[HN Gopher] How (and Why) Neil Gaiman Finally Adapted 'The Sandm...
___________________________________________________________________
How (and Why) Neil Gaiman Finally Adapted 'The Sandman' for TV
Author : signa11
Score : 41 points
Date : 2022-08-07 14:53 UTC (8 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (variety.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (variety.com)
| kuramitropolis wrote:
| From what I bore to watch, it's a quite faithful adaptation -
| even if somewhat simplified.
|
| As someone who only read a bunch of those 80s/90s "transgressive"
| comic books in the late 2000s-early 2010s, thanks to the wonders
| of the Web (and never saw any sign of anyone else having heard of
| these particular works in my godforsaken corner of the world,
| though Gaiman is somewhat known for his collabs with Pratchett),
| I could draw comparison with "Preacher" and "The Boys" (based on
| the eponymous works by Garth Ennis), which seem to be doing the
| whole "comic book to TV show because we bought off all the
| counterculture and are consequently running out of interesting
| intellectual property" thing a bit better. Taking more liberties
| with the source material, too; adding stuff that wasn't in the
| book but bears the original spirit.
|
| Interestingly enough, those are also more grittier and less
| "politically correct" tales - even though their protagonists also
| tend to espouse enlightened views of radical acceptance, and the
| underlying message seems to be that the real antagonist is not
| just some entrenched establishment of crooked power mongers, but
| the mass of NPCs who enable them. Guess violence is timeless and
| magical realism is only relevant in the context of specific
| historical moments of cultural transition - who would've known?
|
| Of course, there's comparatively less of that particular conflict
| overtly represented in the Sandman - it's one of those
| metaphysical things where most of the action happens in the
| characters' inner worlds. (Maybe that's why they thought it was
| such a timeless tale that recasting some of the characters as
| non-Gothic would be sufficient modernization?) Still, I consider
| Gaiman's work part of the same campaign of guerilla cultural
| warfare that was conducted around the turn of the century by
| teaching the kids lateral thinking, imagination, and of course
| emotional literacy and compassion. And of course the kids took
| that and went to become salaried creatives building nostalgic
| simulacra to mask the terminal disenchantment of the world (no
| enchantment -> no hope -> workers don't breed). So, yeah, guess
| we lost that one.
|
| Finally got around to reading William Gibson's "Blue Ant"
| trilogy, and boy oh boy does the man have a good handle on how
| the media machine acts to transform artworks and the human
| experiences that art glorifies into a uniform bland "concept
| soup". Guess they'll start shooting shows from his desiccated
| corpus next. (Heard it here first, folks!)
|
| All in all a Constantine/Watchmen tier adaptation. Don't waste
| time watching it, just torrent the original comic books and
| enjoy.
| da-bacon wrote:
| -_
| tptacek wrote:
| The issue with this season is that while the comics are beloved,
| the first book is quite weak; Gaiman was still finding his voice,
| still experimenting with what the books were going to be, and
| constrained by editorial requirements from DC. The first several
| issues are full of cringey tie-ins to other DC IP, and the horror
| elements are forced (The Sandman is not a horror comic series).
|
| If you're not a Sandman stan, my advice is to watch episode 1,
| and then episode 5, skipping 2-4. The first actually-good episode
| is 6; the Hob Gadling stuff is sort of emblematic of the the
| comic grows into, so if you like it, you'll like the rest of it.
|
| If you are a Sandman stan, something to note is that they seem to
| have deliberately severed it from the DC Universe. I'm surprised
| at how many elements of the first and second book turn out to be
| been DC tie-ins; for instance, Hector and Lyta Hall in Dolls
| House were I guess defined by other DC comics? Anyways, they've
| gone out of their way to cut all that stuff out the series.
|
| I think most of the changes are for the better.
|
| I think the series is fine.
|
| I was way, way into Sandman when I was younger.
|
| This show isn't in my Top N list. I'm curious to see if it gets
| renewed.
|
| By comparison, the HBO Watchmen series is not only one of the
| best comic book adaptations of all time, but also one of my
| favorite TV series of the last 10 years.
| gpoinlt wrote:
| I remember having the same impression 20 years ago. My
| housemate had the whole series of books, and would rave about
| how brilliant they are.
|
| After reading the first book, it was such a "meh" experience I
| didn't bother reading any others. Some occult guy traps the
| dream guy in a glass pot, dream guy escapes and wanders around
| getting his stuff back, also, his sister is a hot goth chick
| who happens to be the grim reaper. Later I understood it was
| peppered with references to other cartoon books, but that
| eluded me at the time.
|
| Not sure what I'm missing but I just don't get the appeal.
| PeterWhittaker wrote:
| I've not read the comics (in fact, despite loving his books, I
| was wholly unaware he wrote comics until recently).
|
| We watched 1-5 last night and will likely watch 6-10 tonight.
|
| 5 was AMAZING. What tension, what dread. All of them are shot
| brilliantly, with fantastic acting and excellent dialogue.
| falcolas wrote:
| The link hasn't totally been severed. Constantine is still
| present.
|
| My only two gripes are a bad 2.0 sound mix - too much dynamic
| range, even with compression turned on - and Lucifer was
| lackluster. Too much "corporate CEO" and not enough fallen
| angel. Should have pulled in the TV show actor.
|
| But Death, Desire, Matthew, Lucien, even Morpheus himself all
| rock.
| tptacek wrote:
| The Constantine of the series isn't the Constantine of the
| book; the Constantine of the book is the protagonist of
| Hellblazer, and he isn't hundreds of years old. The
| Constantine of the series has a thru-line going back to Hob
| Gadling; she's entirely contained in the Sandman story.
| falcolas wrote:
| The two Constantines are two different people, even though
| they're played by the same actress. Morpheus explicitly
| calls out working with her ancestor, who is the one we saw
| in Hobbs story.
|
| More importantly she doesn't recognize Morpheus despite
| working with him.
| snoopy_telex wrote:
| I really hope that he can leverage any success in getting
| American Gods a final season. It deserved a ending
| polotics wrote:
| I came to Sandman expecting something approaching the early
| seasons of American Gods, was sorely disappointed. The
| storytelling is fine in Sandman, but the lack of graphic
| flamboyance really takes it somewhere else than where I hoped.
| Tale of the lost psychedelia I guess: what's on screen is
| readable TV, stable clear shots, not the focused freedom of the
| graphic novels.
| no_wizard wrote:
| I always felt it needed a different network that would be more
| willing to take more risks, like HBO
| echelon wrote:
| HBO, now under control of cost-cutting Discovery+ executives,
| may not be taking risks for much longer.
|
| Twitter is abuzz with insiders stating that the CEO doesn't
| like the cost or margins of "appointment viewing" and would
| prefer Discovery+'s more inexpensive, reality-based "comfort
| viewing".
|
| It sounds like HBO is going to start sucking.
| Consultant32452 wrote:
| HBO just got gutted. https://www.cbr.com/report-hbo-max-
| faces-scripted-content-gu...
| metroholografix wrote:
| > Sources say Goyer was also adamant that "The Sandman" not be
| "dumbed-down" and that it be "kept weird," and any attempts to
| make it "formulaic" were rejected by Goyer and Gaiman.
|
| That's funny since I found it formulaic to the extreme, which is
| a shame. Being a fan of the comics, I was saddened by the
| potential that was squandered in this adaptation. Regardless of
| what Gaiman says, I can't see this series as anything else than
| yet another cookie-cutter commoditized dumbed-down corporate-
| approved offering designed for mass-consumption.
|
| It's more of the same mind-numbingly "safe" and soulless material
| that Netflix is so good at.
|
| At least Alan Moore had the courage to tell Hollywood where to
| go.
| ubermonkey wrote:
| Are you serious? It seems astoundingly faithful and definitely
| very much in keeping with the tone of the source material.
|
| Of course, this is HN, where there's always SOMEONE who needs
| to be contrarian, so I guess I shouldn't be surprised.
| yehShapey wrote:
| arthurcolle wrote:
| I thought it was a pretty good adaptation! What didn't you like
| about it?
| probably_wrong wrote:
| I don't like writing about things I haven't seen (not a
| Netflix subscriber), but since this is the Internet after all
| I'd like to discuss the "Morpheus vs Lucifer" scene that was
| uploaded yesterday [1] and that no one should watch unless
| they like their episodes spoiled.
|
| The setting is less creative/weird than the comic (a night
| club in the original), a demon character is gone (probably to
| simplify the story), and the battle is shortened from the
| comic books while, simultaneously, stretched with a pep talk
| from Morpheus' raven that's only there to add drama.
|
| I accept that maybe the episode is better due to these
| changes - as I said, haven't seen it yet and I could very
| well be wrong. But when I saw the trailer I got the exact
| same impression than the OP: formulaic, conventional, and
| dumbed down.
|
| I feel that Sandman makes such good use of the medium that it
| may very well be impossible to faithfully adapt to live
| action. And maybe this is the best version anyone could
| realistically make. I just wish someone would once in a while
| say "let's keep this exactly as weird and nonsensical as it
| was in the original".
|
| [1] https://youtube.com/watch?v=iZOwaeAEIw0
| tptacek wrote:
| The demons are gone because they weren't actually Gaiman's;
| they were DC IP. The show is going out of its way to cut
| ties with the rest of DC IP; there are things (like Johanna
| Constantine) done I think solely for the purpose of
| disentangling Morpheus from the DCU.
|
| _Later_
|
| Also, can we as adults with the books in far in the rear-
| view mirror (I mean, for those of us who'd say that) all
| not agree that the demon "contest" in the original books is
| cringey and deus ex machina? What the fuck is an "anti-
| life"?
| dogma1138 wrote:
| There were quite a few Demons in the show tho playing
| mostly minor roles.
|
| I was actually surprised they didn't changed it even
| further considering how it conflicts with Fox/Netflix's
| Lucifer which according to the blogosphere departs quite
| a bit from the source material but it was quite a fun
| show, and despite things getting a bit old at some point
| especially when it moved away from its monster of the
| week format it's clear that the entire production and
| cast loved working on it which is why it constantly got
| extended.
| 988747 wrote:
| >>Fox/Netflix's Lucifer which according to the
| blogosphere departs quite a bit from the source material
|
| That's the understatement of the century :) "Lucifer" was
| a fun show to watch but it has NOTHING to do with the
| comic books except that it reuses few main character
| names, and the fact that Lucifer runs a bar/club in LA.
| It was created by Tom Kapinos, the same guy who made
| "Californication", and is one part that, one part
| "Analyze This", and one part "Miami Vice".
| [deleted]
| cgrealy wrote:
| Just to be pedantic: the demon is actually there, he just
| chooses Lucifer as his champion, which makes sense from a
| show perspective as it gives Lucifer (a major character
| later) more to do in that episode.
|
| I don't believe the battle is much shorter (having recently
| re-read the comics), but I agree the pep talk from Matthew
| was unnecessary.
| metroholografix wrote:
| The comic was transformative and iconoclastic. It made you
| think but also forged new ground in graphic storytelling (and
| let's not forget that the artists that worked on it were at
| least as important if not more so than Gaiman).
|
| There is none of that in this adaptation. It plays it safe on
| every possible level. One can easily imagine the corporate
| bean counters slapping Gaiman on the back, a firm nod of
| approval.
| BugsJustFindMe wrote:
| Maybe you're right, but I have no way to tell from your
| comments, because both of them are very generic. A lot of
| handwaving dismissal, but not actually describing any of
| the aggrieved wrongness. Lobbing "formulaic" but not giving
| a formula, "safe" but not explaining the safety. What
| you've done is, ironically, formulaic and safe. Statements
| that fit well into the typical potshot pattern of people on
| the internet wanting to turn "I don't like" into some
| objective truth about the work, with a smattering of
| "everyone knows Netflix corp yada yada", without having
| enough detail to put your own preferences at risk.
| [deleted]
| revscat wrote:
| For many years now I have had a rule to downvote on sight
| any post that complains about something being
| "overrated". 99% of the time it's a cheap criticism,
| insubstantial and impossible to rebut.
|
| "Formulaic" feel like it lives in a similar bucket.
| They're kissing cousins, at least.
| varjag wrote:
| Wonder if it has anything to do with reading the comic in
| your 20s and watching the adaptation in your 40s.
| JackFr wrote:
| Or could it simply be "the book is better."
|
| In my experience of the dozens of books I've read which
| have had movies made of them there are only two in which
| the book is good and the movie is better or even as good
| as the book - "The Shining" and "The Godfather". I find
| it's a very rare and hard thing to do.
| tsimionescu wrote:
| Just to add another example, I think Tarkovsky's Stalker
| is far better than the book it's based on, Picnic on the
| side of the road.
| varjag wrote:
| Could be: I definitely enjoyed the comic immensely back
| in the day. However watching the adaptation after should
| be compared to a re-read perhaps.
|
| Adaptations aren't necessarily worse though. The Martian
| is better than the book. The yesteryear Dune is better
| than the book (I don't really like the book tho). Altered
| Carbon is a draw on the first season, but quickly
| outshines the book sequels later.
| kuramitropolis wrote:
| Or the comic being made in the 80s/90s and the adaptation
| being made in the 2020s.
|
| The work was progressive for its time; today its ideals
| have been captured by managerialism.
|
| > "Our predecessors were so wrong! Of course your
| otherness is worth celebrating! It's so much easier to
| extract value from your labor that way!"
| cmm wrote:
| 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, weirdly enough, but just not good.
| metroholografix wrote:
| Not to mention the lead doesn't have the chops to carry
| this thing through. In casting him, they went for surface
| (looks) rather than substance. To paraphrase the great
| Malcolm Tucker: He comes across like he should still be at
| school with his head down a fucking toilet.
| Supermancho wrote:
| The raven feels like a studio note. Hey, let's get a
| grating voice^ to do narration and exposition cleanup, and
| it can completely counteract the dark moody theme for
| people who don't like that!
|
| ^ No offense to the great Patton Oswald, but the audio is
| boosted to make the choice seem even worse. He's supposed
| to be a voice for the Sandman, but instead he's a bullhorn.
| tptacek wrote:
| 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 & Nocturnes, the weak first book), but if I
| weren't one of those, I'd have been happier skipping them.
| Episode 5 is good; episode 6 is unimpeachable.
| MisterBastahrd wrote:
| Boring.
|
| I could read the book at my own pace but I have to wait for
| the pace of the show when watching the TV adaptation. Like
| trying to swim upstream through mud. I understand that they
| needed to start with this, but "scrawny naked male
| protagonist being sullenly mute while locked in a bottle and
| narrating" is... not great.
| yewenjie wrote:
| Totally agreed. They made it an emotional drama while the story
| is far more than mere emotions. With forced cliffhangers and
| petty emotional dialogue, it just feels so fast - whereas the
| original often gives you space and time to ponder upon the deep
| ideas it plays with.
| tptacek wrote:
| The entire story, of the whole comic series, is an emotional
| coming of age story about a petulant man-child. So this is a
| weird critique.
| bryanrasmussen wrote:
| space and time are, I believe, more easy to achieve in a
| comic book where you will often reread a page multiple times
| in looking at the pictures.
| jasonladuke0311 wrote:
| 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.
| Supermancho wrote:
| > 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.
| bryanrasmussen wrote:
| part of playing at that level of media is talking up the
| product, if he didn't say these things people's jobs and
| livelihoods would be effected, and essentially he would
| probably end up the next Alan Moore and there would less money
| coming in. So I expect he says the things that would alleviate
| people's fears, assuming he thinks it is not a total shit show,
| and then hopefully more than half of the people who see it will
| think that was good and that's good enough.
|
| all that said I like to imagine Neil Gaiman asked why he
| finally adapted The Sandman would snort like Frito in Idiocracy
| and reply I like money.
| simonh wrote:
| > At least Alan Moore had the courage to tell Hollywood where
| to go.
|
| Except he didn't, he sold the rights to a lot of his stuff,
| saying it was "money for old rope".
| metroholografix wrote:
| He sold the rights early in his career, in the 80s, before
| the shitshow adaptations started coming out. Once he realized
| the travesty they had made of his life's work, he vowed never
| to work with Hollywood ever again and even stopped accepting
| royalties, telling the studios to pass them on to the artists
| that had worked on the original comics instead.
| fritztastic wrote:
| FWIW, (in my opinion) it does seem like a "not-bad" adaptation.
| It's not a disaster, and I've enjoyed it so far. I don't think
| there would ever be a perfect time or a perfect way to adapt the
| source material, but I am very glad Gaiman was involved and it
| has been made into a series instead of someone trying to condense
| it into a film (even with the prospect of expanding into
| sequels). I think it does contain a lot of the important themes,
| but is missing some of the vibes- probably because the setting of
| the comics took place in a very 80s/90s reality. Though there are
| branching storylines sprinkled in different times. I haven't
| finished watching the episodes, but it seems like a decent
| adaptation- it's good, not. I think it's missing something,
| though I'd have to read the comics again to articulate precisely
| what that is. Then again, it is no easy feat to translate the
| comics into a video medium- and I'm happy to be able to watch the
| story, so I do have that bias.
| paulryanrogers wrote:
| > it seems like a decent adaptation- it's good, not.
|
| What are you trying to say? Good not great?
| htk wrote:
| Several complaints online about "forced diversity" on the
| casting, many relating it to Netflix's influences.
| greymalik wrote:
| Gaiman has been pretty vocal [1] about his support for the
| casting: "Desire's nonbinary identification is so textual that
| one supporter asked Gaiman if he thought critics of these
| castings had even read The Sandman. "I don't think so, no," the
| author responded. When another asked, "Wasn't Desire... always
| non-binary...??," Gaiman replied, "Well, yes. But you'd have to
| have read the comics to know that. And the shouty people appear
| to have skipped that step."
|
| [1] https://ew.com/tv/neil-gaiman-defends-the-sandman-casting-
| no...
| brazzy wrote:
| I really don't think it's Desire anyone is annoyed about, and
| using that as an example to dismiss the criticism only
| weakens the dismissal.
|
| Lucifer... sure, he's canonically without genitals anyway and
| _decidedly_ uninterested in things like gender norms - and I
| 'm actually excited to see Gwendolyn Christie portray the
| character.
|
| Casting a black woman as Death goes directly against Gaiman's
| explicitly stated concept of how he imagined the character,
| and while she wears many guises, it seems wrong to just break
| the visual similarity (paleness) between the Endless. I
| really, really hope the actress can transport the character's
| essence (IMO first and foremost a kind of universial
| compassion and humor) sufficiently to make it not matter.
|
| And then Lucien as a black woman... was that _really_
| necessary? At some point it just feels forced.
| cgrealy wrote:
| Gaiman has publicly stated that he loves the actress as
| Death.
|
| Someone then complained about disrespecting the artist and
| the model, and the artist responded he loved it too (the
| model has passed, but the artist, who was a close friend,
| said she would have loved it as well).
|
| I did watch that clip from The Sound of Her Wings, and I
| thought she nailed the kindness aspect of Death. I do hope
| we'll also get some of fun, hopeful aspects too, but I
| haven't got t othose episodes yet.
| [deleted]
| cgrealy wrote:
| Oh and Lucien as a black woman... I ask why _not_? How does
| it hurt the character? The actor playing Lucien is is
| perfectly fine, so why not add some more diversity to the
| cast?
| falcolas wrote:
| Lucifer is the only casting so far that hasn't resonated
| with me. She felt more like a corporate CEO than fallen
| angel. And the stereotypical bat wings... meh
|
| The rest have done really well, even Death (who I didn't
| get good vibes from in the lead up).
|
| EDIT: Despair didn't do much for me either. More emo teen
| than avatar of suffering.
| tialaramex wrote:
| I'm going to guess that a bunch of people don't like the
| choice for Death. But the thing about Death is that she's
| _such_ the archetype that from then until now you could never
| move at a goth club for all the women who are sure they 're
| Death. Like, try announcing from the DJ booth, "Has anybody
| lost a silver ankh?" and watch like two dozen women glance
| down between their boobs to check theirs is still hanging
| around their neck.
|
| In the comic book you can just draw a goth chick, and a
| million women say "That's me" and you move on. But if you
| actually _cast_ any of the women who 'd like to think that's
| them it's not going to make anybody happy. She ceases to be
| "Everyman" well, every-goth-chick and becomes a specific
| individual.
|
| So I think you probably specifically don't want to cast Death
| for resemblance to that image, much more than his other
| siblings. Actually I'd be tempted to cast Brad Pitt, and be
| like yeah what? But Brad is a bit old and a bit expensive,
| and that involves rewriting some stuff, so, sure, Kirby
| Howell-Baptiste, why not? Personally I think Brad's accent
| would have thrown me off more than Kirby not having pasty
| white skin.
| kleer001 wrote:
| Huge fan of the comics since they were released and have
| bought both seasons of the audio dramas and my only
| complaint is the apparent older age and no-fun-ness of
| Death in the trailers.
|
| I thought the original author's intention was to have a
| young and indefatigable character play the embodiment of
| the end of all things as a light irony and existential
| cotton candy balance to the grim reality of the job.
|
| But I'll hold my real opinion until I see the whole show.
|
| If I don't hear a bubbly "Peachy-keen!" I'll probably just
| sigh and roll my eyes. It's only TV. If I want the old
| thing I'll just reread the comics again.
| tptacek wrote:
| Death is the most faithfully adapted character in the whole
| show, so if someone's complaining about that, they're
| telling on themselves. They _nailed_ Death.
|
| I was pleasantly surprised by that; there's a (somewhat
| well-regarded) audiobook adaptation of the books, with
| James McAvoy as Morpheus and Kat Dennings (the older
| daughter in 40 Year Old Virgin, and, by appearances, a
| straight-out-of-central-casting choice for Death), and
| Death does _not work at all_ in it.
| goto11 wrote:
| Presumably complaint by people who haven't read the comic?
| simonh wrote:
| Have any of these people actually read the graphic novels?
| They're chock full of trans, non-binary, race swapping
| characters. Playing with the fluidity of identity is a
| persistent theme.
| powerhour wrote:
| It doesn't matter. If anyone outside the "norm" is included,
| a group of folks online will be angry about it. They're a
| minority and can safely be ignored (and probably about other
| topics as well).
| Kaze404 wrote:
| There are two genders: "man" and "political" /s
| wyldfire wrote:
| 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.
| tialaramex wrote:
| 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 allowed to do, even more so than
| when he wrote Sandman. Winter is far more powerful than her
| father, and so the story ought to not work because what are the
| stakes? Introducing some "big bad" that could hurt Winter ruins
| the flow of the rest of the comic, and yet without such a
| threat why should we care about her tale? Gaiman sidesteps that
| by telling it as a children's story, like Judth Kerr's "The
| Tiger Who Came To Tea". In this form the story within a story
| can break all the rules. Masterful. And then the outer envelope
| story continues the Golden Age theme of humans living in a
| utopia still being humans.
| mark_l_watson wrote:
| I have watched the first three episodes so far and like it. I
| never followed Gaiman's comic strip Sandman, so I did 10 minutes
| of web browsing and reading before starting. I also watched part
| of an interview with Gaiman on YouTube about the new series.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2022-08-07 23:01 UTC)