I guess I'm no longer young and hip, I only recognize two of those names.
It'll probably all be on the shoulders of that guy playing Dream. Hope he's up to it.
Interesting. I would be very interested to see how Gwen pulls off the Morningstar. Or for how they show Hell on TV for that matter.
Even though the show has basically nothing to do with the comic, Lucifer has a pretty great actor for the character. I wouldn't have minded seeing him come in as a more series take on the same character.
DEATH – Kirby Howell-Baptiste
DESIRE – Mason Alexander Park
DESPAIR – Donna Preston
JOHANNA CONSTANTINE (John Constantine’s great-great-great grandmother) - Jenna Coleman
ETHEL CRIPPS – Niamh Walsh & Joely Richardson
JOHN DEE – David Thewlis
ROSE WALKER – Kyo Ra
LYTA HALL – Razane Jammal
UNITY KINKAID - Sandra James Young
GILBERT – Stephen Fry
MATTHEW – Patton Oswalt
Um. OK, I'll say it. Technically I'm probably being racist here, but I'm not happy with Kirby Howell-Baptiste as Death. Death in the graphic novels is a (literally) white-skinned Goth girl - and to me that's a pretty integral part of her character. It's like she's obviously inspired Goth fashion, but her chirpy happy-go-lucky attitude is totally contrary to the stereotypical Goth... I think that will get lost with the casting of a black actress.
Crispy78 wrote: I don't think whiting up a black actress is a route that should be taken...
Are they going to?
No. Sandman started in 1989 and was shaped by society at the time. Neil has always said he's open to revisit & revise it for adaptations. Also, the Endless are shapeshifters and appear as different races in the comics (plus cats & plants), and "Their appearance can change to fit the expectations of others. When asked by Marco Polo if he is always so pale, Dream replies, "That depends on who's watching."".
Regarding the pronoun thing, its just about being fair and clear for everyone. If they just put it on Desire, or only on the cast members that specifically raised it as an issue, it could lead to stigma.
If they have asked everyone and clearly recorded each person's preferred choice then its fair and no assumptions are made.
Automatically Appended Next Post: As a short addendum, I’m sure that many people will think it an unnecessary addition, but equally there will be others for whom this kind of consideration is important to them as it forms a core part of their identity. I think they’ve done it well with no real fanfare, just adding in the info in a fair and equitable manner.
Read the first few books many years ago and remember enjoying them. I do believe the later ones got a bit harder to follow, so hope the script and plot is tight - nothing worse than trying to do too much, or plodding along at a snail's pace and each episode hardly moves it along (GOT early seasons...)
Dysartes wrote: As far as I'm aware, Gaiman is pretty involved with this, like he was with Good Omens.
If he's happy with the actress they've picked for Death, I'm willing to go with it until we see some footage.
John Carpenter was happy with the remake of the Fog. That didn't mean that the cast and crew knew what they were doing, it just meant that John Carpenter was paid to say it's good.
I see this alienating a lot of the fanbase, and I have never seen changing a major character turn out any way but utter garbage, with one exception, and it took Idris Elba to pull it off.
gorgon wrote: LOL. I have a hard time seeing the Sandman 'base' being triggered by darker skin.
Its a tricky one and whilst the Endless have that whole eye of the beholder going on Death is kind of iconic. But its his story so he can do as he pleases, and whilst I hope it doesn't make me some kind of -ist I was hoping for a cheery Gothette
gorgon wrote: LOL. I have a hard time seeing the Sandman 'base' being triggered by darker skin.
Are you kidding? Do you have any idea how long some of us have been waiting for a live action 'Death'? This was one of the more iconic characters to come out of the book!
Further, Her only roles of note was Simone in 'The Good Place' and Grace from 'Infinity Train'. This is not encouraging at all.
gorgon wrote: LOL. I have a hard time seeing the Sandman 'base' being triggered by darker skin.
Most of the fans seem to support Neil Gaiman's casting choices, and have faith in him to make this work. The people complaining about it also seem to be complaining about Constantine being gender-swapped as well...
@Baron: The actress in question can wear a leather jacket and ankh, and have eye makeup with an eye of Horus look. And there are non-white people who are Goths. If any of that even matters, since the Endless don't have a fixed appearance, as stated earlier in the thread. I don't understand your angle here.
gorgon wrote: LOL. I have a hard time seeing the Sandman 'base' being triggered by darker skin.
Most of the fans seem to support Neil Gaiman's casting choices, and have faith in him to make this work. The people complaining about it also seem to be complaining about Constantine being gender-swapped as well...
Neil Gaiman wrote:It’s Sandman. It’s still Sandman. The same Sandman that establishes in issue 4 of the comic that The Endless have no fixed race or ethnicity. Take a look at Issue 9 again. It may help.
gorgon wrote: Yeah, what big Sandman fans they are, huh?
I don't want to gatekeep, or judge who is a "true fan", but if you're going to rant on the Internet at least check you've got your basic facts right...
Turnip Jedi wrote: @ Beast, come come you know using facts on the internet is frowned on...
One of the (many) downsides of being an old git...
I get that Death is a cultural icon and means a lot to people, but that Death still exists and cannot be taken away from you. This is a different Death for a different time.
gorgon wrote: @Baron: The actress in question can wear a leather jacket and ankh, and have eye makeup with an eye of Horus look. And there are non-white people who are Goths. If any of that even matters, since the Endless don't have a fixed appearance, as stated earlier in the thread. I don't understand your angle here.
There's no fixed superman either. We can cast and write him as a transgendered central Asian person with no powers and no costume. But I guarantee that people would be unhappy with it.
Using the fact that the Endless are multidimensional beings that are perceived in a variety of ways is a cop out in this case, since, IIRC, Death is the only one who doesn't actually do that in the series, or in other appearances in DC, since she's also the offical Death of the DC universe. (though one could argue that there is some heavy handed symbolism there, if intentional) In fact, in the one story where she altered the perceptions of those around her, she still appears the same to the reader. This was, at least, as I see it, to contrast with Delirium, who changes quite frequently, for obvious reasons.
That and I have serious reservations about her ability to play this part ,not just based on her appearance, but on the part where I've never seen her in anything good.
There's no fixed superman either. We can cast and write him as a transgendered central Asian person with no powers and no costume. But I guarantee that people would be unhappy with it.
There's no fixed superman either. We can cast and write him as a transgendered central Asian person with no powers and no costume. But I guarantee that people would be unhappy with it.
Imagine thinking you know better than the series creator. I wish I had that much chutzpah.
Anyway, I really doubt that people who enjoy Gaiman's stories will care that much, I certainly don't. Being pale wasn't central to her character, being sympathetic and kind was.
Cronch wrote: Imagine thinking you know better than the series creator. I wish I had that much chutzpah.
Look at The Fog. Carpenter loved the remake, no one else did.
Secondly, Gaiman hasn't exactly had a good track record in film and television. While American Gods (which was just cancelled) and Good Omens have been relative successes, Stardust, Beowulf, Mirrormask, and the Miramax dub of Princess Mononoke were at best 'meh'. Hellboy II was just bad, but that can't really be laid at Gaiman's feet, he only wrote part of it.
So, when he claims that he can make something work that has, thus far, generally failed in comic book movies, work, you'll pardon my skepticism.
Flinty wrote: And mirror mask and Stardust are glorious.
Stardust barely broke even at the box office, and Mirrormask made less than a million on a 4 million dollar budget. Even if it was meant for Straight-to-Video, that's not good.
We could do Alita. Yukito Kishiro loved Robert Rodriguez's version, but it still only just broke even, maybe, despite being his highest grossing movie ever.
The thing is, that Gaiman wants something from the studio. He's been fighting to get a dozen movie projects off the ground over the last few years, so he'll say whatever he thinks will improve the movie/series success. Even if his actual opinion is more in line with Allen Moore's views of his own works in cinema. Given how closely the rest of the cast resembles their characters, I suspect this was something studio mandated rather than Gaiman's first choice.
You're moving goalposts between "successful" and "good" to suit your argument, which any fool knows are not equivalent metrics, drawing massive false equivalencies and leaning really hard on one example which is entirely subjective.
All to justify an already paper thin objection that's been shown to be baseless on multiple occasions in the past.
You're moving goalposts between "successful" and "good" to suit your argument, which any fool knows are not equivalent metrics, drawing massive false equivalencies and leaning really hard on one example which is entirely subjective.
You do realize that it will have to be both, right?
Huh.
Good Omens was stellar.
I’ll give this a shot, no matter who’s cast. I find it better that lesser known people get the roles. It helps them become the embodiment of that character as I have no preconceived notions about who they played before. Nor does my previous opinion of their works create a personal bias of like or dislike.
I’m perfectly all right with a black woman as Death. But regardless of ethnicity, I think this is more a case of very high expectations for this particular character, and can she pull it off?
I for one will reserve judgement of good or bad casting choices until I see it.
You're moving goalposts between "successful" and "good" to suit your argument, which any fool knows are not equivalent metrics, drawing massive false equivalencies and leaning really hard on one example which is entirely subjective.
You do realize that it will have to be both, right?
It's on a steaming service, their criteria for "successful" doesn't equate to box office. It may not even translate simply into volume of streams or increase in subscription if history is any indication.
Crispy78 wrote: Um. OK, I'll say it. Technically I'm probably being racist here, but I'm not happy with Kirby Howell-Baptiste as Death. Death in the graphic novels is a (literally) white-skinned Goth girl - and to me that's a pretty integral part of her character. It's like she's obviously inspired Goth fashion, but her chirpy happy-go-lucky attitude is totally contrary to the stereotypical Goth... I think that will get lost with the casting of a black actress.
I'd say it's Death's personality that's important, not the skin colour. Of all the Endless, Death is the one who has the most life, empathises with the humans she comes in contact with and ironically is the one to encourage her siblings to embrace life. Once you've got an actor who can do that, it doesn't matter to me what they look like.
I have a hard time getting hung up on a skin color change from a comic in which sometimes the main character's appearance is "a tribesman", "a cat", or "a burning skull", but you know, you do you I guess.
Spoiler:
imagine pretending to be a fan and also pretending that Death being white is important
imagine pretending to be a fan and also pretending that Death being white is important
Imagine pretending you know what you're talking about if you think it's about her being white. I'll wait to see if she can be goth, but I highly doubt it.
I have never seen changing a major character turn out any way but utter garbage, with one exception, and it took Idris Elba to pull it off.
So what else are we supposed to think?
And what you took away from that was that he was black? Boy, I would have really baffled you if I'd thought Sly Stallone had been any good in Judge Dread, or, worse, had liked BvS.
Azreal13 wrote: I'll just let people reading the thread make their own decisions I think.
Yeah. That might be for the best. I'm not a fan of changing characters to suit the perceived target audience of a movie, regardless of what is being changed. And, frankly, some of the story lines wouldn't make as much sense with this change. It would be an amazing choice for the Girl who Would be Death, but a terrible one for At Death’s Door or The High Cost of Living.
Can it be about her skin color without being about her race? I really rather like the aesthetic contrast between her black clothing and white skin, and I mean stark White, not Caucasian.
AduroT wrote: Can it be about her skin color without being about her race? I really rather like the aesthetic contrast between her black clothing and white skin, and I mean stark White, not Caucasian.
You'll get people saying it is anyway. 'White face' arguments ahoy! But the other aspect is that the makeup just looks terrible if you try to get that stark white look without having a lighter skin tone under it. One of the better compromises I've seen was using metallic gold for a sort of pseudo-Egyptian approach, but there's all sorts of baggage with that if they go that route.
Unfortunately it looks like people are getting to Neil (on Twitter):
Neil Gaiman wrote:
Woke wrote:Why sell out? Just stand by your work or do you lack the intestinal fortitude? It irks me more that you just don’t even give a feth.
I give all the feths about the work. I spent 30 years successfully battling bad movies of Sandman.
I give zero feths about people who don't understand/ haven't read Sandman whining about a non-binary Desire or that Death isn't white enough. Watch the show, make up your minds.
beast_gts wrote: Unfortunately it looks like people are getting to Neil (on Twitter):
Neil Gaiman wrote:
Woke wrote:Why sell out? Just stand by your work or do you lack the intestinal fortitude? It irks me more that you just don’t even give a feth.
I give all the feths about the work. I spent 30 years successfully battling bad movies of Sandman.
I give zero feths about people who don't understand/ haven't read Sandman whining about a non-binary Desire or that Death isn't white enough. Watch the show, make up your minds.
Seems a bit of a panto. he knew what would happen and I thought he'd be smart enough not to feed the trolls...(but buzz is buzz I guess)
People can only take so much abuse before they feel the need to do something about it I guess. Can’t be a perfect social media-ist all the time, hence the platform is so dangerous.
I give all the feths about the work. I spent 30 years successfully battling bad movies of Sandman.
Including ones he, himself, was going to write and direct. Gaiman is neither the showrunner nor writer on this, so God alone knows what we'll actually get.
Reviewing this, there are more parts that will make less sense (having gone back and re-read Preludes last night) with some of the casting choices. Constantine's entire involvement would require extensive re-writing to make sense, particularly if they're switching him and his ancestress for his role in Preludes.
BaronIveagh wrote: Gaiman is neither the showrunner nor writer on this, so God alone knows what we'll actually get.
He's listed as Writer/Executive Producer.
BaronIveagh wrote: Reviewing this, there are more parts that will make less sense (having gone back and re-read Preludes last night) with some of the casting choices. Constantine's entire involvement would require extensive re-writing to make sense, particularly if they're switching him and his ancestress for his role in Preludes.
I was going to say I wonder if they're not doing Preludes & Nocturnes, as I've only seen Doll's House mentioned, but Wiki says:
Wikipedia wrote:According to Gaiman, the plan is to faithfully adapt the series, beginning with the first season adapting "Preludes & Nocturnes" and "The Doll's House". However, the series features changes intended to update the story for modern times. For example, it begins in 2021 rather than 1989, with Dream now having been imprisoned for 105 years instead of 75 years. Gaiman stated that the team attempted to reinvent Dream as if "we were creating [him] now"; this included considering changing Dream's gender.
Gaiman stated that the team attempted to reinvent Dream as if "we were creating [him] now"; this included considering changing Dream's gender.
OK, so, in effect, Gaiman will be pulling a George Lucas. Like I said, this is NOT going to end well.
Though just imagine the twitstorm twitter would have if they'd gone ahead with the idea of casting a woman as Dream, and then de-powered her and held her prisoner for a century.
Move the start of the story on, ensure tech references are updated (at a minimum), but tell the same beats? Given we know Lyta has been cast, the end game you mention could still be on the cards, Turnip Jedi.
It is interesting that they've announced Great-Grannie Constantine before Modern Constantine, though.
I had never read those comics and always heard only how great they are so I am looking to see the show. Hopefully it lives up to the hype of the dead tree version.
Heimdall, the White God of Norse mythology, whos skin was like ivory and had gold teeth, is played fantastically by Idris Alba.
Not to mention that Death, like all of the Endless, doesn't have an actual physical form. They are perceived by the viewer in ways that fit the viewers perceptions. When people see Death they don't see a girl whos skin is pure white. They see either a normal girl, or a skeleton draped in black robes, or whatever else.
We are not talking about Luke Cage whos racial background is a aspect that informs their character.
We are talking about the living embodiment of diametrically opposed concepts as an Endless entity that exists throughout all time and space. It can look like whatever the hell it wants and anyone of any background can play them if they are a good fit for the role.
Not looking forward to this for personal reasons (Gaiman is a bad writer. He has amazing ideas, but his writing is 100% bad)
But I personally do not see the big issue with Death. Gaiman goes to great lengths to point out how their appearances mean nothing in the comics and they can change on a whim. So much is gets incredibly annoying. It is practically all I remember about them, honestly.
Not to mention that Death, like all of the Endless, doesn't have an actual physical form. They are perceived by the viewer in ways that fit the viewers perceptions. When people see Death they don't see a girl whos skin is pure white. They see either a normal girl, or a skeleton draped in black robes, or whatever else.
And does so particularly when Gaiman wants to squeeze out his co-creators Bob Kane style.
And it doesn't mean they won't appear as other people in flashbacks/single shots from anothers point of view. People cast in such small segments don't necessarily get top billing/announcements. They just get a mention in the credits.
Brie Larson was cast as Carol Danvers. The child and teenager who got cast to play her younger selves didn't get announcements.
Lance845 wrote: And it doesn't mean they won't appear as other people in flashbacks/single shots from anothers point of view. People cast in such small segments don't necessarily get top billing/announcements. They just get a mention in the credits.
Brie Larson was cast as Carol Danvers. The child and teenager who got cast to play her younger selves didn't get announcements.
Fair point, I could see them pulling something like the Coming to America segments in American Gods for the side storys
Also is the show covering just the first run or more, as Fiddlers Green (splendid casting there) and a few others dont show up till the 2nd arc
Cronch wrote: Is that one with the super creepy and uncomfortable roadside diner section? I think so but it's been a while...
I THINK the 24 hour diner issue is part of the Dolls House. It's been a long time but I am pretty sure the main bit of the Dolls House if the murderers convention with the Corinthian. The Corinthian has been cast, and I think John Dee (Dr. Destiny) has also been cast... not 100% sure. It would make sense since both bits are either parts of Morpheus regaining his items of power or related to things that went wrong in his absence.
Dysartes wrote: Move the start of the story on, ensure tech references are updated (at a minimum), but tell the same beats? Given we know Lyta has been cast, the end game you mention could still be on the cards, Turnip Jedi.
It is interesting that they've announced Great-Grannie Constantine before Modern Constantine, though.
I am curious about if there were any copyright issues to overcome with having characters who are part of the wider DC universe in there. And the adaptation really doesn't need John Constantine, since his issue (and all the other superhero stuff in the first arc) was essentially a cameo which was presumably there to hook in fans of DC's other stuff. Even Joanna features in two flashbacks total, and really doesn't have much influence on anyone else's plot.
Cronch wrote: Is that one with the super creepy and uncomfortable roadside diner section? I think so but it's been a while...
Yes, that scene happens in the first volume, when Dream is recovering the artifacts lost during imprisonment and one of them has fallen into the hands of a would-be supervillain.
Turnip Jedi wrote: Bit of a mixed bag with David Thewlis as the standout as John was bonkers even by Arkham standards and he does unsettling rather well
Also can someone explain the pronoun thing, especially as it only really applies to Desire ?
Basically this looks like the equivalent of the common and ever-cringe inducing 'nonbinary person walks into the room, all the woke straights decide it's time to go 'round the table listing their pronouns and staring expectantly at the one nonbinary person '
Looking forward to all of this, honestly. Steven Fry is legitimately the single most perfect living actress I could come up with for fiddlers green, and while I can get the hesitation from folks about Death I think being gaunt and skinny and having a gigantic disproportionate shock of hair is more important for recreating the iconic comic images of death. I feel like with a white lady filling that role if you actually tried to get her hair as big as it is shown in the comic, she'd look like one of those awful netflix live action anime adaptations where they put a dude in a wig and group his hair into the big 'anime hair bananas'.
Lance845 wrote: And it doesn't mean they won't appear as other people in flashbacks/single shots from anothers point of view. People cast in such small segments don't necessarily get top billing/announcements. They just get a mention in the credits.
Brie Larson was cast as Carol Danvers. The child and teenager who got cast to play her younger selves didn't get announcements.
Fair point, I could see them pulling something like the Coming to America segments in American Gods for the side storys
Also is the show covering just the first run or more, as Fiddlers Green (splendid casting there) and a few others dont show up till the 2nd arc
I mean yeah, it is almost inevitable that we're going to get some surprise cameo appearances of other actors and CGI woobldy-woos as other forms of the endless momentarily.
Cronch wrote: Is that one with the super creepy and uncomfortable roadside diner section? I think so but it's been a while...
Yes, that scene happens in the first volume, when Dream is recovering the artifacts lost during imprisonment and one of them has fallen into the hands of a would-be supervillain.
That specific issue is my least favorite one of the run; not because it's bad but because for whatever reason I find it to be sort of a hard read. I just feel bad for the people in the diner.
Cronch wrote: Is that one with the super creepy and uncomfortable roadside diner section? I think so but it's been a while...
Yes, that scene happens in the first volume, when Dream is recovering the artifacts lost during imprisonment and one of them has fallen into the hands of a would-be supervillain.
That specific issue is my least favorite one of the run; not because it's bad but because for whatever reason I find it to be sort of a hard read. I just feel bad for the people in the diner.
I think that means it is doing its job effectively, then.
Cronch wrote: Is that one with the super creepy and uncomfortable roadside diner section? I think so but it's been a while...
Yes, that scene happens in the first volume, when Dream is recovering the artifacts lost during imprisonment and one of them has fallen into the hands of a would-be supervillain.
That specific issue is my least favorite one of the run; not because it's bad but because for whatever reason I find it to be sort of a hard read. I just feel bad for the people in the diner.
I've been listening to the audiobook adaptation and I have to say it's really good.
This makes me nervous on some levels because American Gods did not turn out well, but unlike American Gods The Sandman doesn't need to be twisted into a TV series. It already fits fairly well into one.
That little teaser looks great imo. Great casting of the few we see in the little bits we see of them. His items of power look awesome. Looking forward to it.
I always forget how much of a career Charles Dance (the cult leader) has had. I have a bad habit of thinking of him as discount Vincent Price, but he's done multiple projects a year basically since the 80s (and a couple 70s productions). Not big stuff, but a lot of stuff.
Looks cool, will definitely check it out. Don’t really know anything about the setting or story. Still wanna whine about Death’s casting because she is the only character from it I was previously aware of and they changed her aesthetic so much from what I thought was neat.
Watched the first episode, its rather spiffy, a tweak here and there from the book, nothing that stuck out, most likely binging the rest over the weekend (also Tenbones !)
3 Episodes in, still going well, Jenna nails the whole Constantine vibe with bonus points for old Hellblazer references with Rick the Vic and Kit Ryan, she doesn't look like like String mind, and still waiting for my head cannon of Mad Hettie being the bird lady from Mary Poppins, as she needs well fed pigeons for her haruspexy (divining with entrails), to be confirmed
I think is very good. I am not an officiando of the comics having only read some of them back in the day, so apologies if it’s making other folk howl in indignation.
Binged first six episodes last night. It’s a boring ‘I loved everything about it’ kind of review. Story and characters are interesting with decent acting and effects.
My only issue is that the guy playing Dream reminds me so much of a young James Marsters that it’s off-putting.
I am enjoying the show, didn't even notice many of the changes untill I re-read Preludes and Nocturnes as they fit well. Even genderbent Constantine makes sense for the telling of the story in a visual medium...
Spoiler:
Only real thing I didn't like was the duel in hell, as it's shown in the TV series, I think Dream should have lost for hesitating too long or for Matthews interference.
In the comics, I feel like he basically curbstomps his opponent making it much more of an embarrassment both versions make it out to be...
Up to Episode 9 now, dear dear Mr Fry being. like I've gushed before, is perfect casting
Only hhhmm I have is Unity, if she was 12 in 1916 she's now pushing 120, adding an extra generation to the Walker family makes sense but doesn't fix Unitys unlikely life span
Spoiler:
unless its linked to the vortex somehow
And and the tweak to the Lyta. Hector and Jed plot was fine but I hoped for Brute and Glob, yes they are kind of goofy but I liked them
I wonder if they learned lessons from Good Omens? Specifically “Mr Gaiman knows what he’s doing, bloody listen to him”, because that’s two for two on decent adaptations.
Fair point Doc, still not sure what happened to American Gods mind, adding more rambling to an fairly rambling book wasn't ideal and if not from Mr McShane and Ms Browning, I (a fairly rabid Gaimanite) would have given up on it, although wishy casting would have wee Emily as the bestest Endiess, she who was once Delight
Turnip Jedi wrote: Up to Episode 9 now, dear dear Mr Fry being. like I've gushed before, is perfect casting
Only hhhmm I have is Unity, if she was 12 in 1916 she's now pushing 120, adding an extra generation to the Walker family makes sense but doesn't fix Unitys unlikely life span
Spoiler:
unless its linked to the vortex somehow
And and the tweak to the Lyta. Hector and Jed plot was fine but I hoped for Brute and Glob, yes they are kind of goofy but I liked them
Spoiler:
What we know of it, is that being in contact with something of the Endless stretches your life considerably. Having had a child with Desire may be responsible for the increased lifespan- having had Endless seed inside you, you may be gifted with extraordinarily long life. 120 certainly isn't impossible, especially as she's been heavily influenced by Desire and Dream, and lived a very sheltered life in hospitals.
One heck of a ride, and despite the splendid turns Dream, Death and Gilbert put in I think MVP was the Corinthian
Spoiler:
and much like Arnold he'll be back
Curious to see what happens next as the next arc big and the one shots from Dream Country are kind of very strange for telly (although a whole cat based episode would be mog-fastic)
Arguably, that's where the advantage of streamed episodic TV comes in - the episodes don't have the be the same length, and can be given the time they need to breathe.
Given how well it seems to be doing on Netflix - has been No. 1 show in a silly number of countries at this point - I'll be very surprised if we don't hear of season 2 being confirmed at some point this year.
I was surprised to hear from Mr. Gaiman that no merch was organised prior to the show airing - you'd think Funko, at least, would've been prepared to get in on the action, given the number of random licenses they'll make Pops for.
No Merch ? Time to Ebay my many t-shirts which have all strangely shrunk over the past 20 years... (doubley depressing as most of them are chunky fan boy size to start with)
Given I had read the Sandman comics way too long ago to remember them vividly, only the aspects started to come back as I saw them on the show, so was super entertained.
However, I do agree with some of the reviews that an episode here and there was a bit off-track and not entirely necessary. But where I do think the show hit it right on was the casting - superb in every respect, even if people complained it did not match the comic persona. And oddly enough, Mason as Desire was awesomely good, being a non-binary that could seduce either side was scary great. I definitely want to see more of each of the siblings.
One heck of a ride, and despite the splendid turns Dream, Death and Gilbert put in I think MVP was the Corinthian
Spoiler:
and much like Arnold he'll be back
Curious to see what happens next as the next arc big and the one shots from Dream Country are kind of very strange for telly (although a whole cat based episode would be mog-fastic)
Comments from Neil were to the effect of "More about "Season of Mists" than "Dream Country" (Lucifer abdicating Hell, etc) - which also tallies well with that ending.
One heck of a ride, and despite the splendid turns Dream, Death and Gilbert put in I think MVP was the Corinthian
Spoiler:
and much like Arnold he'll be back
Curious to see what happens next as the next arc big and the one shots from Dream Country are kind of very strange for telly (although a whole cat based episode would be mog-fastic)
Comments from Neil were to the effect of "More about "Season of Mists" than "Dream Country" (Lucifer abdicating Hell, etc) - which also tallies well with that ending.
Fair enough, although I think you could stick in Midsummer in mid-season as a break
Although seems with Neil's comment and lack of connected DC supers we'll miss out on "Facade" kind of a shame as more Kirby can only be good, although fingers crossed for a slightly frazzled Death trying to reason with the Dead Boys (or you know just give her a High Cost of Living spin off)
Years ago, some rpg friends who knew I did metal casting, asked if I could make a prop for them for an upcoming "Freeform" (live action rpg event. Like LARP, but more "amateur drama society" and none of the whacking with foam swords gak) that was going to be based on "The Season of mists".
They wanted an actual physical prop for "the key to hell".
So I sculpted one up, based off the artwork for it, and turned that into two wax castings (that in turn, were used to create bronze casts of the key. One went to the overall 'winner' of the event, one went to the writer of the event. They weighed about 600 or so grams each, so had a bit of a heft.
That mould disintegrated years ago. I think I'll have a go at doing a new sculpt, and this time, I'm going to keep the bronze cast I make of it.
Vaguelly recalling it from my youth I watched a few episodes
Its...ok...it looks pretty and some really good actors....but ....I don;t know I can't seem to care about anyone in it...I think if the central character had stayed in his glass cage I think he would have been as happy as he can be -not sure he can be..... Some of the other characters I found too dull to follow.....
Mr Morden wrote: Vaguelly recalling it from my youth I watched a few episodes
Its...ok...it looks pretty and some really good actors....but ....I don;t know I can't seem to care about anyone in it...I think if the central character had stayed in his glass cage I think he would have been as happy as he can be -not sure he can be..... Some of the other characters I found too dull to follow.....
but yeah it looked good......I guess.
I mean, whether or not Morpheus can change and be happy is sort of one of his central arcs across the entire comic run. The endless all kind of suffer this to some extent or another and come to different conclusions. Either reveling in their nature but ultimately being slaves to it (Desire), finding purpose and contentment (Death), or doing everything they can to escape it (Destruction). It's heavily implied but not flat out stated that Delight became Delirium possibly from seeing the truth of the existential issue of their true natures.
How miserable Morpheus is while trudging on due to some sense of pride or duty and what that means for him is more or less the central question of the story.
I'm slowly going through it (only on ep2), but the big barrier for me is Dream's monologues. Particularly after the 'gun moment' in episode 1, where he muses on humanity becoming more 'barbaric' (he might use a different word in the moment, but I can't be asked) without his influence on their dreams.
I choked on that pretty hard, even though I know the Endless are supposed to be the main characters of the story. But that's going way too hard on stripping agency away from people, which is already an issue once you make Immortals in charge of controlling fundamental aspects of human behavior. It is, philosophically and psychologically, fairly gross. Dream's general powerlessness and 'I need my tools' attitude doesn't help either. It seems both at odds with his overconfidence and I always find a mystical character relying on tools to be oddly contemptible. (For which I blame both D&D and fantasy movies).
I have a coworker who's all about this, she's a big fan of Gaiman, particularly Neverwhere, but mostly I remember that one as a slog and American Gods I just put aside and never went back to it. This is reminding me why. And the end credits leaning on 'raven drops f-bombs like candy' wasn't exactly a pull forwards.
Voss wrote: I'm slowly going through it (only on ep2), but the big barrier for me is Dream's monologues. Particularly after the 'gun moment' in episode 1, where he muses on humanity becoming more 'barbaric' (he might use a different word in the moment, but I can't be asked) without his influence on their dreams.
I choked on that pretty hard, even though I know the Endless are supposed to be the main characters of the story. But that's going way too hard on stripping agency away from people, which is already an issue once you make Immortals in charge of controlling fundamental aspects of human behavior. It is, philosophically and psychologically, fairly gross. Dream's general powerlessness and 'I need my tools' attitude doesn't help either. It seems both at odds with his overconfidence and I always find a mystical character relying on tools to be oddly contemptible. (For which I blame both D&D and fantasy movies).
I have a coworker who's all about this, she's a big fan of Gaiman, particularly Neverwhere, but mostly I remember that one as a slog and American Gods I just put aside and never went back to it. This is reminding me why. And the end credits leaning on 'raven drops f-bombs like candy' wasn't exactly a pull forwards.
I can understand this point of view. Totally disagree with it, and adore American Gods (the book, not so much the series), but understand it.
I would say that the question of how much free will and agency humans possess, and how much we are simply responding to our circumstances (and the machinations of various forces beyond our control) is one of those essential human questions. If you choose to continue the series, and certainly there's no obligation to, you'll find an increasing number of humans acting as individuals in spite of their relative lack of power or control.
Dreams a very peculiar character. Odd sense of justice, bizarre sense of compassion- he's not conforming to human standards at all, which I think is one of the show's greatest strengths. Showing an alien individual is not easy, nor is watching a show from the point of view of one.
Voss wrote: Dream's general powerlessness and 'I need my tools' attitude doesn't help either. It seems both at odds with his overconfidence and I always find a mystical character relying on tools to be oddly contemptible. (For which I blame both D&D and fantasy movies).
I would say that the question of how much free will and agency humans possess, and how much we are simply responding to our circumstances (and the machinations of various forces beyond our control) is one of those essential human questions. If you choose to continue the series, and certainly there's no obligation to, you'll find an increasing number of humans acting as individuals in spite of their relative lack of power or control.
Lack of power doesn't bother me. Control bothers me less- I don't understand it, but history (and modern stuff) is a long line of idiots acting without control.
Agency is a different thing. Dream not being around to personally direct the dream realm means the basic nature of humans has changed is... unpleasant.
Free will, on the other hand, is a pointless debate, as its impossible to tell the difference without being outside the universe and seeing the mechanisms (or lack thereof) of determinism. Assume whichever appeals to you, it literally makes no difference and is a waste of time.
Voss wrote: Dream's general powerlessness and 'I need my tools' attitude doesn't help either. It seems both at odds with his overconfidence and I always find a mystical character relying on tools to be oddly contemptible. (For which I blame both D&D and fantasy movies).
The tools are covered in the next few episodes.
Yep. I can tell. That is, in fact, the exact problem.
Fetch the macguffins (x3) isn't particularly interesting. It isn't interesting in MMOs, it wasn't interesting in Harry Potter, and generally isn't interesting in D&D (merely mathematically necessary). He's unknowable, powerful being. Fetching his helmet of defense +3, Sand of Spellcasting +4 and Ruby of Mind Control is potentially tedious in what's being built as a character piece. Especially when he's literally treating them as necessary hammers and nails for rebuilding his house. It takes away from the mystery rather than adds to it.
I would say that the question of how much free will and agency humans possess, and how much we are simply responding to our circumstances (and the machinations of various forces beyond our control) is one of those essential human questions. If you choose to continue the series, and certainly there's no obligation to, you'll find an increasing number of humans acting as individuals in spite of their relative lack of power or control.
Lack of power doesn't bother me. Control bothers me less- I don't understand it, but history (and modern stuff) is a long line of idiots acting without control.
Agency is a different thing. Dream not being around to personally direct the dream realm means the basic nature of humans has changed is... unpleasant.
Free will, on the other hand, is a pointless debate, as its impossible to tell the difference without being outside the universe and seeing the mechanisms (or lack thereof) of determinism. Assume whichever appeals to you, it literally makes no difference and is a waste of time.
Voss wrote: Dream's general powerlessness and 'I need my tools' attitude doesn't help either. It seems both at odds with his overconfidence and I always find a mystical character relying on tools to be oddly contemptible. (For which I blame both D&D and fantasy movies).
The tools are covered in the next few episodes.
Yep. I can tell. That is, in fact, the exact problem.
Fetch the macguffins (x3) isn't particularly interesting. It isn't interesting in MMOs, it wasn't interesting in Harry Potter, and generally isn't interesting in D&D (merely mathematically necessary). He's unknowable, powerful being. Fetching his helmet of defense +3, Sand of Spellcasting +4 and Ruby of Mind Control is potentially tedious in what's being built as a character piece. Especially when he's literally treating them as necessary hammers and nails for rebuilding his house. It takes away from the mystery rather than adds to it.
I don't think the issue is Dream not being around changes humanity and more things like the Corinthian and other Dreams/Nightmares getting out there and influencing things in ways they are not supposed to be.
It's less a lack of something for humanity and more a legion of entities doing things they are not supposed to do to effect what humanity is doing. When Dream was around they were kept in check. Their influence was subtle. They served distinct purposes with the goal of helping humanity (and life in general) to sort out their own things and drive themselves to their own goals/dreams with these entities giving the right little nudge to offer the opportunity. Without Dream directing them... it's chaos. These entities get out into the waking world and start applying their individual influences in way that are no longer subtle. It's no longer a way for humanity to face their fears and instead a waking nightmare with people dying. It's no longer the pursuit of their own hopes and dreams and instead a place they retreat to and never truly wake from.
We watched it all over the last few days.
Meh, not grate but not bad. Not a fan of a few things but it is what it is. I'd nit pick over the house with the basement in Florida, given the wter table. But I am not entirely sure where that house was. And I found it odd that from where ever the cape Kennedy town was that it was only 3 hours to the hotel in GA. The map seemed to put it further south than I am and the trip would have taken me much longer I think.
Little things like that, in any movie in any genera that I know anything about bug me a lot.
Not a fan of the actress from Dr. Who, played Clara I think it was. Seems like she has one character she plays regardless of the characters name.
I really enjoyed the Audio version more than the show. I really feel like Audio is a much strong format for these kinds of media.
Voss wrote: Dream's general powerlessness and 'I need my tools' attitude doesn't help either. It seems both at odds with his overconfidence and I always find a mystical character relying on tools to be oddly contemptible. (For which I blame both D&D and fantasy movies).
The tools are covered in the next few episodes.
Yep. I can tell. That is, in fact, the exact problem.
Fetch the macguffins (x3) isn't particularly interesting. It isn't interesting in MMOs, it wasn't interesting in Harry Potter, and generally isn't interesting in D&D (merely mathematically necessary). He's unknowable, powerful being. Fetching his helmet of defense +3, Sand of Spellcasting +4 and Ruby of Mind Control is potentially tedious in what's being built as a character piece. Especially when he's literally treating them as necessary hammers and nails for rebuilding his house. It takes away from the mystery rather than adds to it.
I thought the tool quests were pretty good. Unlike most films where they tend to be against some kind of doomsday clock, to be won at the last minute against terrible odds, in Sandman they focus much more on what it means for Dream to be, and how the lord of the realm of Dream interacts with other eternal players. I mean there are no endless trails of following clues across the world, its a single trip in each case and what results is an interesting short story, with some great looking effects.
Spoiler:
I mean the trip to hell and the interaction with Nada are pretty formative things for the character and the viewer's comprehension of the character.
warhead01 wrote: And I found it odd that from where ever the cape Kennedy town was that it was only 3 hours to the hotel in GA. The map seemed to put it further south than I am and the trip would have taken me much longer I think.
Little things like that, in any movie in any genera that I know anything about bug me a lot.
Do not get me started on how the geography of London bends time and space in film and TV
I just got a bunch of issues of the Sandman comics series.
I've been a huge Sam Kieth fan since Maxx number 1. It's the only comic series I have every issue of. I've really enjoyed seeing how the Sandman series influenced the Maxx.
warhead01 wrote: And I found it odd that from where ever the cape Kennedy town was that it was only 3 hours to the hotel in GA. The map seemed to put it further south than I am and the trip would have taken me much longer I think.
Little things like that, in any movie in any genera that I know anything about bug me a lot.
Do not get me started on how the geography of London bends time and space in film and TV
I can understand! I can't or don't enjoy modern military movies set in the last 25 years either. And uniforms worn poorly and incorrectly in movies drive me up the wall.
warhead01 wrote: I can understand! I can't or don't enjoy modern military movies set in the last 25 years either. And uniforms worn poorly and incorrectly in movies drive me up the wall.
Wow, top gun is 36 years old...
But otherwise? Black hawk down, The Siege of Jadotville, Danger Close: The Battle of Long Tan, to name but three. They are still being made. Hell, dog soldiers was fun
Turnip Jedi wrote: A exult for Chris for the Dog Soldiers plug, it's a splendid were-wotsit splatter fest (adding it to Spooky season watchlist for this year)
Gave the show a second run, still grumply about
Spoiler:
Gregory not getting a rez
but still likely to be the bestest telly I done watched 2022
And one from me.
Squaddies vs The Unknown, and each and everyone gives it their all, and no-one becomes a big blubbering incompetent mess like their training never ever allowed for anything unknown to happen.
My favourite split second scene? Squaddie nailing the door shut. Werewolf hand comes through the letter box. He batters it with the hammer, then gets back to what he was doing.
That whole film is just Chef’s Kiss. I’m yet to fail to enjoy anything Neal Marshall has given the world. He needs more and more and more work.
Yes even Doomsday, because that films is such a cool cool mess of tropes which works!
warhead01 wrote: I can understand! I can't or don't enjoy modern military movies set in the last 25 years either. And uniforms worn poorly and incorrectly in movies drive me up the wall.
Wow, top gun is 36 years old...
But otherwise? Black hawk down, The Siege of Jadotville, Danger Close: The Battle of Long Tan, to name but three. They are still being made. Hell, dog soldiers was fun
Well, at the time what did I know about anything, not much and that made Top Gun fun. Have not seen Maverick yet. I did have a laugh about one of the mockups looking so realistic that China may have been concerned. Humorous anyway.
Saw Black Hawk Down in the theaters and it's not a movie I enjoyed.
Haven't seen the rest on your list, I do recall a Dog Soldiers but I'm not sure if I have seen it. was it a cheesy Scifi channel movie?
I just don't watch movies or shows about wars from the last 20ish years.
Closer to topic, the comics have been worth reading. I've read the high cost of living so far and am just an issue into the sandman comics.
I really liked Dr. D in the audio drama. Less so in the show.
Mrs.GG and I finally got to see the Sandman series. She had read all the graphic novels and remembered them… whereas I had read some but largely forgotten what I read.
We both enjoyed the series very much and hope there will be a second season.
As an aside, to the other shows referenced in this thread… Dog Soldiers was great. Especially the regular squaddies. As a veteran myself they reminded me of people I worked with when I was attached to the Royal Welch Fusiliers. The “special operations… operators” did not seem to operate very operationally however. Other than that lots of fun.
Siege Of Jadot is not just an enjoyably entertaining military film it highlights a piece of history that should not be forgotten. I highly recommend it. It really made me rethink the UN and it’s relationship with member governments. It is about a conflict over 25 years ago, as is Danger Close… which I have not yet seen… so you should be ok watching it Warhead01.
