episode 4 of the Script, Michael uses it about "there are no back channels", but that use doesn't appear in the Series as shown.)
In Episode 5, the Quartermaster says that returning to Earth without a body is obviously ridiculous, because angels can't possess humans and Aziraphale has no body. We learn later that it's because without physical eyes, Aziraphale can't see where he is. Still, returning is not entirely ridiculous, because angels can possess humans. They're just taught that they can't.
ETA again: When Aziraphale is studying Agnes's book, Crowley calls asking if there is any new information. Aziraphale says there isn't any, if there were he would tell Crowley, "obviously." Well, he hasn't quite worked it out completely yet, but very shortly after that he makes the telephone call that confirms where Adam is. He seems to have understood the part about Tadfield being where the Antichrist still is.
It's used mainly in Episode 1, first when Crowley says they just sent him up to make some trouble, not specifically about the apple. Aziraphale says "Obviously. You're a demon, it's what you do." It seems like a simple statement, but there were long discussions historically about the concept of the "Fortunate Fall" where eating the apple was vitally necessary to the Plan. Making that particular trouble turns out to have been the right thing to do.
Aziraphale next uses it ironically, when Gabriel claims that he never sullies his celestial body with gross matter while standing there wearing a cashmere suit. "Obviously. Nice suit."
He's unconsciously ironic when he tells Crowley that "Obviously" Heaven will win. It's nowhere near obvious; at best it's a 50-50 chance.
Gabriel tells Aziraphale that his efforts to influence the Antichrist are obviously doomed to failure. He is both ironically right and completely wrong. Aziraphale is working on the wrong kid (though I head-canon that Warlock was improved by the attempt), but Adam could be influenced. He was influenced toward the light by his parents and friends, and that was strong enough to let him turn away from his origin.
When Crowley notices that Adam has named Dog, Aziraphale is doubtful. Crowley asks, "Would I lie to you?" and Aziraphale repeats the first usage identically: "Obviously. You're a demon, it's what you do." After 6,000 years and eleven years of working together closely, he still doesn't entirely trust Crowley, yet Crowley isn't lying. I don't recall offhand a single instance when Crowley ever lied to Aziraphale.
It's used again in Episode 3 when they argue about holy water in 1862, and Crowley says "I don't need you." Aziraphale says "The feeling is mutual. Obviously." Crowley repeats "Obviously." They're both wrong, but they don't, apparently, talk about it again for 105 years, despite having made up in 1941.
[ETA: OOPS, I missed one in Episode 3, Hard Times:
1601:
Az: You are up to no good.
Cr: Obviously.
This one is harder to shove into my theory. Crowley is there to try to get Aziraphale to work the Arrangement again, and succeeds. There is one odd bit: at that moment, Crowley is to Aziraphale's right, instead of left. That usually signifies that Crowley is actually more in the right than Aziraphale is. Aziraphale does succumb to the temptation to avoid work, and loses the coin-toss to boot. But he also makes puppy-eyes at Crowley, who volunteers to help Shakespeare, so Crowley actually is eventually "up to good" (assuming you like the play).]
Another character uses the word. (Two if you count when in Episode 4 of the Script, Michael uses it about "there are no back channels", but that use doesn't appear in the Series as shown.)
In Episode 5, the Quartermaster says that returning to Earth without a body is obviously ridiculous, because angels can't possess humans and Aziraphale has no body. We learn later that it's because without physical eyes, Aziraphale can't see where he is. Still, returning is not entirely ridiculous, because angels can possess humans. They're just taught that they can't.
ETA again: When Aziraphale is studying Agnes's book, Crowley calls asking if there is any new information. Aziraphale says there isn't any, if there were he would tell Crowley, "obviously." Well, he hasn't quite worked it out completely yet, but very shortly after that he makes the telephone call that confirms where Adam is. He seems to have understood the part about Tadfield being where the Antichrist still is.
Last edited:
I just noticed:
"Lick butt" corrected to "Kick butt" by Crowley
is immediately followed by
"For Heaven's sake - Urgh, I don't believe I said that."
It's an equally incorrect statement for the person who is saying it (Crowley).
This fits the old AFP-on-Usenet standard, that any pedantic correction will include another similar error.
(Also, in 19th century slang, to lick someone is to beat them up.
It shows up in Mark Twain's books, among others. Aziraphale isn't so much wrong as out of date.)
"Lick butt" corrected to "Kick butt" by Crowley
is immediately followed by
"For Heaven's sake - Urgh, I don't believe I said that."
It's an equally incorrect statement for the person who is saying it (Crowley).
This fits the old AFP-on-Usenet standard, that any pedantic correction will include another similar error.
(Also, in 19th century slang, to lick someone is to beat them up.
It shows up in Mark Twain's books, among others. Aziraphale isn't so much wrong as out of date.)
About that one line, where Crowley asks Aziraphale why he's in the Bastille in 1793.
(That scene is not in the book, it's not the huge goof. This is a Series goof.)
My kindest thought is that Gaiman was using the term that most people would recognize immediately, and never mind historical details that would just confuse people. After all, this is a fantasy extrapolation based on a combination of myths.
Honestly, I wouldn't have known if I hadn't seen people complaining about how the Bastille was torn down long before the Reign of Terror so the location was wrong. I checked Wikipedia and learned that the prison Aziraphale would have been in was the Conciergerie. That was where the prisoners were kept and the guillotine set up during the worst year and a half. The correct name would have confused most of the audience, while calling it the Bastille made it recognizable even though wrong. Still, I think it would have been better to have left out the name and just had Crowley ask why Aziraphale was in a French prison.
(That scene is not in the book, it's not the huge goof. This is a Series goof.)
My kindest thought is that Gaiman was using the term that most people would recognize immediately, and never mind historical details that would just confuse people. After all, this is a fantasy extrapolation based on a combination of myths.
Honestly, I wouldn't have known if I hadn't seen people complaining about how the Bastille was torn down long before the Reign of Terror so the location was wrong. I checked Wikipedia and learned that the prison Aziraphale would have been in was the Conciergerie. That was where the prisoners were kept and the guillotine set up during the worst year and a half. The correct name would have confused most of the audience, while calling it the Bastille made it recognizable even though wrong. Still, I think it would have been better to have left out the name and just had Crowley ask why Aziraphale was in a French prison.
The owner of apple-duty tumblr posted this exchange:
nitocrisss:
>> what i want to know is what aziraphale was doing when he was technically on apple tree duty
apple-duty:
> Getting drunk on fermented fruit
And that led me to wonder:
What _was_ Aziraphale doing, if he was only technically on duty? If he was supposed to be guarding the Tree, as well as the Eastern Gate, he had to be using magical vision or maybe turning in place a lot.
On the other hand, the garden of Eden probably had a lot of other kinds of fruit available.
Was he inventing wine?
And did the prohibition apply to him as well? If so, did he know it? Did Aziraphale also eat from the Tree? He, alone of the angels, seems to know the difference between good and evil as something aside from the official rules.
In the series as shown, he mended the wall, so Adam and Eve couldn't get back in anyway, and he definitely was no longer just guarding the unopenable gate. Yet he seems to have been permanently assigned to Earth. Others, like Sandalphon, arrived to do a specific job and left again, but Aziraphale seems to have been left to wander the Earth forever, seeing the results of his mistake.
nitocrisss:
>> what i want to know is what aziraphale was doing when he was technically on apple tree duty
apple-duty:
> Getting drunk on fermented fruit
And that led me to wonder:
What _was_ Aziraphale doing, if he was only technically on duty? If he was supposed to be guarding the Tree, as well as the Eastern Gate, he had to be using magical vision or maybe turning in place a lot.
On the other hand, the garden of Eden probably had a lot of other kinds of fruit available.
Was he inventing wine?
And did the prohibition apply to him as well? If so, did he know it? Did Aziraphale also eat from the Tree? He, alone of the angels, seems to know the difference between good and evil as something aside from the official rules.
In the series as shown, he mended the wall, so Adam and Eve couldn't get back in anyway, and he definitely was no longer just guarding the unopenable gate. Yet he seems to have been permanently assigned to Earth. Others, like Sandalphon, arrived to do a specific job and left again, but Aziraphale seems to have been left to wander the Earth forever, seeing the results of his mistake.
About that "huge goof" in the Novel: Okay, here's a theory. I've revised it completely twice in the last 24 hours, so I'm not saying it's perfect. (Reading the Script got me very confused, and it doesn't relate to the question. For this purpose, ignore the Script; it isn't exactly what was filmed anyway.)
Page numbers are from the paperback reissue with Series-related cover picture.
Neil Gaiman has a tumblr. On it he sometimes answers questions (he gets hundreds of questions, so he only answers some of them.)
"faunawolf" asked why, in the Series as shown, Hastur burned in the M25 fire if hellfire doesn't burn demons.
Gaiman said: It was just fire. Demon-caused, but not Actual Hellfire.
{As Hastur said in the Series, "the real thing" would discorporate them both. }
"handere" asked: Does all fire harm angels, or is it just hellfire?
Gaiman said Just hellfire.
So it is established as Gaiman's belief (he says that anything not in print or on film is head canon, even if it's from him): angels have no problem with regular fire, while demons get burned by it.
Crowley got through the M25 fire by using his Imagination to convince his car that it wasn't on fire and that he was also not on fire.
Things were a bit different in the Novel; the M25 was magically both hot and cold, but things only burst into flame if they tried to cross it. In the Novel, p.382, the motor scooter flew over the M25 "engulfed in a deep blue nimbus which faded to red at the edges", obviously being protected by Aziraphale's angelic magic. In the Series as shown, we didn't see that happen, but there's no conflict.
However, earlier, the bookshop burned. In the Novel (p.312,313) the bookshop upper floor and then the whole building collapses on top of Crowley. He comes out unharmed. This doesn't work well with the "real fire burns demons" statement. In the Series as shown, the bookshop does not collapse, and Crowley does not actually contact flames.
My theory is that the two sentences that describe the bookshop collapsing are the mistake that Gaiman intends to remove in a future edition.
Page numbers are from the paperback reissue with Series-related cover picture.
Neil Gaiman has a tumblr. On it he sometimes answers questions (he gets hundreds of questions, so he only answers some of them.)
"faunawolf" asked why, in the Series as shown, Hastur burned in the M25 fire if hellfire doesn't burn demons.
Gaiman said: It was just fire. Demon-caused, but not Actual Hellfire.
{As Hastur said in the Series, "the real thing" would discorporate them both. }
"handere" asked: Does all fire harm angels, or is it just hellfire?
Gaiman said Just hellfire.
So it is established as Gaiman's belief (he says that anything not in print or on film is head canon, even if it's from him): angels have no problem with regular fire, while demons get burned by it.
Crowley got through the M25 fire by using his Imagination to convince his car that it wasn't on fire and that he was also not on fire.
Things were a bit different in the Novel; the M25 was magically both hot and cold, but things only burst into flame if they tried to cross it. In the Novel, p.382, the motor scooter flew over the M25 "engulfed in a deep blue nimbus which faded to red at the edges", obviously being protected by Aziraphale's angelic magic. In the Series as shown, we didn't see that happen, but there's no conflict.
However, earlier, the bookshop burned. In the Novel (p.312,313) the bookshop upper floor and then the whole building collapses on top of Crowley. He comes out unharmed. This doesn't work well with the "real fire burns demons" statement. In the Series as shown, the bookshop does not collapse, and Crowley does not actually contact flames.
My theory is that the two sentences that describe the bookshop collapsing are the mistake that Gaiman intends to remove in a future edition.
People keep wondering whether Crowley ever eats. Of course he does. Book-Crowley sleeps after heavy meals and orders angel cake at the museum (even though Aziraphale eats it). Series-Crowley has a bag of popcorn in that movie theater (where Hastur takes over the cartoon), and when he leaves to flee from other demons, he takes the popcorn with him!
Minutia: A few people online have wondered what is in Crowley's pocket in the Birthday Party scene. He's wearing what seem to be stretch trousers, and something disc-shaped shows in his right-hand pocket.
I checked other pictures I've found online, and I'm 99% sure that it's the key to the Bentley. The key is in a leather holder with a brand-logo fob on it, and the fob is round.
I checked other pictures I've found online, and I'm 99% sure that it's the key to the Bentley. The key is in a leather holder with a brand-logo fob on it, and the fob is round.
