-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
GreyHorace
Member
I think the series highlighted a problem for me that is present in all media of the Witcher, whether the games or the books.
The smaller side stories were much more interesting than the big overarching epic story. People can go wax poetic on how awesome the novel saga was but I much preferred the initial short stories that Andrzej Sapkowski wrote. Same thing with the games, I liked the little sidequests that CD Projekt Red wrote over that of the main quest (with the exception of 2. Assassin's of Kings had a fantastic plot).
The series should have gone the episodic route like what The Mandalorian did and focused solely on Geralt. Having intertwining narratives with both Yennefer and Ciri just served to confuse the viewer and muddle the pacing.
The smaller side stories were much more interesting than the big overarching epic story. People can go wax poetic on how awesome the novel saga was but I much preferred the initial short stories that Andrzej Sapkowski wrote. Same thing with the games, I liked the little sidequests that CD Projekt Red wrote over that of the main quest (with the exception of 2. Assassin's of Kings had a fantastic plot).
The series should have gone the episodic route like what The Mandalorian did and focused solely on Geralt. Having intertwining narratives with both Yennefer and Ciri just served to confuse the viewer and muddle the pacing.
Last edited:
imsosleepy
Member
witcher is currently top selling on steam lol
Syn Marnotrawny
Banned
That's the problem. Why did they do this shit is beyond me. Yen wasn't even so fleshed out in books and if memory serves me right Ciri also had a very small part in short novels. There was an overarching story of Geralt healing his wounds in Nenneke's shrine after the Striga fight and I believe he was telling stories of his adventures to one of the priestesses. When I think back on the books the tv series pales in comparison. There is no humor, no word play (I know it would be difficult to translate this to english, but anyway) and Geralt is a complete dick, especially to Jaskier.
lifa-cobex
Member
Really!?
Must have missed it.
mayhemking
Member
Why are these medieval hoes so liberated? Shouldn't they be married off and making babies and shit?
Strife In a Teacup
Member
It's probably more an assumption on my part, but Ciri when she's dressed as the boy playing in town with the other boys, they're playing dice on that cloth. So I assumed it was dice poker, or at least after having played the Witcher 1/2 which had it, that's the first thing I thought of.
Pumpkin Seeds
Member
The pacing and time switches are a mess. Show could have used a framing device.
Smaller than Atom
Member
Thanks for the perspective. So true.Chinese productions I don't know, but...
And one can't forget
This is so common it's an actual trope, are you kidding.
What breaks my disbelief more is things like a child from the middle of bum fuck nowhere village extolling modern day feminism. Medieval Europe was already importing people from Africa and Asia, and people of color are relatively sparse in this show, doesn't break my disbelief in a medieval European setting there.
Fuz
Banned
Because I hate myself.
BouncyFrag
Member
I’ve watched 3 episodes and the show is legit. Episode 2 ends strong and got me hooked. Cavill does look goofy with the long ass hair but he rocks out the combat.
Last edited:
Scopa
The Tribe Has Spoken
They were playing Knuckles.
Strife In a Teacup
Member
Ahh damn, looked like dice to me, though I wasn't that focused on it. Still though, they were gambling of sorts. So it still counts in some form!
Shifty1897
Member
It's a great supplement to the books and games, and was clearly made for people who are already fans of the series and understand the lore. I love it.
That being said, my friends who haven't played the games asked me about it and I told them not to watch it unless they want to put in the work to understand the lore first, because the show wasn't going to stop to explain everything to you, and what it does explain it explains in two lines or less and then moves on.
Also, having the Geralt/Yennifer/Ciri plots constantly cut to each other on screen but take place at different points on a 30+ year timeline was a mistake in my opinion. If they didn't want to show everything in chronological order, then they should have had a Yennifer episode or two that was just her origin story, and the same with Geralt until we were caught up to the present day for all three characters.
That being said, my friends who haven't played the games asked me about it and I told them not to watch it unless they want to put in the work to understand the lore first, because the show wasn't going to stop to explain everything to you, and what it does explain it explains in two lines or less and then moves on.
Also, having the Geralt/Yennifer/Ciri plots constantly cut to each other on screen but take place at different points on a 30+ year timeline was a mistake in my opinion. If they didn't want to show everything in chronological order, then they should have had a Yennifer episode or two that was just her origin story, and the same with Geralt until we were caught up to the present day for all three characters.
Pyramid Song
Member
Episode 3 was 
jufonuk
not tag worthy
Wow found out someone at my work is in the show.
Last edited:
lifa-cobex
Member
Pretty good series.
Needs some more pacing and better character relationship developments between some key people.
The story timeline needs work.
Could use a higher budget.
Nilff armor is bad.
Other than that I thought it was a pretty good adaption.
Wonder what folks who never played the games or read the books thought.
Needs some more pacing and better character relationship developments between some key people.
The story timeline needs work.
Could use a higher budget.
Nilff armor is bad.
Other than that I thought it was a pretty good adaption.
Wonder what folks who never played the games or read the books thought.
F31 Leopard
Member
It has nothing to do with having a problem with colored people but more on portraying the characters on how they were supposed to look from the source material. I still would find it annoying if they casted a white person with blonde hair and blue eyes as Fringilla and a 4'9" white red head as Triss.
On another note I wish that Famke Janssen was younger because she would have made a perfect Yennifer.
Last edited:
LaughingStock
Member
Casting midgets as dwarves looks so cheap. LOTR did it right.
mejin
Member
Fringilla was also destroyed. At least, actress of Trish is beautiful.
yep, laughed so much when I saw they running.
yep, laughed so much when I saw they running.
Pimpbaa
Member
Actress playing Yennifer yes, Triss hell no. I wouldn't have had a problem with the hair and skin color change if she was stunningly beautiful, but she is not (IMO of course).
Teletraan1
Banned
The actress playing Triss seems like the kind of person who would need to make a love potion that Ron Weasley accidently takes.
Coflash
Member
The citizens of Rivia are now all dressed like Ronald McDonald. The books didn't say otherwise, and it's fantasy (where anything goes, apparently)... so... problem?
Last edited:
Malakhov
Banned
Finished season 1, it was alright. I just wish there will have a bigger budget for season 2, some of the special effects were horrible.
I have no problem with the casting, they nailed geralt and yennifer, the rest I don't care.
Yennifer is just hauntingly beautiful, seriously, wow
I have no problem with the casting, they nailed geralt and yennifer, the rest I don't care.
Yennifer is just hauntingly beautiful, seriously, wow
GreyHorace
Member
Just finished episodes 5 & 6. Some thoughts on them.
Likes
- I can understand further why they cast Anya as Yennefer, she has amazing chemistry with Henry Cavill. The scenes between Geralt and Yen could have been ripped straight from the books or The Witcher 3. Though Yen here is much less bitchy than in the books or the game (TW3 does soften her a bit though).
- Joey Batey continues to provide great comic relief as Jaskier. I can't think anyone better to play this role since he's also a great singer.
Dislikes
- Where's the humor? Come on Netflix, you purposely omitted two of the funniest scenes from the stories. The first being Geralt's chant to exorcise of the djinn, which he later finds out translates to "Go fuck yourself." No wonder it was furious. The second being when they first encounter the golden dragon. The knight accompanying Yennefer bravely charges at it only to get swatted aside, to which dragon replies "Next?" Part of the charm of The Witcher series is that it was also a sendup of European fairy stories and had some undercurrent of comedy. Many people like to compare the series to Game of Thrones, when it has more in common with Shrek.
- The cheap special effects. Hoo boy. I know a TV series as a limited budget and all. But you seriously don't expect me to believe those velociraptor ripoffs are dragons? And I guess they ran out of money to show off Yen's magic because she had to resort to dual wielding. Speaking of which...
- The fight scenes are getting lame. After the great Blaviken melee in the first episode the fight choreography here was really meh. And again, why is a mage fighting in a melee like a peasant? I want to see a sorceress in action damnit, not Yennefer Warrior Princess.
- Okay Netflix. I've not really minded your changes to the stories, but that doppler better not be Dudu Beibervedlt You change one of the most decent characters in the series into a serial killer? Fuck off.
- And a bit of a negative on Henry Cavill's performance, which so far has been stellar. But I'm not liking how furious his Geralt is at all that's happening and laying the blame on Jaskier. Come on, as frustrated as Geralt can be with the way fate fucks him over at times, he wouldn't pin it all on a friend like that. That's not the witcher I know.
So yeah. I can start to see some of the negatives now with this adaptation, but I'll still continue on. Hopefully the last two episodes redeem some of the fuckups here.
Likes
- I can understand further why they cast Anya as Yennefer, she has amazing chemistry with Henry Cavill. The scenes between Geralt and Yen could have been ripped straight from the books or The Witcher 3. Though Yen here is much less bitchy than in the books or the game (TW3 does soften her a bit though).
- Joey Batey continues to provide great comic relief as Jaskier. I can't think anyone better to play this role since he's also a great singer.
Dislikes
- Where's the humor? Come on Netflix, you purposely omitted two of the funniest scenes from the stories. The first being Geralt's chant to exorcise of the djinn, which he later finds out translates to "Go fuck yourself." No wonder it was furious. The second being when they first encounter the golden dragon. The knight accompanying Yennefer bravely charges at it only to get swatted aside, to which dragon replies "Next?" Part of the charm of The Witcher series is that it was also a sendup of European fairy stories and had some undercurrent of comedy. Many people like to compare the series to Game of Thrones, when it has more in common with Shrek.
- The cheap special effects. Hoo boy. I know a TV series as a limited budget and all. But you seriously don't expect me to believe those velociraptor ripoffs are dragons? And I guess they ran out of money to show off Yen's magic because she had to resort to dual wielding. Speaking of which...
- The fight scenes are getting lame. After the great Blaviken melee in the first episode the fight choreography here was really meh. And again, why is a mage fighting in a melee like a peasant? I want to see a sorceress in action damnit, not Yennefer Warrior Princess.
- Okay Netflix. I've not really minded your changes to the stories, but that doppler better not be Dudu Beibervedlt You change one of the most decent characters in the series into a serial killer? Fuck off.
- And a bit of a negative on Henry Cavill's performance, which so far has been stellar. But I'm not liking how furious his Geralt is at all that's happening and laying the blame on Jaskier. Come on, as frustrated as Geralt can be with the way fate fucks him over at times, he wouldn't pin it all on a friend like that. That's not the witcher I know.
So yeah. I can start to see some of the negatives now with this adaptation, but I'll still continue on. Hopefully the last two episodes redeem some of the fuckups here.
Halo is Back
Member
No you are right. Too many people are sensitive to “wokeness” and will try to find something that isn’t there. It’s very minimal at best, if you seriously have a problem with them having black characters I don’t know what to say. It’s an America adaptation not everything is going to translate the same nor should it.
Smaller than Atom
Member
I'm really enjoying it. Didnt read books nor play 1 or 2. It fills in the backstory and gives me context to what I heard in the third game.
HBx2000
Member
Started the show last friday, wachted the first two episodes. After the first episode I thought: "I don't get it, what's this all about?"
After the second episode I was hooked. Maybe because I had to think, trying to piece the things together. So my whole saturday was about wachting the remaining six episodes.
Only knew about the games existing, didn't play them, only saw glimpses of The Witcher III through the years. After seeing the show I might try it, it is in Game Pass, so no loss if I didn't like it.
I'm just glad about the fact that there will be a second season. Too bad we will have to wait another year for it. Only negative thing I have to say was about the really bad CGI for that gold dragon.
Seeing people upset about the casting, I don't know the origins of it all, so I tought the acting and casting was good. Show looked nice in Dolby Vision with full sound from Dolby Atmos.
To put things in perspective, I've yet to see an episode from Game of Thrones.
Last edited:
Armorian
Banned
You have ~60h of greatness ahead of you (if you ever start), rest is medicore (s7) and garbage (s8).
RavageX
Member
Except that isn't whats happening with the show.
imsosleepy
Member
This is a serie that did not have to be a 10. An 8 would have been perfect for this type of show ON netflix.
There are not many 'game' adaptions, and most people know the witcher from the games so their expectations were true the roof.
Somehow they pulled it of and gamers seem to love it, appreciate it and dont need it to be a 10. I'm happy with that.
Its just weird how critics are just so out of touch.. Geezus christ they suck ass. Reading some of the reviews.. Just horrible.
There are not many 'game' adaptions, and most people know the witcher from the games so their expectations were true the roof.
Somehow they pulled it of and gamers seem to love it, appreciate it and dont need it to be a 10. I'm happy with that.
Its just weird how critics are just so out of touch.. Geezus christ they suck ass. Reading some of the reviews.. Just horrible.
Coflash
Member
Why shouldn't it? Fantasy gives them liberty to do whatever they want, no?
I don't actually believe this, I'm just wondering if you still think it's a good excuse.
iNvid02
Member
I didn't have high expectations going in and thought Henry was miscast (probably because I love game Geralt and his voice far too much) but they managed to create something cool which I ended up bingewatching when I should be studying
My biggest fear was bad CGI but it was solid, I think the cringiest moment was the talking dragon but it was shortlived
On a side note, some really attractive women on this show. Renfri and Parvetta were smoking
My biggest fear was bad CGI but it was solid, I think the cringiest moment was the talking dragon but it was shortlived
On a side note, some really attractive women on this show. Renfri and Parvetta were smoking
GreyHorace
Member
This makes my mind boggle. I know opinions differ but when I was watching the show I wasn't seeing Henry Cavill, I saw Geralt of Rivia. It's the same character that I kknew when reading the books and playing the games He played the part as perfectly as one could ask for. How could anyone think he was miscast?
And he had great chemistry with Anya Chalotra. Whenever they're onscreen together sparks fly and I could totally buy them as Geralt and Yennefer.
Last edited:
Ar¢tos
Member
I didn't read any book and played about 5h of the 3rd game (got bored of the shallow combat and sold the game), so.. So far I'm finding it ...entertaining enough...
Could be better, but it could also be a lot worse, so I'm OK with it. Still have the last 2 episodes to watch.
Negatives:
If you are going to show fully naked females, at least have the balls to show fully naked males. Hiding dicks with cheap camera angles is lame. It's not national TV, it's Netflix, there is already a ton of nudity content, even some explicit sex there.
Slicing heads and limbs with tons of blood is ok, but showing dicks would start the end of the world...
Positives:
Hard to really find something that really stands out, most things are serviceable. If it wasn't for the forced voice, I would say Henry is a very good Geralt.
Could be better, but it could also be a lot worse, so I'm OK with it. Still have the last 2 episodes to watch.
Negatives:
If you are going to show fully naked females, at least have the balls to show fully naked males. Hiding dicks with cheap camera angles is lame. It's not national TV, it's Netflix, there is already a ton of nudity content, even some explicit sex there.
Slicing heads and limbs with tons of blood is ok, but showing dicks would start the end of the world...
Positives:
Hard to really find something that really stands out, most things are serviceable. If it wasn't for the forced voice, I would say Henry is a very good Geralt.
LaughingStock
Member
Tits isnt "fully naked". I don't recall seeing any vaginas. Not even pubic hair.
Ar¢tos
Member
Naked women in the garden, Yen entering the bathtub.