The Sandman

Netflix’s The Sandman isn’t perfect. But, goodness, it’s so, so much more than I ever thought I’d get. Fans of the original will inevitably find things to nitpick—and to be fair, there are some fairly significant changes to the source material—but the heart of the comics story is here, with many scenes that look as though they were lifted straight from the pages of specific issues, and an incredible ensemble cast that manages to embrace even the weirdest of twists with open hearts.

Some things have been changed from the page here, but a singular quality remains constant: The idea that the waking world can be just as odd as whatever our unconscious minds cook up.

It's to the show's credit that it is able to translate the comic book's lyrical but sometimes labyrinthine story to the screen in a way that feels natural and welcoming.

The rethinking makes the show more vibrant and balanced and contemporary, and no reasonable viewer could fault the performances of the actors who don’t resemble their graphic originals; each is splendidly who they need to be.

From smart casting and strong writing to exquisitely eerie, noir-meets-horror production design that makes thoughtful use of digital effects, this is easily one of the best small-screen comic adaptations ever made.

The season metes out its material with an economical approach (no episode runs over 54 minutes) and smart narrative structure. ... With enough forward-facing momentum and the might of Gaiman’s ever-complicating lore behind, Netflix’s “The Sandman” justifies its existence — and the potential for so much more story to come — time and time again.

The first season of this Netflix adaptation is extremely faithful to the source material – from delirious diners to "cereal" conventions – bringing the world of the esteemed comic book into live-action with appropriate visual flair. Any imperfections, of which there are several, are easily forgiven when the show gets so much right.

The Sandman mostly gets it right and is as authentic an adaptation as might be reasonably expected. For Gaiman fans, it’s finally game on.

With its attention to the source material, its impressive cast, and the kind of expansive world-building that surely demands more seasons, The Sandman is what dreams are made of.

It is transportive, playful at times, and certainly grand. But above all, it is dark.

At its best, the show is strong fantasy entertainment that functions as a great introduction to Gaiman’s writing. But the barrier to entry is high, and the cost of jumping into such an intricate saga might be too much for some.

“The Sandman” stands out visually. A parade of fine actors — Joely Richardson, Charles Dance, Stephen Fry — weave in and out, with David Thewlis particularly strong as an escaped mental patient. Still, the show remains comic-book thin on character and plot conveniences are everywhere. “The Sandman” dreams of being more than it is, but it’s still pretty good.

This season strays a bit from what makes its earliest installments work in its second half, but it doesn't stray that far, and with a lot of story left to tell there's plenty in The Sandman's first season to make it easy to want to hear the rest of it.

There’s a LOT going on here, and yet at the end of the 10-episode arc, they’re clearing amping up for more mystical pyrotechnics. We’ll be there.

It’s an enjoyable enough series, with picturesque CG settings (think Asgard meets Rivendell for Dream’s castle), a likable cast and an occasionally disarming sense of curiosity about the human condition. But it’s too trapped in glass to let itself run truly free into the dream world it wants to conjure.

It follows the comic closely and hits all of the good stuff from the comic, so it is at least a pretty good version of that story—because, again, that story on its own is good. But the transition to live-action doesn’t really reveal anything new about Morpheus or his siblings or their shifting perspectives on the lives of mortals or why we should watch, not read, this all unfold.

While not our cup of tea, we definitely see how appealing The Sandman would be to fans of Gaiman and his work. We’re just not sure it’s particularly accessible to those of us who are new to the story.

Despite its credentials as “a comic strip for intellectuals” (as novelist Norman Mailer put it), the result is very middling, neither dream nor nightmare, just the vague reverie you have when you’re hungry and lunch is still an hour away.

It doesn’t help “The Sandman” for so many of its best ideas to feel like echoes of a story that’s already been told. And it doesn’t help that the show seems surprisingly afraid to get truly grisly. This should be a very adult show in terms of violent visions, but it seems toned down to appeal to a wider audience like so much product in the Content Era tends to be. So what does work about “The Sandman”? After some early season uncertainty, Sturridge settles into his role nicely.

The resulting series is visually striking but dramatically listless, made for those -- and maybe only those -- who already possess degrees in Sandman 101.

In many ways, the 10 episodes that are now streaming on Netflix represent the closest thing possible to bringing Gaiman’s earliest Sandman comics to life. And in others, it illustrates why it has taken so long, and why, sometimes, the great stories are not best served by remaining in the original forms.

It’s so focused on teasing this character or that realm that it forgets to craft a commanding through-line, fully abandons any discernible arc for its lead, and falls back on confounding dream logic to keep things moving forward. “The Sandman” isn’t an arduous watch, but absent a beating heart and a focused mind, it is easily forgotten.

The overall results are so shaggy and uneven, with characters and incidents from the comics that add little to the story on screen, that the reasons to adapt “The Sandman” never exceed the reasons not to have done so. ... The rocky performances and wavering accents among the secondary cast members parallel the disappointingly unimaginative (and not particularly lavish) special effects.

The portrait The Sandman provides feels as paint-by-numbers as any other generated by the Netflix algorithm. The series rushes so quickly toward a kinder, cuddlier version of its titular character that his transformation first feels curiously weightless, and finally emotionally hollow — an ephemera evaporating in the daylight, or perhaps yet another example of beloved IP getting lost in the queue.

There’s no evidence that any care or consideration was given to appealing to people who aren’t already diehard fans of the source material. And as for those diehards. ... more than a few of them will grow weary of just how unimaginative—how sadly undreamt about—this series of dreams really is.

It is not, in fact, a very good or great show. The series is a middling series, made worse by wasted potential and Netflix's dollars. Excruciatingly slow and dull if not outright boring, "Sandman" is a perplexing failure.