Just watched Sandman

MGibster

Legend
Is there a reason why harmful addictive substances don't belong on that list?

What does the list most have in common? Typically they're things that might induce nightmares or be images that are a bit too intense for younger audiences. And then we have smoking. So yeah, I find it rather amusing that smoking is included when they're already warning us about suicide and self-harm. It's especially amusing to me because I can remember a time when people could smoke almost anywhere they wanted.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

payn

I don't believe in the no-win scenario
What does the list most have in common? Typically they're things that might induce nightmares or be images that are a bit too intense for younger audiences. And then we have smoking. So yeah, I find it rather amusing that smoking is included when they're already warning us about suicide and self-harm. It's especially amusing to me because I can remember a time when people could smoke almost anywhere they wanted.
Alcohol is just as bad, if not worse, and nobody cares about that either.
 



Jahydin

Hero
I can just picture a parent reading the warnings: "Murder? Fine. Suicide? Yeah, that's fine. Self-harm? Not a problem at all. Smoking? Oh, no! Little Johnny can't handle any smoking!"
I would guess it's more for people trying to quit.

Watching someone light up and take a drag while you're on your first week clean is pretty brutal, haha.
 

Umbran

Mod Squad
Staff member
Supporter
1663643252182.png
 

Jahydin

Hero
Some of my favorites, beyond Sandman, are Locke & Key (the TV show is only okay, but the comic is one of the best of all comics); Saga (a masterful mix of all genres); Anything by Ed Brubaker (In particular Criminal & Reckless); Whiteout by Greg Rucka (there was a movie, apparently, that did NOT do it justice); and Something is Killing the Children..
Just finished Volume 1 (deluxe version) of Something is Killing Children. So good!
Can't wait for volume 2 to come out. No dates online that I could find.

I'll try Saga next I think...

Thanks again!
 

Mirtek

Hero
I didnt get past the pilot for Fox's Lucifer. I thought they skipped the graphic novels in favor of making yet another police procedural, but this time starring Satan. Does it actually go into the graphic novels? Sandman felt much truer to form.
I am still believing it was never intended as a comic adaption. Just when they went over the pitch for the "police procedural, but this time starring Satan" someone started about that Gaiman guy and how he already had a series with the premise of Lucifer quitting and going to Earth and just to nip any potential law suit in the bud they bought the license, changed a few more names to names from the comic and then just did their thing.

To answer your questions: It actually moves even farther away from the graphic novels.
 

Sandman was amazing, but they messed up the end of the season. The last episode was just the Sandman doing something that could have been inserted anywhere in the season. It was anticlimactic. The episode just prior to it felt like a season ender, with Lucifer getting ready to go on the offensive. They should have swapped those two episodes.

I don't count the last two as episodes, I count them as related short films instead.
 

Vael

Legend
Great show, with a couple of real stand-outs. The cast was brilliant. What I find I like best about adaptations of Gaiman's work is there seems to be real thought put into the fact that this is a different medium. Stardust, for example. I love that the movie has a more "hollywood" ending, compared to the bittersweet book. Both work for them, I like a more melancholy ending in a book than a big budget movie.

Same here with Sandman. I read the comics, but years ago, but I like how they've adapted the work here. What'll fit better in an episode rather than a single comic issue seems to be well thought out. Glad we didn't have random DC heroes showing up.
 

Remove ads

Top