Sandman

Having never read the books I wasn't really sure what to expect from The Sandman. Then after reading through the reviews and seeing how mixed they were I was even more confused about whether I should give it a try. I'm glad I did because I really enjoyed it. I just read that it got renewed for a second season so that's good news. It looks like most of the negative reviews are from people that are mad that it's not exactly like the source material and I've never got that. As long as it's entertaining...who cares. Movies and shows have to be adapted for tv and are just based off the source material. Less than 5% of the people who watch these movies and tv shows have actually read the book or comic it's based on.

A series that will unfortunately have a short lifespan due to the controversies surrounding its author.

The tragedy of "The Sandman" lies in the fact that we won't be able to see the adaptation we deserve in two seasons due to its plot complexity and dreamlike themes.

I consider this story to be among the top three comics ever published, along with Alan Moore's "Watchmen" and Frank Miller's "The Dark Knight Returns." Hence the importance of doing things right and living up to expectations.

When a Netflix adaptation was discussed, I was apprehensive; it's no wonder this platform has had equal parts success and failure.

The casting also had its detractors. Beyond Tom Sturridge, who I think is an excellent Dream, the rest, a priori, didn't fit what the comic represented, in terms of skin color, gender, appearance, and many other aspects.

However, both the casting and the tone of the series were very much on point. Of course, it's not a perfect series, but it's clear that there was love and that the author's hand is present.

I think it has a very good first half, with a brutal climax in episode 5. We have an interlude episode 6 with a self-contained plot that, in my opinion, is by far the best of the season. And finally, we have a much weaker second half, which ultimately lowers the season's rating.

Then, we have a bonus episode that was released a few weeks later that is also interesting and contributes quite a bit to the lore.

In any case, overall, it's a very interesting series, and I personally liked it. The downside is that, due to publicly known facts, we'll only get one more season soon. It may turn out well, it may turn out badly.

What is clear is that we won't get the adaptation that the original material should have had, and we'll be left with what could have been and couldn't be.

If Sandman were doing it's job, episodes 7-10 would explain why we should care about Dream and The Dreaming, not alienate and confuse viewers that do not have an insight into where the epic Sandman storyline eventually ends up. There is little connective tissue from Point A to Point Z, mostly because these episodes lack any real tone or nuance. The show gets busy - strangely more compacted- than even the 24 page comics they are adapted from. These episodes - without the gravity of a gifted actor like David Thewlis - just sort of spiral into nonsense. And since little effort is placed on delineating the importance or role of Dream or The Dreaming (or for that matter, the identities of The Endless as characters or the function of their realms) the series comes off as dull and drab and dim-witted.

"the Sandman" is one if the most emotional, insightful, intelligent comics ever written, and it accomplishes so much by suggesting the fantastical in the mundane. But in this Netflix adaptation, The Dreaming and Reality have no clear identities - just noisy cross-cutting between often drab actors performing rote functions. That's why, perhaps, the performance of Thewlis pops so much. We need to see the consequences of an innocent character interacting with the ideas of a universe so beyond his control. Every bit of momentum that the show builds up in those center episodes puts a greater emphasis on how the first episode and especially episodes 7-10 utterly fail.

Netflix's Sandman lacks scope, and ultimately comes off as pretty silly when it fails to maintain a solid core of genuine human emotion. Why, for example, squander the casting of Stephen Fry and the warm, wonderful Gilbert character with such a slim, unconvincing treatment? Gilbert's journey is essential as a mirror to that of the Corinthian, and all of the queasy menace of a "cereal convention" gets lost in the production's dayglo attitudes, loose ends, and loud box-checking.

I turned on this series the second Rose, Unity, and Jed began stumbling through these awful scripts and questionable performances. Any honest crew could have seen that mess going wrong. How could they not, having obviously understood the significance of, say, "Passengers" and "The Sound of Her Wings"? If Jed, Unity, and Rose are a "family", hiw are supposed to believe that Dream has any real affection for Death or Hob, or even compassion for John Dee or Johanna Constantine? The emotional gravity devolves into nonsensical B-movie execution.

If Sandman gets a second season, it will have to address the elephant in the room - casting and scope will have to get much more expansive and solve a lot of scale problems. Nothing here suggests that this can be accomplished. If you read through the negative responses to the series, you can see that folks don't have a lot of patience for the massive world-building that makes the conclusion of Sandman so moving and philosophically relevant. But as a fan of the source material, one has to ask why a die-hard would want to see such messy adaptations of works that deserve better?

With the two most awkward Sandman texts out of the way, the meat of the series comes next, but nothing in episodes 7-10 suggest that these producers are up to the task.

"The Sandman" TV show delivers a mesmerizing and captivating narrative that seamlessly weaves together elements of fantasy, mystery, and supernatural intrigue. From its stunning cinematography to its richly developed characters, the series offers a visually arresting and emotionally resonant experience for viewers. One of its greatest strengths lies in its ability to stay true to the essence of Neil Gaiman's beloved graphic novels while also bringing a fresh perspective to the screen. The cast delivers standout performances, bringing depth and complexity to their respective roles. The intricate storytelling keeps audiences engaged, with each episode unveiling new layers of the intricate mythology that underpins the series. With its compelling blend of dark fantasy and philosophical themes, "The Sandman" proves to be a must-watch for fans of the genre.

I really liked the comics back then, when they were published. I haven't read them again since, so I forgot most of the things and so also the story for the first season, if it was ever put into the comics. The show is visually stunning and I like the look. The one thing that was probably cut though for budget reasons was that Morpheus should have way more impact on the dreamworld wherever he goes and visually influence it. That wasn't a major point for me. The lead actor was well chosen, even with the hairdo making me wonder when he would sing songs from the Cure. I don't like the actor for the main villain - the Corinthian - so it was good, that he was the villain, but he more a psychopath than a true evil.

What most people might have a problem with was the slow pace the first season had. I personally didn't mind stories like the human Morpheus was meeting in that pub every 100 years. It added to that existential feel of the show.

While I personally don't like the recent gender swapping in respect to source material - I mean, why not invent awesome material yourself rather than say make a show called "Pippin Longstocking" - it was moderately done so in the show that it didn't hurt personally speaking. What I found a bit sad was that they turned Death from the little Goth chick to some black woman. But I found it worse that she had not so much screen time at all.

Overall, I enjoyed it a lot.