Live data from Hacker News

How (and Why) Neil Gaiman Finally Adapted ‘The Sandman’ for TV

variety.com

101–105 of 105 posts

Re: How (and Why) Neil Gaiman Finally Adapted ‘The Sandman’ for TV

#101
post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the anti-life bit was about entropy, but avoided the word for some reason. Could be for simplicity, poetic reasons, who could say.

> I think the anti-life bit was about entropy, but avoided the word for some reason But it wasn't, it was about the anti-life equation, a reference to DC's Darkseid.

Weirdly, if that's true, it's a DC reference that actually improves the story, because I always wondered "if the demon can just play anti-life, why can't it play anti-hope or whatever too, or Morpheus play anti-anti-life". It's still not good, but at least it's not inexplicable.

Re: How (and Why) Neil Gaiman Finally Adapted ‘The Sandman’ for TV

#102
post #84

I feel it's ironic to say this for The Sandman, but for me the standard woke changes to the source material hurt the story, as they forced Dream to be a much weaker character. Johanna Constantine for instance starts off rude and dismissive towards Dream, since this is the sort of behavior writers use to telegraph strong female character nowadays -- which ended up making the main character feel weaker when he's not ta…

>Johanna Constantine for instance starts off rude and dismissive towards Dream, since this is the sort of behavior writers use to telegraph strong female character nowadays -- which ended up making the main character feel weaker when he's not taken seriously.[..]

This. Exactly! Jenna Coleman plays Joanna Constantine in Netflix’s Sandman. I really disliked her in Dr.Who because it became the Clara Oswald Show…

I couldn’t bear to watch her repeat the same shtick in Sandman too.

Re: How (and Why) Neil Gaiman Finally Adapted ‘The Sandman’ for TV

#103
post #51
post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

well, let's see: bog-standard cgi, overbearing music that sounds like music in any other big recent(ish) "fantasy" production, stilted dialogue laced with awkward exposition, nobody among the cast seems to know how to fucking act (except the guy playing John Dee, he's excellent though also exactly the same as everywhere else, so he just steals every scene he's in), that stupid raven, shall I go on. still watchable, w…

The music is a definitely weak point. The guy playing John Dee is David Thewlis, one of the best cinema actors of all time. Matthew the Raven is not well handled (he's not well-handled in the book either!), and his dialog is unearned and superficial. "Dreams don't die" is the Goonies wishing well speech repurposed. I groaned audibly. Episodes 2-4 were interesting as a fan of the books (though not of Preludes & Noctur…

> The guy playing John Dee is David Thewlis, one of the best cinema actors of all time.

He's Lupin in Harry Potters, for a quick reference (for others). I take it you've seen The Landscapers? Exceptional performances from both Thewlis and Olivia Colman. I came to Sandman as an adult, and I was not a comic reader as a child. Maybe that's why I love it, not having the fluency to recognize the uneven writing and things you listed as weakness? I remember being absolutely floored when I read the first few, and also being convinced it could never be successfully adapted. I thought there were so many nuances, so many allusions to myths and folklore woven into Gaiman's writing that a film adaptation would absolutely butcher the original material by its inability to render all the shades; (e.g. the Cain and Abel sub-story is played for laughs and misses the sinister undercurrent - it is after all a story about a man murdering his kin and lying about it to God).

So far I'm pleasantly surprised by the series. I thought the casting and costuming of Morpheus dead-on. In the book he's drawn as a tall and pale Gothic priest. I appreciate that the production design tried to keep close to the visual framing in the book, I look at each frame and I could see the original in the derivative.

I'm worried that the complexities of the books and its branching anthologies, after the world-building phase is done, will be reduced to stupid modern clichés, e.g. "when dream dies humanity would die" and similar treacle. For example how are you going to make sense of the story where Dream meets his friends every 100 years for a drink at an eternal tavern, I forget who was there, Newton and Pascal? That's not an episode to view but a novella or in its best form, a 20-page comic.

Re: How (and Why) Neil Gaiman Finally Adapted ‘The Sandman’ for TV

#104
post #5

I don't read a ton of fiction, but I absolutely love everything I've read by Gaiman. I haven't read "The Sandman" yet, but I'm pretty optimistic about the show based on everything else I've read.

The Sandman is a weird thing to have missed. I guess you got into him after he started writing novels? Sandman is in my opinion Gaiman's best long form work, but for my money his best single issue is probably from his (likely now never to be finished although they do keep teasing, most recently for this October) Miracleman run. "Winter's Tale" from the Golden Age of Miracleman is doing something comic books aren't al…

> The Sandman is a weird thing to have missed. I guess you got into him after he started writing novels?

I like graphic novels ("1602" was excellent!) but when I started to look through Gaiman's catalog for new stuff to read, "The Sandman" seemed a bit epic and not as easily digestable as novels and short stories.

Re: How (and Why) Neil Gaiman Finally Adapted ‘The Sandman’ for TV

#105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

24 hour diner followed a bunch of nobodies and a side character for 40 minutes. That is not in any formula that conventional shows would follow.

> 24 hour diner followed a bunch of nobodies and a side character for 40 minutes. It's well very well-traveled ground. This formula isn't popular. The Walking Dead-themed shows are known for it.

Count of Monte Cristo sure did it...
Post reply on HN