3 ms·
It looked pretty good and it was a great adaptation. It also didn't really look that much like their other shows (many of which are indeed extremely mediocre) a
by Tenoke 4y ago
It looked pretty good and it was a great adaptation. It also didn't really look that much like their other shows (many of which are indeed extremely mediocre) and it sounds like you just have some anti-netflix bias.
- sho_hn 4y agoI'd say it sounds like I made a superficial judgement based on the trailers, which is exactly true as described! Would you say the finished product has more visual flair than the trailers indicate? It may be they intentionally picked shots or changed the trailer footage to fit in with the brand guidelines.
- dagw 4y agoFocusing on whether or not it has "visual flair" or not seems to be slightly missing the point. For what it's worth I found the visuals solid, but not mind blowing, and yes it does feel quite 'Netflix' in places. However beyond that, Sandman is probably the best example of a virtually panel by panel comic book to live action adaptation I've seen. Just getting to watch David Thewlis as John Dee stealing every scene he's in and seeing what Gaiman managed to do with his second chance at doing 24 Hour Diner is easily worth the price of admission. Add to that the pitch perfect recreation of The Sound of Her Wings, and the surprisingly well done Dream of a Thousand Cats and Calliope and you have show that more than makes up for some of its missteps (I thought the collectors convention didn't work anywhere near as well as it did in the comics for example). If you don't want to watch the whole thing, I recommend giving episodes 4-6 + 11 a go.
- shakes_mcjunkie 4y agoIMO it was a good looking show and I'm not a fan of super hero movies or really Netflix content.
- spacemadness 4y agoThat’s an unfair rebuttal and a bit defensive sounding. I agree with OP that it has that Netflix look which would make sense in it turning off a fan of the comic.