S01.E02: Imperfect Hosts

[Meredith Quill]

Quote

Morpheus begins his quest to find his tools of power — his sand, ruby and helm — by paying a visit to a pair of notoriously dysfunctional brothers.

[RachelKM]

Gargoyle Puppy! Nooooooooo! 

Yay baby gargoyle. But Cain is right. It doesn't make up for Gregory.

Edited August 5, 2022 by RachelKM

[Bellatrix]

Too much killing of the adorable creatures in this series.

The magpie in the first episode, and then the baby gargoyle in this episode.

I hate these "For the Greater Good"-plotlines.

Also, if Lord Morpheus had taken Alex' deal in 1926, he would have been out of there roughly a century earlier, after "only" ten years, so he has himself to blame for the complete pot his kingdom has gone to. He shouldn't run around sacrificing innocent creatures to remedy his own mistakes.

[Affogato]

1 hour ago, Bellatrix said:

Too much killing of the adorable creatures in this series.

The magpie in the first episode, and then the baby gargoyle in this episode.

I hate these "For the Greater Good"-plotlines.

Also, if Lord Morpheus had taken Alex' deal in 1926, he would have been out of there roughly a century earlier, after "only" ten years, so he has himself to blame for the complete pot his kingdom has gone to. He shouldn't run around sacrificing innocent creatures to remedy his own mistakes.

He did ask gregory. Which is a huge deal. I think the thing to remember is that he isn’t human. 

Edited August 5, 2022 by Affogato

[Bellatrix]

6 minutes ago, Affogato said:

He did ask gregory. Which is a huge deal. I thought nk the thing to remember is that he isn’t human. 

Yeah, I hated it all the same.

I am sure you are right that its important to remember that he's not human, but my gut reaction is that I just do not care for what he did.

I actually think it's even more rotten to ask somebody to sacrifice themselves. At least murder them and take the responsibility outright instead of wishy-washy excuses.

Edited August 5, 2022 by Bellatrix

[Valyrian]

I quit watching before he did whatever it was he did to Gregory. There has been no pleasure in watching this.

[thuganomics85]

Two episodes in and they are already killing baby gargoyles.  Poor Gregory: even if he agreed to the sacrifice.  Enjoyed this take on Cain and Abel.  Especially Cain apparently still killing Abel and Abel kind of just accepting it at this point, because that's just who Cain is!

So, it looks like we've got ourselves a good old celestial scavenger hunt with Sandman/Morpheus trying to find the three items that were taken from him (his bag of sand, the ruby, and his mask), and Corinthian wanting it so that he can be free.  At least Sandman has a generally idea about where two of them are, with one being in London and the other likely in Hell (naturally.)  Also got our first glimpse of Jenna Coleman as Johanna Constantine!\

Enjoyed the casting of Joely Richardson and David Thewlis as older versions of Ethel and John/her and Rodrick's son. 

[Chicago Redshirt]

11 hours ago, Bellatrix said:

Also, if Lord Morpheus had taken Alex' deal in 1926, he would have been out of there roughly a century earlier, after "only" ten years, so he has himself to blame for the complete pot his kingdom has gone to. He shouldn't run around sacrificing innocent creatures to remedy his own mistakes.

There is no way of knowing whether Alex was going to actually honor the deal. 

Indeed, as things played out, it seems likely that Alex was not. If he were, he probably would not have killed Jessamy, and of course, he could have simply given Morpheus his freedom and taken his chances that Morpheus would not seek revenge at any time.

[Bellatrix]

2 hours ago, Chicago Redshirt said:

There is no way of knowing whether Alex was going to actually honor the deal. 

Since the deal was that "I will let you out if you promise not to hurt me or my partner," I cannot really see what Morpheus had to lose by agreeing, even if Alex had rescinded on the agreement. Morpheus then in turn would not have bound by his promise, since it was for his freedom, which Alex had then denied him.

2 hours ago, Chicago Redshirt said:

Indeed, as things played out, it seems likely that Alex was not. If he were, he probably would not have killed Jessamy, and of course, he could have simply given Morpheus his freedom and taken his chances that Morpheus would not seek revenge at any time.

You won't get any defence of Alex from me. I thought the guy was a pathetic little weasel. Cowardly and deceitful and in a weird way even more cruel than his father. His father at least did not lie to himself or others about who he was and what he wanted.

"Oh, I'm such a good person, really! I just have to do these vile things because of ... reasons!"

[ombre]

16 hours ago, Bellatrix said:

Yeah, I hated it all the same.

I am sure you are right that its important to remember that he's not human, but my gut reaction is that I just do not care for what he did.

I actually think it's even more rotten to ask somebody to sacrifice themselves. At least murder them and take the responsibility outright instead of wishy-washy excuses.

This is the cost of not *showing* that the world was spinning into insanity. We don't see that there is a real stake. We don't see why Gregory's sacrifice is important. A few newspaper headlines, a brief glimpse of a sick ward doesn't quite bring it home. 

My memory is that the implication is that all the insanity of the last hundred years is the result of Dream's imprisonment.  The cost has been authoritarian regimes, environmental disaster, cheapening of life, etc. It's not just about bringing one goth god's power back, but also about bringing these nightmares back under control, reinstilling the impulse and capacity for creative thought, etc.  

In other words, it's the trolley problem, but they didn't manage to convey the depth of urgency. There was emotional resonance on one side of the equation (cute gargoyle!) and not on the other.  For folks who are new to the story, who are trying to decide if they want to watch, this may have been a poor choice. 

I think we're also in an even more anti-feudalism moment than when the comics were first written (which is saying something - it's no accident that so many characters are punks!), so they needed to do a little more work to show why it's good to rebuild this lord's power. Harder to just take it as a given. Easy to see why *he* wants to, harder to know whether or not we want him to succeed. 

[Bellatrix]

On 8/6/2022 at 3:39 PM, ombre said:

This is the cost of not *showing* that the world was spinning into insanity. We don't see that there is a real stake. We don't see why Gregory's sacrifice is important. A few newspaper headlines, a brief glimpse of a sick ward doesn't quite bring it home. 

My memory is that the implication is that all the insanity of the last hundred years is the result of Dream's imprisonment.  The cost has been authoritarian regimes, environmental disaster, cheapening of life, etc. It's not just about bringing one goth god's power back, but also about bringing these nightmares back under control, reinstilling the impulse and capacity for creative thought, etc.  

In other words, it's the trolley problem, but they didn't manage to convey the depth of urgency. There was emotional resonance on one side of the equation (cute gargoyle!) and not on the other.  For folks who are new to the story, who are trying to decide if they want to watch, this may have been a poor choice. 

I think we're also in an even more anti-feudalism moment than when the comics were first written (which is saying something - it's no accident that so many characters are punks!), so they needed to do a little more work to show why it's good to rebuild this lord's power. Harder to just take it as a given. Easy to see why *he* wants to, harder to know whether or not we want him to succeed. 

Oh, thank you for writing this. They absolutely did not convey any of this. You wrote in the thread for episode one that: "The world, we are told, descended into some level of chaos (but kept muddling through, as humans seem to do)". That was what I took away from it, too.

On 8/6/2022 at 3:39 PM, ombre said:

In other words, it's the trolley problem, but they didn't manage to convey the depth of urgency. There was emotional resonance on one side of the equation (cute gargoyle!) and not on the other.  For folks who are new to the story, who are trying to decide if they want to watch, this may have been a poor choice. 

100% in agreement. To be honest, I think that they should have foregone on the gargoyle slaughter altogether. Whatever he needed the baby gargoyle for could just have easily been in some old random object he found in sand (get it? the irony?) in his palace.

On 8/6/2022 at 4:13 AM, Valyrian said:

I quit watching before he did whatever it was he did to Gregory. There has been no pleasure in watching this.

If I could have liked this post a 100 times, I would. It feels depressing and glum.

On 8/6/2022 at 3:39 PM, ombre said:

I think we're also in an even more anti-feudalism moment than when the comics were first written (which is saying something - it's no accident that so many characters are punks!), so they needed to do a little more work to show why it's good to rebuild this lord's power. Harder to just take it as a given. Easy to see why *he* wants to, harder to know whether or not we want him to succeed. 

No, I mean, I was rooting for The Sandman/Lord Morpheus. I mean, he is in controll of dreams and nightmares, but he doesn't want the nightmares to spread to the real world. I am all for that. He was going to killing that evil dude. He was then imprisoned unjustly, under horrible conditions. (I mean, Alex couldn't have made a bigger seal and a bigger glass bubble and at least given the guy a chair and a dressing gown and chess set or something? Seriously. Serial killers have more luxury in prison than that.) He lost his only friend up there due to some creepy kid who had just claimed to want to be his friend.

I wanted him to escape, and I wanted him to rebuild his kingdom. He lost everything through no fault of his own, (he was completely blameless for the first ten years and then still unjustly imprisoned) and he is clearly fulfilling a vital task, even though the urgency and sheer scope of the problem was not dealt with adequately by the show.

I get that he wanted revenge for his murdered bird friend. I did, too. But that should have been his sacrifice. Swallowing that need in order to get out into a world that needed him.

Instead he puts that burden on someone else. And that just did not work for me.

Edited August 8, 2022 by Bellatrix

[JustHereForFood]

"You get exactly three questions". "OK". *proceeds to ask a second question each time* LOL.

Cain and Abel's place in the Dreaming looks nice and poor Gregory was so cute. So is Goldie/Irving, of course.

[AnimeMania]

The first episode was around an hour, the second was half that. At no point am I understanding the "plight" of the Waking World. The show plods through by following a "God" that heeds no ones advice, no matter how good or logical. Morpheus' never willing to "compromise even slightly, no matter how sound the advice is" attitude and his willingness to bulldoze over the people who remained loyal to him. "The Sandman" is an unsympathetic character, the advice he got from the "Fates" did not seem to be worth the price he paid for it in the "good will" of his subjects. 

Too bad Lucienne doesn't have the power to run the Dreaming World, I believe the Realm would be much better off.

[MrWhyt]

1 hour ago, AnimeMania said:

The show plods through by following a "God" that heeds no ones advice, no matter how good or logical.

Gods don't take advice

[millennium]

It seems a bit on the nose that a series about the god of Dreams should make you feel like falling asleep.

[paramitch]

JUSTICE FOR GREGORY!
 

[Chicago Redshirt]

On 8/6/2022 at 5:12 AM, Bellatrix said:

Since the deal was that "I will let you out if you promise not to hurt me or my partner," I cannot really see what Morpheus had to lose by agreeing, even if Alex had rescinded on the agreement. Morpheus then in turn would not have bound by his promise, since it was for his freedom, which Alex had then denied him.

I think that the show should have done a better job of explaining Morpheus' thinking. 

But I can imagine that Morpheus was thinking something along the lines of:

I'm a powerful entity who has existed from nearly the beginning of time.. I just got sucker-punched by a piece of dust who will be gone. I can afford to be patient. I also don't negotiate with terrorists. It is beneath me to even speak to them. 

I think it was a bad call for Alex to be offering the deal, as he would have no way to hold Morpheus accountable if he broke his word. It would have made way more sense for him to just follow in his father's footsteps and demand all the good stuff that he thought Dream could bring.

[Black Knight]

3 hours ago, Chicago Redshirt said:

I think it was a bad call for Alex to be offering the deal, as he would have no way to hold Morpheus accountable if he broke his word. It would have made way more sense for him to just follow in his father's footsteps and demand all the good stuff that he thought Dream could bring.

I suspect what the writers were thinking is that if they went that way, though, then Alex is just like Roderick and that's boring. He becomes just the placeholder because Dream's imprisonment needs to last many decades and Roderick, who was already middle-aged at the time he caught Dream, wasn't going to be able to live that long. So Alex needed to be different from his father.

I don't think Alex needed to feel he had a way to hold Morpheus accountable. The foundation of this world is mythological, and in mythology, deals are not broken by gods or other supernatural entities that make them (now, some of the mortals who make these deals, they are stupid enough sometimes to break them - always to their ruin). They can have loopholes or otherwise be twisted, which is what the really bad actors do, but the deals themselves are not broken. Alex could be confident Dream would not break his word and thus did not need to have a way to hold him accountable. If Dream promised no vengeance, there would be no vengeance.

On a related note, there really isn't any concept in mythology of a deal that's made through coercion that thus frees the person being coerced from keeping the agreement. That's a modern concept. In the old tales, either you don't make the deal and suffer the consequences of not making it, or you make the deal and keep it even though you were pressured into it. But to make the deal with every intention of breaking it was unacceptable and would work out very poorly for the person who tried it.

[ombre]

2 minutes ago, Black Knight said:

I suspect what the writers were thinking is that if they went that way, though, then Alex is just like Roderick and that's boring. He becomes just the placeholder because Dream's imprisonment needs to last many decades and Roderick, who was already middle-aged at the time he caught Dream, wasn't going to be able to live that long. So Alex needed to be different from his father.

I don't think Alex needed to feel he had a way to hold Morpheus accountable. The foundation of this world is mythological, and in mythology, deals are not broken by gods or other supernatural entities that make them (now, some of the mortals who make these deals, they are stupid enough sometimes to break them - always to their ruin). They can have loopholes or otherwise be twisted, which is what the really bad actors do, but the deals themselves are not broken. Alex could be confident Dream would not break his word and thus did not need to have a way to hold him accountable. If Dream promised no vengeance, there would be no vengeance.

On a related note, there really isn't any concept in mythology of a deal that's made through coercion that thus frees the person being coerced from keeping the agreement. That's a modern concept. In the old tales, either you don't make the deal and suffer the consequences of not making it, or you make the deal and keep it even though you were pressured into it. But to make the deal with every intention of breaking it was unacceptable and would work out very poorly for the person who tried it.

I like all of this, but I think there are also other dynamics at play. I think Dream is not just literally imprisoned but also caught by his dim view of humans.  (which, of course, Alex reinforced.) And I think that Alex is imprisoned by his feelings of guilt. He *knows* his family has wronged this immensely powerful being so he fears the consequences of freeing this creature he wronged.  His predicament reminds me of Jefferson on slavery - we have the wolf by the ears and we can neither free him nor let him go. Neither one of them created the situation, but they're both still trapped by it. 

[Morrigan2575]

Damn you, Show! Less than 5 minutes with Gregory and I'm crying over his death 😭

I enjoyed this episode,  the show is beautiful to look at but, we're now getting a better feel for the characters and the journey.

I'm not thrilled that they replaced John Constantine with Joanna Constantine (his ancestor). Mostly because I would have loved to see Matt Ryan in this universe but, maybe there was legal/contract issues?

Who knows, maybe next season we'll get John Constantine 🥰

Edited August 7, 2022 by Morrigan2575

[Black Knight]

8 minutes ago, Morrigan2575 said:

I'm not thrilled that they replaced John Constantine with Joanna Constantine (his ancestor). Mostly because I would have loved to see Matt Ryan in this universe but, maybe there was legal/contract issues?

Yes, the legal rights to the character John Constantine are held by others (there's an HBO Max show in development using the character), so that necessitated the change.

[Morrigan2575]

3 minutes ago, Black Knight said:

Yes, the legal rights to the character John Constantine are held by others (there's an HBO Max show in development using the character), so that necessitated the change.

Oh. I didn't realize that. I was thinking he was still tied to Legends of Tomorrow/Berlanti 

[ItCouldBeWorse]

Gregory was not a baby gargoyle; Goldie is.

[QuantumMechanic]

I wonder why the writers killed Gregory.

In the comics

Spoiler

Dream asked Cain and Abel to bring him the written commissions he had given them ages ago and absorbed those.

I guess they did it to be able to show Dream trying to make up for killing Gregory by leaving Goldie's egg for the brothers to soften the character?

Spoiler

(I for one, didn't find Dream likable in the comics -- but I also didn't think he was supposed to be. It will be interesting to see what the writers do with him in the show.  Will he be the same or will they soften him more?)

[JustHereForFood]

6 hours ago, ombre said:

His predicament reminds me of Jefferson on slavery - we have the wolf by the ears and we can neither free him nor let him go. Neither one of them created the situation, but they're both still trapped by it. 

That is a very pathetic excuse.

5 hours ago, Black Knight said:

Yes, the legal rights to the character John Constantine are held by others (there's an HBO Max show in development using the character), so that necessitated the change.

As I understand it, they didn't cast a second actor, because 

Spoiler

Johanna Constantine will appear in more episodes, John would only be in one. So they went with Jenna Coleman plying both characters instead.

[ombre]

16 minutes ago, JustHereForFood said:

That is a very pathetic excuse.

  Reveal spoiler

Johanna Constantine will appear in more episodes, John would only be in one. So they went with Jenna Coleman plying both characters instead.

To. Be. Sure. 

But also very real and very human. 

[Zuleikha]

Quote

You won't get any defence of Alex from me. I thought the guy was a pathetic little weasel. 

He was an abused child! Of course, he was afraid. 

I don't blame him. Morpheus is a terrifying unknown. All Alex wanted was to feel safe that he could let Morpheus free without being murdered or worse. I don't see why Morpheus couldn't have made that bargain. To me, it's a weakness in the show's writing. Alex was offering a win-win, and I don't see why Morpheus wouldn't have seen it that way.

I really liked Cain and Abel when they first showed up. But I'm not sold on Cain yet. I remember him as being both more sniveling and more malevolant/resentful.

The Fates didn't work for me either. I tried to put my finger on what was off, I can't. I'm wondering if they were supposed to be blind or veiled? Or maybe dressed more distinctively? Somehow they were both too similar and not conjoined enough.
 

[Bellatrix]

4 hours ago, Zuleikha said:

He was an abused child! Of course, he was afraid. 

Alex had my sympathy (even if not my like) right up until he killed the bird. Right after he had tried befriending Morpheus. He proved himself to be disingenuous and deceitful. And for what? So that Daddy would love him? That ship sailed long ago, honey.

In fact, I think his father would have had more respect for him if he stood up to him once in a while, but you can't really expect that from an abused child. 

I am still reminded of this quote from Emma by Jane Austen:

“There is one thing, Emma, which a man can always do, if he chuses, and that is, his duty; not by manoeuvring and finessing, but by vigour and resolution. [...] Our amiable young man is a very weak young man, if this be the first occasion of his carrying through a resolution to do right against the will of others. It ought to have been a habit with him by this time, of following his duty, instead of consulting expediency. I can allow for the fears of the child, but not of the man. As he became rational, he ought to have roused himself and shaken off all that was unworthy in their authority. He ought to have opposed the first attempt on their side to make him slight his father. Had he begun as he ought, there would have been no difficulty now.”

Except in this case I would have suggested manoeuvring and finessing. There was no reason for Alex to actually hit the bird, he could have just pretended chasing it.

Funnily enough, in reference to Charles Dance and his skills as a fictional father, I could not help but think that none of his three Lannister children would have gone along with any order of his that they had problems with so easily.

4 hours ago, Zuleikha said:

I don't blame him. Morpheus is a terrifying unknown. All Alex wanted was to feel safe that he could let Morpheus free without being murdered or worse. I don't see why Morpheus couldn't have made that bargain. To me, it's a weakness in the show's writing. Alex was offering a win-win, and I don't see why Morpheus wouldn't have seen it that way.

Here we are in complete agreement. I think Morpheus was a fool for not taking that offer, and worse than that, an irresponsible fool. 

15 hours ago, QuantumMechanic said:

I wonder why the writers killed Gregory.

In the comics

  Reveal spoiler

Dream asked Cain and Abel to bring him the written commissions he had given them ages ago and absorbed those.

I guess they did it to be able to show Dream trying to make up for killing Gregory by leaving Goldie's egg for the brothers to soften the character?

  Reveal spoiler

(I for one, didn't find Dream likable in the comics -- but I also didn't think he was supposed to be. It will be interesting to see what the writers do with him in the show.  Will he be the same or will they soften him more?)

WHAT????

Spoiler

You mean that wasn't in the comics?!!!!!!!!!!

I was sure it was, that was the only reason such an execrable scene was included. Instead it seems to be a part of the "shocking twists!"-trope that plagues television these days. You actually cared about these characters? More fool you! Well, I stopped watching the moment Gregory was dead, and somebody further up in the thread stopped when it became clear what was about to happen. We seemed to have been the target audience, so kudos to the writers for alienating us. Well done. Will try to avoid anything from you in the future.

21 hours ago, Chicago Redshirt said:

I think that the show should have done a better job of explaining Morpheus' thinking. 

But I can imagine that Morpheus was thinking something along the lines of:

I'm a powerful entity who has existed from nearly the beginning of time.. I just got sucker-punched by a piece of dust who will be gone. I can afford to be patient. I also don't negotiate with terrorists. It is beneath me to even speak to them. 

Yes, but when he saw the state his kingdom was in, and what had come of the world, he needed to take some responsibility for that.

On 8/7/2022 at 7:01 AM, AnimeMania said:

The first episode was around an hour, the second was half that. At no point am I understanding the "plight" of the Waking World. The show plods through by following a "God" that heeds no ones advice, no matter how good or logical. Morpheus' never willing to "compromise even slightly, no matter how sound the advice is" attitude and his willingness to bulldoze over the people who remained loyal to him. "The Sandman" is an unsympathetic character, the advice he got from the "Fates" did not seem to be worth the price he paid for it in the "good will" of his subjects. 

Too bad Lucienne doesn't have the power to run the Dreaming World, I believe the Realm would be much better off.

This, essentially.

Edited August 8, 2022 by Bellatrix

[QuantumMechanic]

6 hours ago, Bellatrix said:

  Reveal spoiler

You mean that wasn't in the comics?!!!!!!!!!!

I was sure it was, that was the only reason such an execrable scene was included. Instead it seems to be a part of the "shocking twists!"-trope that plagues television these days. You actually cared about these characters? More fool you!

In the comics/GNs:

Spoiler

Gregory was Cain's pet (originally appearing in House of Mystery #175 in 1968).  In The Sandman, Gregory finds Morpheus out in the sands after Morpheus escapes his prison and brings him to Cain's house to initially recover.  Morpheus is trying to reboot himself and (like in the show) asks Cain and Abel if they have anything he's created.  Gregory is never brought up at all.  Cain just says they don't have anything and then Abel says "Wait - we have our commissions!".  So they bring out these paper scrolls and Morpheus absorbs those.

[Eliza422]

On 8/6/2022 at 8:39 AM, ombre said:

This is the cost of not *showing* that the world was spinning into insanity. We don't see that there is a real stake. We don't see why Gregory's sacrifice is important. A few newspaper headlines, a brief glimpse of a sick ward doesn't quite bring it home. 

My memory is that the implication is that all the insanity of the last hundred years is the result of Dream's imprisonment.  The cost has been authoritarian regimes, environmental disaster, cheapening of life, etc. It's not just about bringing one goth god's power back, but also about bringing these nightmares back under control, reinstilling the impulse and capacity for creative thought, etc.  

In other words, it's the trolley problem, but they didn't manage to convey the depth of urgency. There was emotional resonance on one side of the equation (cute gargoyle!) and not on the other.  For folks who are new to the story, who are trying to decide if they want to watch, this may have been a poor choice. 

I think we're also in an even more anti-feudalism moment than when the comics were first written (which is saying something - it's no accident that so many characters are punks!), so they needed to do a little more work to show why it's good to rebuild this lord's power. Harder to just take it as a given. Easy to see why *he* wants to, harder to know whether or not we want him to succeed. 

I'm glad you said this. I've not read the original, and even though it was called the Sandman I am still struggling with should I be rooting for Sandman? Is he the "good guy" in this story? The initial prologue of episode 1 left me confused, because frankly I don't believe people run their lives based on their dreams (not their literal dreams, anyway - we all have "dreams" of how we want life to be). So as far as I could tell the only result of Morpheus being locked up was the people caught with the sleeping sickness. Bad, to be sure, but not threatening the world in general. Maybe in future episodes they will expand on all the effects, but it wasn't here.

I still don't even know why Corinthian is bad - I'm only assuming so because I've been told, not shown. I think he killed a guy in the first episode? I'm not binging the show all at once so maybe one of the later episodes will expand on all this.

This is an interesting mix of gothic horror and humor. The entire first episode was very serious in tone, this one with Cain and Abel, a very different tone overall (even with poor Gregory's demise).

[Zuleikha]

1 hour ago, Eliza422 said:

I think he killed a guy in the first episode?

Yes, he killed a guy and did something with his eyes (we were shown the corpse with eyes removed). I know what he did from comics lore. It was also hinted at in his conversation with Ethel, but not clearly established. 

It is funny to think about the Corinthian without graphics novels knowledge of his character. We know that he's a Nightmare, which implies a lot of not good things. But most of what he's done on screen is go up against Morpheus for his own personal protection/independence. 

8 hours ago, Bellatrix said:

Alex had my sympathy (even if not my like) right up until he killed the bird. Right after he had tried befriending Morpheus. He proved himself to be disingenuous and deceitful.

I don't think it was disingenuous or deceitful.  Morpheus hadn't shown signs of accepting Alex's overtures of friendship, so there was no relationship to be betrayed. Indeed, Morpheus hadn't said anything to Alex at all. Jessamy's a bird--obviously of more intelligence than a typical bird, but still just a bird  (and one who had tried to burn down the house).  Also, Alex had no reason to believe that Morpheus wouldn't kill him or otherwise harm him if Jessamy did free Morpheus.

[Bellatrix]

2 hours ago, QuantumMechanic said:

In the comics/GNs:

  Reveal spoiler

Gregory was Cain's pet (originally appearing in House of Mystery #175 in 1968).  In The Sandman, Gregory finds Morpheus out in the sands after Morpheus escapes his prison and brings him to Cain's house to initially recover.  Morpheus is trying to reboot himself and (like in the show) asks Cain and Abel if they have anything he's created.  Gregory is never brought up at all.  Cain just says they don't have anything and then Abel says "Wait - we have our commissions!".  So they bring out these paper scrolls and Morpheus absorbs those.

I am just speechless. That is possibly the stupidest the decision I have ever seen somebody in television ever make, and I think we can all agree that that says something.

Protip any writers who are reading this: It's okay if your audience cares about the characters. It's really handy for this thing called people watching your show. Characters people care about = Views. Capische?

If Sam had brutally murdered Diane in the first season of Cheers, how many seasons do you think it would have had? 

The little sister of a friend of mine stopped watching Lost when Later!Damon on the Vampire Diaries was killed. I stopped when the ex-hobbit was killed. When you kill characters people care about, and especially in ways that make people stop caring about other characters they might have cared about, people stop watching your show. That's why, you know, successful show runners actually try to keep the actors on so that they might continue in their roles. And for every person that stops watching, there is probably a friend or friend group that stops watching too because it's something they used to talk about with each other.

1 hour ago, Zuleikha said:

I don't think it was disingenuous or deceitful.  Morpheus hadn't shown signs of accepting Alex's overtures of friendship, so there was no relationship to be betrayed. Indeed, Morpheus hadn't said anything to Alex at all. Jessamy's a bird--obviously of more intelligence than a typical bird, but still just a bird  (and one who had tried to burn down the house). 

Alex and Morpheus were touching hands through the globe when they were interrupted by Alex' father. This was right before the bird killing.

Either way, it would have been supercreepy. Like me trying to befriend a girl at a coffee shop or something and then running her dog over later.

Ordinary birds can manage to almost burn down the house, too, if there's a candle and they knock it over. I have still not killed any birds that accidentally have gotten inside.

1 hour ago, Zuleikha said:

Also, Alex had no reason to believe that Morpheus wouldn't kill him or otherwise harm him if Jessamy did free Morpheus.

No, but again, it's creepy. It's this "Vah, vah, poor me, I am such a good person!" and then turning around and doing something breath-takingly cruel.

It would have been easy to stop the bird some other way than shooting it. It's a magpie.

Edited August 8, 2022 by Bellatrix

[tennisgurl]

Poor Gregory, I was not expecting that at all. Goldie is adorable but Gregory was such a cute thing. Was that necessary, show? I guess the purpose was to show more Dream's nature, he cares more about the big picture than individual lives, but he does still care in his distant way, but still. Ouch.

Its great to see Cain and Abel, we definitely needed the comic relief. Another day, another fratricide. I hope we get to stop by the House of Mysteries!

[Black Knight]

5 hours ago, Bellatrix said:

The little sister of a friend of mine stopped watching Lost when Later!Damon on the Vampire Diaries was killed. I stopped when the ex-hobbit was killed. When you kill characters people care about, and especially in ways that make people stop caring about other characters they might have cared about, people stop watching your show. That's why, you know, successful show runners actually try to keep the actors on so that they might continue in their roles. And for every person that stops watching, there is probably a friend or friend group that stops watching too because it's something they used to talk about with each other.

6 hours ago, Zuleikha said:

Lost went for 6 seasons (and only ended at 6 at the insistence of the showrunners - the network wanted more seasons). The Vampire Diaries lasted for 8. Game of Thrones increased its audience every season despite killing off a bevy of characters every season, and most complaints about the final season aren't about character deaths, but about poor execution of plot points and rushing the endgame because the showrunners wanted to be done. The Walking Dead was similarly brutal about killing off characters and remained a phenomenon for a long time, until it just kind of ran out of steam because it was the same plots over and over.

An individual's decision to stop watching doesn't necessarily translate into massive audience loss. The Sam/Diane hypothetical doesn't really track since Cheers was a pleasant sitcom and Sam murdering Diane would have been wildly out of step for that genre. Sandman is horror, and it would be pretty poor horror if bad things didn't happen to characters people like. Gregory is a marker the show laid down to help calibrate viewer expectations about how dark the show can be: Yes, it will shoot your cute puppy (or gargoyle). Best for viewers to know that now so the ones who are turned off by such things can leave. Sandman has a story to tell.

[JustHereForFood]

16 hours ago, Zuleikha said:

I don't see why Morpheus couldn't have made that bargain. To me, it's a weakness in the show's writing. Alex was offering a win-win, and I don't see why Morpheus wouldn't have seen it that way.
 

As someone already said, you don't negotiate with criminals.

[Morrigan2575]

53 minutes ago, JustHereForFood said:

As someone already said, you don't negotiate with criminals.

I honestly don't even think it had anything to do with the. Dream of the Endless...he's got all the time in the world.  I think Morphius was being obstinate/Petulant.  Staying put was his Big F U! you Alex,  who wanted nothing more than to be rid of him.

[Bellatrix]

8 hours ago, Black Knight said:

Lost went for 6 seasons (and only ended at 6 at the insistence of the showrunners - the network wanted more seasons). The Vampire Diaries lasted for 8. Game of Thrones increased its audience every season despite killing off a bevy of characters every season, and most complaints about the final season aren't about character deaths, but about poor execution of plot points and rushing the endgame because the showrunners wanted to be done. The Walking Dead was similarly brutal about killing off characters and remained a phenomenon for a long time, until it just kind of ran out of steam because it was the same plots over and over.

An individual's decision to stop watching doesn't necessarily translate into massive audience loss. The Sam/Diane hypothetical doesn't really track since Cheers was a pleasant sitcom and Sam murdering Diane would have been wildly out of step for that genre. Sandman is horror, and it would be pretty poor horror if bad things didn't happen to characters people like. Gregory is a marker the show laid down to help calibrate viewer expectations about how dark the show can be: Yes, it will shoot your cute puppy (or gargoyle). Best for viewers to know that now so the ones who are turned off by such things can leave. Sandman has a story to tell.

Yes, but look at the legacy for Lost. And The Walking Dead. And How I Met Your Mother, for that matter. When shocking twists take the place of good storytelling, the story suffers.

I am glad you brought up Game of Thrones. That was probably what kicked this stupid trend into high gear, though I will argue that it existed before. Yes, that worked in one show, in one season, in one episode, one time. And it was brilliant. I'll even throw in the Red Wedding. That was brilliant, too. But as the books progressed, George R.R. Martin became somewhat of a one-trick pony. I found myself thinking, as I read on, that not even real life is this depressing. Eventually all of the unending misery just became boring.

Look, I am not saying that there should never be death in fiction. I am not arguing that Top Gun, for instance, would have been a better movie without Goose's death.

I am just saying, to extrapolate on the point I made above, that what script writers today don't seem to understand, is that death in its essence is boring. It takes away something you'd rather have. It leaves everything greyer. And it's painful. And pain tends to leave people annoyed.

This goes for fiction, too. Unless the payoff is worth it.

Here it was decidedly not.

[magdalene]

I fall in love with Gregory and of course he kills him.  I am probably not supposed to "like" the Sandman and I surely don't. The baby gargoyle is adorable but does not make up for Gregory.

[ItCouldBeWorse]

On 8/8/2022 at 1:00 PM, Bellatrix said:

If Sam had brutally murdered Diane in the first season of Cheers, how many seasons do you think it would have had? 

Cheers was a comedy.  This is not.  And Gregory was not a main character.  In the comics, Morpheus doesn't gift Goldie to Abel, either. 

Spoiler

Cain gave Goldie to Abel as an apology for killing him, and then killed him again when Abel wanted to name him Irving.

I get that you don't like shows where animals die.  I don't like shows where children die.  This is complete fantasy, though, and not only are gargoyles not real (obviously), but we didn't form an attachment to Gregory.  You also said earlier that you turned the show off before Gregory was killed.  He dissipated into black dust, much the way the people who were blipped disappeared in the Marvel universe, except he knew what was happening and wasn't afraid or in pain.  Definitely more dramatic than 

Spoiler

reabsorbing some paper.

On 8/7/2022 at 3:25 PM, QuantumMechanic said:

I wonder why the writers killed Gregory.

I think it was to enable to allow Morpheus to show remorse by fetching Goldie's egg and gifting it to Abel.

On 8/8/2022 at 2:10 PM, tennisgurl said:

Poor Gregory, I was not expecting that at all. Goldie is adorable but Gregory was such a cute thing. Was that necessary, show? I guess the purpose was to show more Dream's nature, he cares more about the big picture than individual lives, but he does still care in his distant way, but still. Ouch.

This, too.  He really did have to regain his power and his tools, or all people and dreams/nightmares, including Gregory, would have been destroyed.  The needs of the many, etc. . . . .

[Bellatrix]

6 hours ago, ItCouldBeWorse said:

Cheers was a comedy.  This is not.  And Gregory was not a main character.

Only Murders in the Building will be sad to learn it's not a comedy. My point here was not regarding genre, but viewer investment. If you have characters that people enjoy watching, the chances of them tuning in are much higher.

Well, I enjoyed watching Gregory. And after watching that scene I would have enjoyed watching Morpheus getting pushed in front of a bus. Since that likely wouldn't have killed him, I would have taken a few millennia more for him in the Burgess basement.

6 hours ago, ItCouldBeWorse said:

In the comics, Morpheus doesn't gift Goldie to Abel, either.

That actually makes it worse. Only a complete psychopath would think that giving someone a new pet after intentionally killing their old one would make anything better.

Edited August 10, 2022 by Bellatrix

[Black Knight]

On 8/9/2022 at 3:46 AM, Bellatrix said:

Yes, but look at the legacy for Lost. And The Walking Dead. And How I Met Your Mother, for that matter. When shocking twists take the place of good storytelling, the story suffers.

The legacies of those shows have nothing to do with shocking twists. Lost didn't bother to follow through on its mythology, leaving viewers with tons of unanswered questions. TWD told the same story over and over, which is the opposite of a shocking twist. There was nothing shocking about HIMYM either; that show's problem was that it should have ended several seasons earlier, and because they chose to drag the story out for money, the planned ending no longer made much sense but they still stuck with it. But again, not shocking: If you gave a brief synopsis of the premise of the show and the original characters, anybody familiar with the basics of storytelling could have said who Ted would end up with if the writers were not inventive.

The source material for the original Sandman series was completed long ago, and has a secure place in comics history as one of the greatest comics ever produced, building such a devoted fanbase that Netflix thought it worth adapting for TV. And what happened to Gregory was entirely in keeping with the spirit of the source material. That's why I said the show essentially laid down a marker with that bit, to let viewers know what kind of show this is. It serves other important functions, of world-building and character-building - we learn quite a bit about Dream and the rules he operates under, and it helps make Cain, a guy who repeatedly kills his brother on the flimsiest of pretexts, three-dimensional.

Sandman's not for everyone. No story is for everyone. There are popular ones that have bored or alienated me. But my own very individual reaction doesn't say anything about a story in itself or can necessarily be assumed to be the reaction of a majority. No story keeps everyone to the end.

[JustHereForFood]

I generally care much more if animals die, than people, both in real life and on TV. And I didn't like how Gregory died here. But it needs to be reminded that Sandman is a comic that started as horror. It's not gonna be pretty. (Even though it does have its comfort watch/read moments.)

[scarynikki12]

This thread is moving off topic. If you want to discuss the problems with other shows please visit their threads/forums. More general television discussion, including comparisons, are better suited for the Everything Else forum. 

[Bellatrix]

21 hours ago, Black Knight said:

The legacies of those shows have nothing to do with shocking twists. Lost didn't bother to follow through on its mythology, leaving viewers with tons of unanswered questions. TWD told the same story over and over, which is the opposite of a shocking twist. There was nothing shocking about HIMYM either; that show's problem was that it should have ended several seasons earlier, and because they chose to drag the story out for money, the planned ending no longer made much sense but they still stuck with it. But again, not shocking: If you gave a brief synopsis of the premise of the show and the original characters, anybody familiar with the basics of storytelling could have said who Ted would end up with if the writers were not inventive.

Whenever a show gets more interested in killing off everyone the viewers cared for than bothering to follow through on its mythology or developing any good storylines, and still less any good new storylines, the story suffers. When the focus is only on: "Who can we kill now? What will hurt the most?" it takes the focus away from everything else. 

I think that is what this adaption of the Sandman has done. Taking what happened to Gregory off the table, the series is just kind of underwhelming. And it shouldn't have been. Casting is excellent, the actors are doing their best, they clearly have the ability to make people care about the characters.

Also, and I hope the Sandman doesn't go down in this direction, when you have killed everyone, it severely limits the stories that can be told. Interesting TV is like football—or whatever team-based sports metaphor you like. If you kill off most of the team there isn't much left to do for the ones left. They can't play effectively.

21 hours ago, Black Knight said:

Sandman's not for everyone. No story is for everyone. There are popular ones that have bored or alienated me. But my own very individual reaction doesn't say anything about a story in itself or can necessarily be assumed to be the reaction of a majority. No story keeps everyone to the end.

Many stories have kept me to the end. This did not work for me. It did not work for a lot of people. I rather enjoy reading why it did not work for other people, and exploring why it did not work for them, or why it did not work for me. Because it could have done. It almost did.

Stupid shock twists do not high art make. 

Edited August 11, 2022 by Bellatrix

[nomodrama]

On 8/8/2022 at 12:52 AM, Bellatrix said:

Alex had my sympathy (even if not my like) right up until he killed the bird. Right after he had tried befriending Morpheus. He proved himself to be disingenuous and deceitful. And for what? So that Daddy would love him? That ship sailed long ago, honey.

If it was that easy every single child/adult who grows up in abusive relationships with narcissistic parents wouldn't suffer from unresolved trauma all their lives. People in these situations do far worse just so that Mommy or Daddy will love them. I completely buy Alex feeling incredibly guilty/conflicted about keeping Morpheus being imprisoned but still going along with killing the bird just on the off chance that maybe this will make his dad proud/acknowledge him/show him some affection/etc. That felt very true to real life. It doesn't excuse him at all but his motivations make sense. 

I guess I didn't really understand Paul's motivation in the end to help Morpheus escape, Im sure he was over Alex's cowardice and who knows maybe he was ready for Alex to move on, but then he seemed so shocked when Alex was trapped in the restless sleep. What exactly did he think was going to happen?

On 8/8/2022 at 4:10 PM, Black Knight said:

Gregory is a marker the show laid down to help calibrate viewer expectations about how dark the show can be: Yes, it will shoot your cute puppy (or gargoyle). Best for viewers to know that now so the ones who are turned off by such things can leave. Sandman has a story to tell.

On 8/9/2022 at 8:39 PM, ItCouldBeWorse said:

I get that you don't like shows where animals die.  I don't like shows where children die.  This is complete fantasy, though, and not only are gargoyles not real (obviously), but we didn't form an attachment to Gregory.  You also said earlier that you turned the show off before Gregory was killed.  He dissipated into black dust, much the way the people who were blipped disappeared in the Marvel universe, except he knew what was happening and wasn't afraid or in pain.  Definitely more dramatic than 

I read this thread before even starting the show (I didn't want to commit until I knew if it was actually going to keep my interest) and I have to say I was very confused watching this episode. Gregory was very cute but he was on screen for less than a min, is a CGI mythical creature and you could tell it was CGI, and his "death" was in no way gruesome at all....I almost felt like I missed something. 

Reading this was not in the comics though, I agree with the thought that it was meant as a way to prove that Morpheus isn't some sadist and cares about his subjects/creations. 

I thought The Fates were great and that portion of the episode added some welcome levity, but also gave Morpheus more personality, it was funny having him get reprimanded each time he kept asking more questions than he was allowed. 

[ItCouldBeWorse]

5 hours ago, nomodrama said:

Gregory was very cute but he was on screen for less than a min, is a CGI mythical creature and you could tell it was CGI, and his "death" was in no way gruesome at all....I almost felt like I missed something. 

Exactly.

[Black Knight]

On 8/11/2022 at 2:03 AM, nomodrama said:

I guess I didn't really understand Paul's motivation in the end to help Morpheus escape, Im sure he was over Alex's cowardice and who knows maybe he was ready for Alex to move on, but then he seemed so shocked when Alex was trapped in the restless sleep. What exactly did he think was going to happen?

Rewatching that scene, I don't think Paul helped, at least not intentionally. We aren't shown his face when the wheelchair is being turned and breaks the circle. Paul walks away, then pauses as if in realization, and looks back at the floor and sees the circle is indeed broken. That points to him not breaking it deliberately. I think his little nod to Dream at that point is sort of an "Well, c'est la vie,  I won't say anything about it." I don't think in magic you can just dump chalk (or whatever) into the broken part of a circle to make it whole again, so there wasn't anything Paul could really have done to fix the issue anyway. He might have hoped by not yelling it out to all and sundry, and sort of acting like it was intentional, Dream would spare his lover.

[Ottis]

On 8/6/2022 at 7:39 AM, ombre said:

My memory is that the implication is that all the insanity of the last hundred years is the result of Dream's imprisonment.  The cost has been authoritarian regimes, environmental disaster, cheapening of life, etc. It's not just about bringing one goth god's power back, but also about bringing these nightmares back under control, reinstilling the impulse and capacity for creative thought, etc.  

In other words, it's the trolley problem, but they didn't manage to convey the depth of urgency. There was emotional resonance on one side of the equation (cute gargoyle!) and not on the other.  For folks who are new to the story, who are trying to decide if they want to watch, this may have been a poor choice. 

OMG, I had no idea. Sincerely. My impression as someone who has zero background on this show or character is that Dream is kind of a dick, and his actions are inconsistent. He keeps *saying* things like "you have no idea what you've done," and he is right, because I sure don't. So there has not been much reason to root for him, IMO. Having this info helps. Thank you.