Gaiman's other choice is also by some margin the internet's favourite potential Dream. It's easy to see why the sometime Sherlock, Smaug and Khan has been deemed the most perfect fit for Sandman. Cumberbatch's star has risen incredibly since first appearing as the BBC's Holmes four years ago. With roles in two of this year's biggest movies, The Hobbit and Star Trek, Cumberbatch is well placed to take the lead in a much-discussed movie like this. Tall, skinny, with high cheekbones and often seen rocking a mess of dark hair, Cumberbatch bears a physical similarity to the character on the page. More than that, the persona of his best roles are characterised by a supremely self confident view of his own genius and an utter surety in the rightness of his moral and intellectual choices, no matter how damaging they may be. In displaying that high opinion of himself, Cumberbatch's Sherlock and Frankenstein convince that their brilliance is genuine. He's also performed as a Gaiman character before, voicing the Angel, Islington, another egotist with grand plans, in the star-studded Radio 4 adaptation of Gaiman's Neverwhere. Given all of that, why shouldn't Cumberbatch be cast right away? With 12 Years a Slave, August: Osage County, The Imitation Game and The Hobbit: There and Back Again all to come out this year, the actor obviously has a very busy schedule. On top of that, he is also committed to Magik, an animated fantasy with superficial similarity to Sandman given it involves travelling between real and magical worlds, and not to mention a fourth series of Sherlock. On the other hand, his status as the actor of the moment may not last through all those projects. Hollywood can be fickle and all his many projects may mean that people are likely to tire of him sooner or later, or another of his movies will flop like The Fifth Estate. Will Cumberbatch still be so popular by the time Sandman comes round?
