"Sandman" is coming to Netflix...

[Tanith]

As someone who considers sai Gaiman to be a hero, and fell in love with the Sandman books years ago, this is very exciting news!

Netflix is adapting Neil Gaiman's Sandman graphic novels for TV. I had a link, but the message board says I have to acquire a certain post quota before I'll be allowed to link the story. But if you Google it, you're sure to find it.

I enjoyed season 1 of American Gods and have heard good things about Good Omens, so it's going to be interesting to see what they do with this. Will they begin at the beginning, or choose a story from another part of the series? I really enjoyed "Season of Mists" and can totally see that as a TV series.

 

[Brian G Turner]

Ooh - cool! Would be very interested to see what they make of this, and plenty of seasons available as they need it. Not least my personal favourite, The Seasons of Mist.

Oh, and here's a link: Netflix reportedly adapting Neil Gaiman's Sandman comics into a TV series

 

[Guttersnipe]

Yesyesyesyesyes

 

[olive]

Good Omens was pretty good. (Was it Amazon?) I haven't seen American Gods.

Now, this one will be really difficult. Casting must be perfect. Not good or OK, but perfect. The Endless figures are tied to traditional norms; they have certain attributes tied to certain physical appearances which mainstream movie industry is -supposedly, not really- trying to go against. (At least in female and lgbt+ characters, nonwhite ethnic groups.) But then, good acting and good production may not be enough if they cannot be conveyed as exactly as they are if we consider everything happens because of what they are, not who they are. Because these characters are categories rather than individual characters.

Think about Despair. She is an 'ugly', obese, white female character. That's not a character you can represent in a politically correct way. It's about her being obese, 'ugly', white and most importantly female. Do you get the same kind of 'Despair' from an 'ugly' male or an obese nonwhite female representation? Beside her, there is Death who is a traditionally 'beautiful' white female, Destruction who is a traditionally 'handsome', blonde white male with implied heterosexuality. They are the most powerful, flawless, perfect characters in the group. Then there is Desire who is supposedly 'genderless', he/she constantly changes, but he doesn't really, does he? The character basically carries the bigotic, toxic labels put on lgbt+ groups in a heteronormative world. Lusty, evil, always plotting, perverse sense of joy by being cruel to innocent people...etc. He/she doesn't evoke anything related to a real sense of desire among all kinds of humans, specifically heterosexual male or female groups. Also, Delirium's 'childishness' will be a problem in representing an unbalanced adult character. She can easily come as very wrong when not done carefully.

So they are highly heteronormative, traditional characters.

Am I wrong? There is very little freedom to play with their physical identities if you stay loyal to the story. It would be amazing if they could pull it off with the most diverse cast, but it is a near-impossible task to represent them in an accurate way with different appearances and identities. Not just as themselves but as opposed to each other, as their differences bear a lot as a whole. Even if they did, the reception is about the toxic, collective human memory and its norms and pretty much that is the telling.

I don't know.

 

[Vince W]

I love Sandman and would love to see Netflix do this well but I doubt it will be anything more than a weak reflection of the comics. The only thing that will profit from this is Gaiman's wallet.

 

[ctg]

-

 

[Bramandin]

Apparently people are rating-bombing it because it's too progressive. I was a little on the fence about making any changes while adapting it, but I realized that Sandman has always been as progressive as it could get away with.

 

[Ned Ryerson]

Just got done binging it. I'd give it 7/10. I feel the quality dropped off in the last three episodes but I really liked the show overall.

 

[TheEndIsNigh]

Up to episode 3.

So far so good.

@Ned Ryerson Could it be your eyes gave up the ghost and you slept through the last three?

Oh wait. , that would mea....

 

[Mon0Zer0]

I can't say it set my world on fire. I'm not sure Morpheus has enough personality to sustain the story. In a comic it looks cool, in video it's like a po-faced Richmond: King of the Goths walking about looking a bit depressed.

It's all terrifically portentous and middle-class, too.

 

[HareBrain]

I'm not sure Morpheus has enough personality to sustain the story.

This was my worry. Also, I didn't even really like the comic books much because (as far as I remember) Morpheus didn't really *do* much apart from have conversations with other mythical figures. Is that any different here?

 

[Mon0Zer0]

This was my worry. Also, I didn't even really like the comic books much because (as far as I remember) Morpheus didn't really *do* much apart from have conversations with other mythical figures. Is that any different here?

Pretty much. It's mainly a vehicle for Gaiman to pontificate about stuff.

 

[Brian G Turner]

(as far as I remember) Morpheus didn't really *do* much apart from have conversations with other mythical figures. Is that any different here?

That's pretty typical of a Gaiman main character.

 

[Troyzan787]

Morpheus is a bit stiff, but that is kind of the point. He spent eons being burdened with responsibility that it flattened him and emotionally isolated him from humanity. It was not until he was physically isolated that it something sparked in him to change. The story was always more about the beauty and ugliness of humanity. Morpheus is just the vessel in which the reader/viewer experiences it.

 

[Christine Wheelwright]

What does everyone make of the swearing? I'm not against it in principle. In many movies (like, say, Pulp Fiction) the swearing is completely in context. In fact, it might be odd if the gangster holding the gun did not swear. But in Sandman on Netflix it sounds contrived; almost wedged in to the dialogue. Did the makers feel a need to convince us they are edgy in some way? Are they trying to boost the adult credentials of the work? And the humor disappoints (Cain repeatedly murdering Abel is about 2/10 on the laughter scale). Really, I'm not sure if I am criticizing the original graphic novel, which I have not read, or the Netflix adaptation. So far it is not a winner for me.

 

[Dave]

I'm not sure Morpheus has enough personality to sustain the story...

Morpheus didn't really *do* much apart from have conversations with other mythical figures...

Morpheus is a bit stiff...

I'm up to episode 4 and this is exactly how I feel. Morpheus is being wonderfully acted as a guy with zero emotions, and no personality, and who doesn't really care less whether he succeeds or not. He goes from a conversation with one mythical figure to a conversation with another without very much really happening at all. I keep hoping something exciting will happen, but I can see that he could reach the end of the season, and only just have recovered the magical items lost to him in the very first few minutes. The B story about John Dee is far more interesting.

 

[Dave]

I liked episode 6. His face actually broke into a smile in that episode!

I also see now that the lost magical items are McGuffins and it doesn't really make any difference if he get's the Ruby back or not.

 

[Khuratokh]

I can't say it set my world on fire. I'm not sure Morpheus has enough personality to sustain the story. In a comic it looks cool, in video it's like a po-faced Richmond: King of the Goths walking about looking a bit depressed.

View attachment 91953

It's all terrifically portentous and middle-class, too.

-I've been feeling gloomy all day.
-yeah... I guess it's hard to tell under all that make-up
-I'm not wearing make-up.

Honestly, I rather enjoyed this adaptation. They've made some questionable casting decisions here and there and changed some plotpoints, but I would definitely recommend watching it.

Of course, my baseline is the gods awful adaptation-in-name-only "The Watch", which butchers Sir Pratchett's source material in so many awful ways.

 

[Christine Wheelwright]

I watched two episodes before abandoning. I was starting to wonder if the intent was to actually send the viewer to sleep.

 

[Matteo]

Just finished watching it last night and was glad they didn't (somehow) squeeze a load into that episode - to finish the story line.

I didn't mind them changing some plotlines - it worked to make a story - and liked that they fitted in some of the standalone stories from single issues of the comic.

The overall look was nice and I thought the portrayal of Morpheus was fairly accurate.

Disappointed they changed Death though...I was looking forward to see a cute goth girl. And they played a bit safe with Despair.