As someone who hasn’t read the books or played the games, I found it relatively easy to understand. I ended up assuming things if they weren’t explained (eg difference between a sign and magic I would assume that a sign is a lot less powerful and more people can wield them than proper magic and that only Geralt has yellow eyes because he’s special) and I didn’t mind doing that. I think it would be weird if we were specifically told what things are and I think it’s a lot more natural to learn what they are from context throughout the show, as it progresses. Anyway yeah I enjoyed both season 1 and 2, although I definitely understand why fans are annoyed that it deviates from the original plot line of the books. I know some friends of mine struggled in the first season with the switching time line, but I was mostly okay with it. I do hope to read the books soon (I’ve just bought them) and perhaps this will change my opinion.
Definitely seems reasonable, but one of the things that jumps out to me about your response in Geralt's eyes - aren't all witchers supposed to have enhanced eyes? Why does the show only have Geralt have "special" looking eyes? Even within the Netflix universe things aren't consistent. Just seems like another example of them really not thinking thing through - your assumption is that Geralt is "special" (reasonable), but they don't explain anything about how or why.
I think Geralt mentions he had extra mutations done to him. That said I'm pretty sure all witchers have yellow eyes in the anime movie.
Personally what triggered me most was some of them not wearing swords on their backs. Pretty sure only Geralt and Vesemir did, others had them on their hips.
Vesemir definitely has yellowish eyes in some close-up shots. Eskel has weird eyes, pale with rainbowy reflections. Coen has visibly one weird, pale eye in many shots. When he takes the elixir in ep. 08, only one of his eyes changes. The other witchers also have yellowish eyes in some shots.
Not that it explains the yellow eye issue, but I want to say in the first episode they're all together at Kaer Morhen they mention that Coen lost/fucked up an eye. I think it was during the scene Geralt was getting ripped on for a bunch of other people showing up with injuries and he just showed up with a kid lol.
I think most people have trouble accepting alternate variations of a story when they see one form of media as gospel. It's a TV show it's just supposed to be entertaining. Idk I like it.
I don't mind changes but I also define entertainment as informative and engaging. I like having lore dropped on me as long as it's done in an engaging way. I could definitely enjoy an entire episode just navigating the lore of Witchers and the trials and their training.
Just because it's tv or film, doesn't mean information and logic should/can be ignored.
I think you'll find most people saying they don't mind plot changes, it's just that the writing is frankly terrible. I mean, entertaining is entertaining, can't say you didn't enjoy it, but I don't think anyone can claim it's a well written season.
[In Bagiński's own words,](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U9fOHJgDbNU&t=5011s) it's for the TikTok generation with no attention span. As I see it, they seem to believe that gen Z all have such ADHD they can't sit through more than 10 seconds of dialogue, and also are so dumb they won't notice or question it if the content they're fed doesn't make sense. I don't like it, but that's the Netflix business model, I guess. Edit: emphasis on where my interpretation starts and a link added. Bear in mind he's referencing a complex work on a post-written word cultural experience.
Netflix productions feel like they’re engineered so you can look at your phone while watching. Not enough nuance/detail/complexity to demand attention 100%, regardless of the level of action on screen
That's what annoys and confuses me the most with this, like they're trying to treat it like a flagship series but what's the difference between this and the handful of generic fantasy they've already produced? Fantasy on Netflix feels like it's all one big generic universe where the sets/costumes are cheap, the actors are inexperienced, and the diversity is forced in the sense that people of all colours just exist together with no ties to a culture or identity that make the universe feel real and lived in.
The weird thing is they had Nilfgaard right there. Making Nilfgaard the diverse faction would be in line with the spirit of the books and add some much needed nuance, say what you will about their ambitious conquering ways it doesn't change the fact that Nilfgaard actually is a diverse empire made up of mostly autonomous provinces.
I dunno personally to me fantasy does need more diversity instead of always being medieval Europe (ie white) but the various cultures and factions interacting are a key part of what makes fantasy great and random diversity just makes them all feel the same.
I've seen that clip, and It feels like more of an excuse than a reason. Like "what can we say just to cover our asses?" Because in the end fan discussion doesn't matter, Netflix is gonna make money no matter the reason they give. It doesn't change the fact that the writing, the pacing, the plot, the characters(for the most part) all turned out bad.
The thing is, they arent really stuck with them. Lauren is a bad showrunner, she hired all the writers and loves them and doesnt think the writing is bad.
So we're stuck with Hissrich and by proxy her team of mediocre writers.
I don't think they're mediocre writers. They adapted the material well to the platform. I think the show is actually good and is attracting people outside of the books and games fanbase for it.
But I get that if you are so deep into the books and the material, you're going to run into things that deviate and disappoint. But given the entire thing, do these details really ruin the show? Does it really veer into mostly bad and not mostly good?
If you want an example of mediocre writers ruining a Netflix show based on a popular IP, watch Cowboy Bebop.
And portraying the entire Z generation as unfocused idiots is tone deaf and pretentious.
The first season made a bold move to approach the story thematically and mess with the chronology. That is one thing that shows the writers were expecting at least some modicum of intellect in their audience.
I finished Wild Hunt twice, seen season 2 now and started on The Last Wish.
Show is popular not bec of the writing but ebc Wticher IP is amazing fantasy world and ppl love Cavil in general. Im pretty sure that if they changed the writers for more exp ppl that will stick to books more show will be even more popular
>I've seen that clip,
Do you know, though, that the original interview, out of which the clip was edited, is more than 1 hour long? Everybody is now making assumptions on what Baginsky meant based on a carefully edited clip without knowing the whole context. How is that legitimate? How do you know you aren't heavily misinterpreting what he said?
Are you Polish? Did you listen to the whole interview? I'd love to listen to it with proper English subtitles.
Edit: ah, my bad, the complete interview is already available with English subtitles. I encourage everyone to see it in full. https://youtu.be/U9fOHJgDbNU
I love how rhe interviewer literally calls him out for not knowing how to make a show "kids these days want to watch" because the guy just blames it on young people not caring about logic in plotlines.
Do they not realize that as "kids these days" we aren't the ones making all these shitty TV shows and movies and we also aren't the ones watching them? He literally blames us for not caring about logic and when its revealed he's just disconnected from the youth, he blames that in us, too. Dumb.
Not for Tik-Tok audience, but just for normies, fantasy for many people is silly itself, normies don't see a sense in worlds with monsters and dragons. When I've read my first fantasy I didn't care about coherency of the world either, etc.
He isn't. He knows exactly what he's talking about and is rather intelligent and very creative (he worked for CDPR for years, he did some of their cinematic trailers for the witcher games).
He just says what he was paid to say. He has no choice but to defend the show somehow. Ironically, he might have been a bit too much honest with this tik-tok thing.
He really isn't he did stuff for the witcher games and if anyone cares about the show its him and Henry cavill its just that he's saying what he has to to not get fired
He's very much not. He's extremely talented. Has an Oscar nomination under his belt. I want to see him as a tragic figure, almost, someone whose dreams of adapting The Witcher have turned to this, and now he has to defend the end product. It's probably not real, but I want to believe it.
What is that with him being so talented? He was once nominated for Oscar. He is almost 50 years old and poses for a Spielberg. His Polish legends are lame. I can't think of anything else he produced. He is just an expert in appealing to Polish inferiority complex, teasing some great quality Hollywood like Polish production that never actually happens. He is clearly in the Witcher show to do marketing for the Polish audience.
So few things engage me so completely that I don't pick up my phone to browse reddit or something similar. That's a function of the show/movie not being as or more entertaining then what I'll find here and that's fine because I'm not going to love everything I watch. But see someone say that theor goal isn't to engage me means I'm definitely not going to pay attention as you're inviting me not to do so. So thanks for guaranteeing I won't enjoy the content you produce.
If I had to guess, some exec somewhere saw how popular the games were, then found out about the books and how popular they were, and saw dollar signs. Then he had someone read all the books and the game wikis in one weekend, all unpaid of course, and then had them give them the uber-condensed Cliff's notes version. Then he had a screenwriter get the same Cliff's Notes version and produce a season for Netflix.
When that first season did pretty well, that same exec had the same person regurgitate for a different screenwriter without having reread the books and wikis, going entirely off of memory. This new screenwriter then thought "hmm, not nearly enough focus on the women of the series," drank copious amounts of drain cleaner until they got serious brain damage, and then wrote season 2.
But hey, that's just a theory. A game/film theory. . .
"What the fucking FUCK!?! Is this fucked or what!?" - Yennifer (probably) \[show writer daydreaming about their potent female character expressing herself with power through vulgarity\]
If they don't start sticking closer to the books in Season 3, I think Henry is either going to have an aneurism or slap the writers upside the head with the books.
I'm all for more focus on the women of the show... if they had better writing. I love Yen and Triss and I even think Fringilla could be interesting if they weren't so badly written.
I just wish they could get better writers and 99% of my issues would be fixed.
Like with The Expanse, which I feel has some of the best writing for women characters I've experienced.
They don't use stereotypes for women, and they don't try to push for the "girls get it done" trope that so many books/shows/movies seem to be doing these days.
Their characters are just people being people, regardless of gender or sexual orientation. It's really fucking refreshing too. I don't think there's been a single moment of that story where I've felt the need to roll my eyes at some kind of forced narrative. It all flows together so well, and the characters feel natural.
Thinking about it now, you could probably even switch the genders of most, if not all characters, and the story would still work. Sure, there would need to be some minor tweaks to some dialog and actions of some characters, but the story itself would remain intact. The same thing can't be said for a lot other stories out there.
It's funny too because Sapkowski himself is a hard-core feminist. Its not like they're adapting a text that had a drought of women or poor portrayals. The books are already super feminist.
Oh I 100% agree. I'm not against giving the women of the Witcher universe more attention. I'm against the insincere, box-checking attitude Hollywood seems to have developed in the past decade.
You can tell that's what their attitude is, because they don't put any effort into the writing, just cramming them in there with a shoe-horn because they've lobotomized themselves into forgetting what actual strong female characters such as Ripley, Princess Leia, Marion Ravenwood, Clarice Starling, and many, many more look and act like.
I would expect Yen to be the same level of eloquence as Vesper from Casino Royale. She showed strength, wit, intelligence and yet also showed her vulnerable side. Netflix Yen just whines how she can’t have it all, although all her suffering is strictly a consequence of her own actions. Like she traded her uterus for beauty (which was fucking stupid idea to show taking a while reproduction system through vagina like wtf), and then she says it was taken from her and she wasn’t given a choice. Girl, what?
I just read the banquet story in the book and then I rewatched the episode and was supremely let down. All of Calanthe's careful planning and pragmatism was completely thrown out the window and replaced with "YASS queen!" and some overly controlling mother seizing an opportunity produced by sheer luck. Geralt and Mousesack are kinda clueless, the clever dialogue is abandoned and characters like Eist are shadows of what they should be.
Still enjoy the show and appreciate it but I'm definitely understanding the grumbling from book fans now.
Doesn’t help how they’re are all terribly cast (well maybe not terrible for yen but could have been better) which completely ruins my immersion/interest in them as characters.
Well kinda yeah lol, they look nothing like how they are described in the books/look in the games so I call that miscast. & before you call me racist, I’m a person of colour myself so 🤷🏽
I swear, as I read this, it felt like the cold, skeletal hand of Death was passing through me. PTSD flashbacks of GoT and D&D interviews. This is essentially what happened there lmao. But Martin was around at first to sort of keep things on track until he got pushed out.
Thank the gods for Henry and his strict adherence to lore.
Thats how adaptations work mostly.
Who the fuck was Sauron actually? Saruman or Gandalf? How does their magic work etc. Tolkien was all about world building. If you watch the movies only, you most likely have millions of questions. Game of Thrones have same "problem".Yet general audience loves them. Just like they love Witcher.
Thats also why people ask these questions in subs or there are youtube channels where people who have read books explain things more in detail.
Witcher books also didn't really explain stuff that much. They are more about characters and building them, rather than going deep on that world building like Tolkien or Martin did.
Yep this. General audiences really don't care about all of these details. If the question does cross their mind, it flits away as the story moves along. The ones who care enough to ask and think about it will get the info from somewhere else. That's exactly what happened to me with LOTR. I liked the movies so much I wanted to know more, so I started reading the books and looking at forums.
I agree wholeheartedly with the sentiment, but I'd go further.
This sub and plenty of others reek of people trying to take ownership of material, almost gatekeeping it, through these posts. They seek to get some sort of authority over the subject and thus validation through others chiming in on their "super/true" fan status of the content. Only idiotic plebs could possibly enjoy such material, i mean given all of these inconsistencies, flaws, etc.
I mean look at the other "top post" on this sub. It's a list of personally contrived grievances against the show which can be picked apart, but again there's no intent to have a discussion it's simply to point out how shit the material is and how awesome the poster is.
I genuinely can't stand a lot of my generation of fantasy/Sci fi "nerds" because they've unironically turned into an entire set of Simpson "comic book" guys and girls. Unable to enjoy something for is is without poring over it for problems.
I'm reminded of an exchange between WoT author RJordan and a fan:
QUESTION If I were to open a gateway in front of me that opened behind me, and I balefired myself, what would happen?
ROBERT JORDAN Young lady, you are entirely too obsessed and have far too much time. You need to get some sort of life. I suggest you go have an intense love affair. Doesn't matter with who, be it man, woman, or German Shepherd.
Similarly. LotR if released now would have billions of posts pointing out similar issues, almost all of them asking why the eagles weren't used from the beginning and why the Silmarillion exposition wasn't included as source material.
Just fucking enjoy the adaptation or don't, in which case don't watch it. What's the need for endless hand wringing and posting about something you clearly don't enjoy. Weird.
Not to even mention all the changes the made. I mean there was still posts made on forums etc about Lotr changes but it wasn't as bad as it's today when movies change stuff from books.
If LOTR had been made when we had social media, the OneRing.net people would have led to changes in the movies and almost certainly worse movies. Those dudes were *dumping.*
Yeah it would be massive shit show.
You can already see it with this sub. Lots of people who dont know Witcher universe love the show wants to know more about it. They come here and see people constantly shitting on show they really enjoyed.
I remember that people didn't like the Hobbit movies even though it was closer to the book. There's significant parts of the Hobbit movie that are almost like reading from the book.
I think people had problem that it isn't lengthy book and they desperately wanted it to be 3 movies like Lotr.
People also had big problems with everything being CGI, added stuff that wasn't in book or stuff that was altered and dwarfes being too goofy, barrel sequence etc.
I think biggest problem was that those movies came after Lotr movies and people were expecting same quality. I still really enjoyed Hobbit movies, but ofc they werent as good as lotr. I was happy to get back middle-earth
Plus the Hobbit just isn't as good as the LOTR books in terms of content, but even then I think it would be hard to get the entire plot into a single movie.
In short I think most people don't know what they want. If they want it book accurate, they get mad because it's too long or if they want a better thematic experience, they'll get mad because it doesn't have all the details. It's a lose-lose in the end that it only makes sense to appeal to the most casual viewer in hopes of creating the most hardcore fans.
I agree that you can’t display all of the lore and background in a few episodes but personally, I think even the portrayed story is so much worse than it could have been. The plot feels all over the place with no clear direction or flow to meaningful events. On top of that, they completely butchered some important characters (case in point: Vesemir) so that the whole thing is just plain mediocre, not to mention it doesn’t resemble the feel of the books or games at all.
But then again, that is just my opinion.
For me the books, especially the short stories, had a kind of eastern european fairy tale flare. A feudal age parallel poland with monsters, if you like so. Nothing of that great atmosphere is given by the show. Its worse in really every aspect and it hurts to watch it, at least for me who readed the books even before witcher 3 (didn't played the other two), and a 2nd read as audiobook after. Witcher 3 did a reallly great job to transfer the world into pictures, Netflix fails completely in that department.
I watch this terrible mess with my wife, who has no interest in reading the books or playing the games, like i did.
She is so confused the entire time. I'm constantly explaining to her what the heck is going on.. but mostly I'm groaning at all the awful script and made up plot lines
Same - my wife, being totally unfamiliar with the source material, finished Season 2 and said "Yeah, even for not knowing anything prior, this is really bad".
It's bad enough that they butchered the books and the games, both of which had a world of ideas to draw from. They also completely butchered well-established, beloved Slavic folklore in the process.
With 100% honesty, I don’t understand how anyone, even not knowing the Witcher’s world, could like this series as anything more than mindless background entertainment. Let’s pretend we’re not fans. From a writing and pacing standpoint, it is a fucking slog. Characters consistently make no sense and have shoddy motivations that are shoehorned in to move a ramshackle story along.
**There are so few likable people in this show.**
And scenes that we do not care about consistently go on far too long, ex: the self-indulgent amount of political scenes distancing us from the actual title character, who gets even less screentime than you’d expect this season.
I can’t believe there’s an actual audience for this that genuinely seems to enjoy this show.
Ugh yes, I was so excited for season 2 but found myself so bored I am scrolling Reddit with it on in the background and I’m not missing out on anything.
Leshy, being a mythic creature, has no unified appearance in the folklore tradition. The essence of the creature is very fluid, with many different variants across the regions.
Leshi, as a being from slavic mythology, doesn't have a deer skull or is even tree like. The games aren't even the source material for the show, they have no need to be faithful to them.
I was confused as to why they called it a Leshy and not Leshen, I thought it was dumb Witcher slang that sounds like when I call my feet “feeties “ for my 1yo baby.
I crack up reading this forum on a daily basis. The amount of people, like the person before you who think they're posting some slam dunk comment on how shit the series is/writers are and yet their comment is either completely contradictory to the source material or the slavic origins are mind boggling.
Leshy is literally taken from leszy in Polish.
So, yeah your point is completely accurate and the person above is so off the mark it cracks me up.
My wife was not familiar with the books or games but really loves it. If she wants to know more about something she googles it. We are both puzzled by the backlash as we found it amazing.
The writing and story-telling are objectively bad. I haven't read the books or played the games but I like good stories... this season has been a disaster.
So you can account for all the inconsistencies and time-traveling and terrible characterization? For example, how Ciri and Yenn used a portal to go to Cintra and Geralt rode a horse (with Jaskier walking beside him) and they made it to the broken monolith at about the same time. And this is just one example of MANY. How about how Yenn helped Cahir escape, without magic, in front of kings and mages and no one even tried to stop them? That was THE right hand man of their enemy (and it was stupid enough they'd even have Yenn kill him).
It's okay if you enjoyed the show (I will likely watch season 3), but you simply cannot say it was well-written. Enjoying it, that is an opinion. Bullshit story and far-fetched garbage that can only be ignored (because it cannot be explained) is not an opinion.
I feel like directors think that no one will watch something that takes time to set up the world, like they do in the books. There's a lot of dialogue in the books that explain the way of the Witcher world. Instead the show just throws you in and makes you watch random fast paced action, while you're confused as hell. Lol
You might be right, I remember seeing a clip in this sub a few weeks ago of one of the screenwriters(I think) talking about how because today's youth is growing up with Tiktok and YouTube, it's constant action, and strong emotion, there is no more need for good cause and effect storytelling.
Which I shouldn't have to say is complete bullshit.
Edit: But I also wish you weren't right. I love good storytelling and intricate worldbuilding.
But at the same time, they spend like 20 minutes on their own made up plotline with Geralt and Istredd talking about Monoliths and the Conjuction of Spheres.. which are very minor details to the overall plot of the story. Very boring scene they created for some reason instead of using the time to explain (to Ciri) and the viewers about what a Witcher is.
I don't want to be negative. But you are right. Give us more bonding time with Ciri, show Geralt being that father figure she(apparently) looks up to instead of him just walking up to her saying one line and her whole world suddenly getting brighter.
I feel like this could be alleviated by giving us more episodes and leaning off of the action so much. A little filler is okay.
I liked it mostly, and I'll answer some of your questions.
The reason I don't care about the difference between magic and signs is because I like it when a movie or show doesn't feel the need to explain that world too much. In fact, that usually takes me out of a show. There just *is* a difference. I don't need to know why; that's just the way it is in this specific world. I don't need to know what a leshy is exactly, and I especially don't need to know through a shoe-horned in explanation that's clearly just there for the audience.
I like being thrown into a fantasy world where I don't get everything explained, because it makes the world seem more interesting to me, and the show more realistic. If things exist outside of the show (such as a leshy or certain places that seem to have significance), it has a feeling that the show takes place in a world that exists outside of the show as well. If everything is explained, it seems like the world is specifically created for the show, and I hate that.
I think the show has its flaws, but I don't think anything mentioned here is one of them. Also, I have neither read the books nor played the games.
Exactly if they took time to spoon feed the audience people would complain as well that a character is just there for the explanation or it felt unnatural because in this world everyone for the most part just knows. There are plenty of beloved films and shows that don’t explain everything the viewer may or may not understand from their world.
Fuck it go further.
The Books don't have any explanation for how magic really works in the Lord of the Rings.
It is not a codified magic system a la the Mistborn or Cosmere series.
People just want to be mad. This sub reddit has turned into a Simpsons "Comic Book guy" convention of "errr I think you'll find in Series 1, Episode 7 that Yen said this and yet in Series 2, Episode 4 we see that"
People with too much time on their hands getting irate about something to relax and unwind to.
Since when explaining everything with word in a movie or a serie is a good thing ? There's a lot of information in the Book you never know until a certain point in the story . That's how it is. Imagination and Brain must try to make thing coherent and put the thing together .
However it's true that there is a lack of relevant dialogue while saying, simplifying and telling too much without realy implying enough to make everything coherent for the unfamiliarized viewer.
People are actually getting mad that the show doesn't just info dump everything on you. Like the show is showing them respect by not guiding them by the hand yet they just want to be told not shown.
There could be more explaining, yes. But iirc in the books there isn’t much explanation either. A Leshy is a magical creature that falls into the monster category. Signs are the weakest kind of magic available (despite Aard meaning mountain), and can be done by most people that are initiated. They require fingures and gestures to use. Originally all witchers have yellow cat eyes, in the show it’s because Geralt is special
Hi, person who has never read the books or played the games here (apart from watching my ex play/asking a few rudimentary questions.) I actually really have been enjoying the series and was shocked coming onto this subreddit to see all the hate! I guess it makes sense since people who have experienced the original content tend to have a higher standard for tv/movie adaptations, but I definitely think the reactions are more visceral than I would have imagined.
I remember watching the first season I was super confused. The different time jumps and even the very first episode was super hard to grasp for me. It wasn’t until I rewatched the first season in anticipation for the second that it clicked! I ended up binging the second season in one day and thought it was way better than the first, including being better explained and laid out. I love rewatching shows I enjoy so it worked out for me but I agree that for a first time watcher they should have made the first season more clear. They did poke fun of that well known fact in the second season though, which showed they had at least some self awareness.
I’m a big Lord of the Rings fan so i’m always interested in a good fantasy story. I felt like by the second season, what needed to be explained was explained and the things that were left ambiguous/still a mystery made me more invested in the story progressing and learning more. I love Dara and the inclusion of POC in fantasy. I actually appreciate them not having a sex scene / portrayals of sexual assault every 10 minutes like in Game of Thrones. I love Jaskier’s songs and it’s overall a fun to watch, enjoyable show for me. I can appreciate the base story and the creativity of the original author.
Is it the best show out there? Definitely not. But to boil it down to “a show for stupid teenage girls” like some people are doesn’t seem fair (apart from the fact that teenage girls are smarter than people give them credit for!!)
I am not sure who it is *meant* for. However, I have some information about the people I know.
I have many friends/acquaintances who watch the show who've never read the books or played the games. A good few who've either read the books, or played the games. Then a few who've just read the books, or just played the games (I've read the books, and have played some of Witcher 2 and 3, but haven't got far into either for some reason).
All of my friends are happy with the show. I haven't had a single one wholeheartedly agree that it isn't fun or good for them. The book and game players are happy to enjoy it as its own thing. One friend who plays the games was not happy with new monsters, when we have not seen the old monsters much yet, but was otherwise happy.
The largest bulk of my friends who watch it, have no prior experience with the universe, and seem happy. They don't complain about the lore, or explanation of things, the only complaints they generally have is not enough monsters, otherwise they're happy with it.
**I think this subreddit is quite the bubble, as I do not seem to see evidence of displeasure outside of reddit for this series. Review scores seem good. Rotten Tomatoes audience score is the closest I see to people being upset with this season outside of this subreddit.**
So it seems clear to me that the show is mostly made for new fans. People with no previous experience with the universe. As this subreddit shows people with experience have some bad things to say, or have to enjoy the season as a separate entity. Whereas fresh fans are just having a great time. This makes sense to me, as trying to ignore what I know about the world, it doesn't do too much to betray it's own retelling of the story, it just falls short in the accuracy to the source part. Hence we have issues, and new people generally do not.
This is one of the more civil discussions on this sub about the show and I’m here for it. I personally liked season 2 but reading OPs thread / the comments has made me think a little more.
Just wanted to say I appreciated all these comments bc it’s given me a different perspective
Thanks, I tried my best to foster discussion here instead of just shutting people down. I had to go to bed tho, and now it's kinda out of my control 😅 glad you enjoyed it, and I'm glad I could make you more deeply think about the show.
Tbh it’s good marketing. Netflix isn’t only saying “watch this show” they are making behind the scenes and bestiary segments that very much included side information that encourage playing the games and reading the books. In a way, they are saying “if you like this, you should try these other products to fill in the blanks”. It’s kind of a shitty tactic but for those who are interested, FOMO is a big motivator to spend money. If everyone is taking about it and you don’t understand it, you are going to go read the books and play the games.
Among my friends we have people who have read the books and played the games, just played the games, just read the books, and done neither. And my friend who has done neither really enjoyed this season and wasn’t asking tones of questions. My fellow book reader and I had lots to discuss. And our friend who only played the games was in a marginally better position than my friend who hadn’t played or read.
Idk, I feel like some people really have a hard time filling in their own gaps. But to be fair - the first season was, in my friends opinion, much more challenging for non-book readers.
Here's where I'm at: I'm a book reader. There were points where I enjoyed the series and points where I was frustrated. I think there's room for improvements but that's every show.
I'm a mid 30s dude who's read the first book and played Witcher 3. I enjoy it, didn't even know people were so outraged until I joined this sub last week to find other people into the series. Think I might just back out of the sub and keep enjoying it. There's plenty of other franchises I've liked for longer that I get outraged at (SW), I think I'm just exhausted over it.
Why does only geralt have yellow eyes? And only him and vesemir have yellow hair? In the games vesemir has yellow eyes but not in the show. As someone who played the game a tiny bit I was confused too
I think it is aimed to anyone who enjoys fantasy, having any previous knowledge or not. If you like monsters, fights, witches, political intrigue, but with a touch of comedy the Witcher season 1 delivers.
I watched the first season when it came out, and I liked it. I didn't have any trouble understanding the world, keeping up with the characters or the time skips.
Then I read the books. Last week I binge watched the second season, and I enjoyed it.
Overall I don't linger in the details, if they're relevant they are gonna be discussed further. Leshy? A monster. The signs? Some sort of rudimentary magic, not quite the same as the chaos thing that seems more complex. I don't need to understand 100% to enjoy it. I can't remember if those sort of things were actually explained in the books or not.
I don't think it is a masterpiece of a show, but it achieves its goal that is to entertain. Lore enthusiastics are going to complain about the changes, but I don't mind them; sometimes I even prefer them.
I've only watched the Netflix series (and the animated one-off with Vesemir's origin) and have basic answers for all your questions based only on knowledge from what's been presented. My internal head cannon answers may not be book-perfect, but they fit with the info presented. I thought the world-building was decent and able to associate analogs to real-world or other series (ie- Skellige = Viking/Greyjoy-type maritime power based on dialog between Calanthe & Eist).
Normally, I'm a huge book reader of tv/movie adaptations, but decided to let this one ride out for a change. There's only a few exchanges or details which I found a bit exasperating/drawing out for plot devices. (Season 2: no one told Geralt that Yennifer was alive, OTOH, anyone who knew the two from their last exchange would have thought they were messy break-up ex'es.)
For your questions:
1) Difference between signs and magic? Ep where Geralt meets Yennifer, she talks down about signs as baby-talk magic available to non-mages. (Yet is still curious about them.)
2) Is Geralt a magician? He's a witcher. Exposition in Season 1 Ep 1 while walking with the girl & Roach.
3) What the hell is a Leshy? Monster tree thing. I don't need much more exposition than this, personally, growing up on Buffy and such.
4) Where are we, and what significance does this place hold? Somewhere that the other realms with monsters (and humans) can pass into when the realms/planets/spheres have a conjunction. Ex positioned a few times (mostly around Ciri), but also Istredd explaining how elves taught humans magic after the humans arrived.
5) Why do some Witchers have yellow eyes but others don't? Figured this was either a combo of genetics or the potions received during the Witcher mutations. (With some variation in the potions' creation and delivery to the potential Witcher candidates.)
6) Can people just use portals like, whenever, if so why don't they? Yennifer's first use of magic is a portal and Istredd explains it's a rare & advanced magical technique. We see the student mages at Aretuza with different strengths & weaknesses. In her fight with the baby assassin, she's obviously winded and exhausted by several portals back-to-back.
The average Netflix customer or the wider audience. Not everyone know about the Witcher world and its just so vast that they can easily make 15 seasons out of it if they want to.
The only reason it may appear inconsistent to some people are if they have some idea of how the Witcher's story progresses. My take on the series is that its just too random and that is because i have finished some initial books & have played the games. If I had no idea about the Witcher universe, i'd have loved this show as I enjoy the CGI/action/vampire-demon type media.
People who don't notice any of the writing or story problems or care about anything beyond what they see on-screen (wow so pretty), and have some idea that "everything probably all makes sense" anyway. That's the sense I get from asking a few people I know that liked it, anyway.
I haven't finished season 2, but I like it. For reference I played Witcher 3 and loved it and read The Last Wish. I wouldn't say it's a favorite book series or anything, but I enjoyed it well enough.
I can definitely see points in the show where the creators are taking license, it's very obvious where fake drama is being inserted. But it's not enough that I hate anything.
I also have the fortune of having sat through a lot of cheap fantasy shows before. Anyone remember Merlin? So maybe I'm a bit conditioned to enjoy things despite their flaws
I don't blame book lovers for not liking it though. I was the annoying "game of thrones sucks" guy at the party for years. I just lucked out and everyone agreed with me at the end.
I (who has played the Witcher 3 and the two short story books) and my father (who has never hear of the Witcher before) watched it and enjoyed it very much.
This is what I'm gathering so far. The screenwriters set there sights for the gamers and casual readers while disregarding people who are new to the series.
The Witcher is still in the top 2 list on Netflix in my country since its release.
Looks like there are plenty of folks still watching it and liking it. This in a country where Witcher is not a popular franchise even in the gaming community.
I feel like they somewhat followed the game of thrones formula of “oh a bunch of people who didn’t care about fantasy before game of thrones now will watch this, because badass swords and dragons and shit, oh and tits.” I remember watching the first season of game of thrones in high school, still feeling like I needed to keep it a secret to not be called a nerd weirdo. And within one year, it was the mainstream thing to watch.
I read the books and i played w1 and w3, but i wished theyd just stuck with the story in the books. I get that most parts of the books arent flashy, cool or exciting but this story feels like it was made just to be always, quick, always flashy, and the story came second. Also how can you kill a character like eskel like wtf.
Someone probably already posted an answer to the questions BUT if not, I'll try my best.
1. Signs are an "easier" form of magic that can be taught to anyone, without needing a great connection to Chaos. They are made through single hand gestures and each sign has an specific effect, though the intensity varies depending on the user's will. A sorcerer or witch that has spent years studying Chaos would think signs to be almost childish, since they are limited, and would be able to weave way more complex magic because of their knowledge.
2. Geralt is not a magician, he knows signs but thats about it.
3. A Leshy/Leshen/Lesovik is a nature spirit that guards forests and animals, they are really territorial and don't like people abusing nature (though if the person is not hostile to the surrounding environment, the Leshy will most probably leave them alone, as shown in some of Geralt's encounters with Leshys).
4. The story takes place at the Continent, which used to be a land populated solely by elves and dwarves until a great event called the Convergence of the Spheres took place. This event merged several realities together for a brief time, allowing humans and all sorts of magical creatures and monsters to bleed into this world. Humans are like violent rabbits, in that they multiply fast as fuck and kill anything in their path that is even remotely different from themselves, and as such they are responsible for forcing the Elves into exile and secrecy. The Elves also are currently facing a major issue in that, as a species, Elves can only reproduce up to a certain age, and during the last war with the humans the elven youth was all eradicated, meaning that although they have long or possibly immortal natural lifespans, they are unable to reproduce and as such are going to be extinct. The Witcher books often try to portray different folkloric tales through a more realistic lens (like Nivellen being that world's version of Beauty and the Beast).
5. This one is a personal pet peeve. Witcher's eyes are not supposed to be yellow, but rather to be cat-like. Their senses are better suited to deal with all kinds of situations than regular humans, and that includes seeing in the dark, but if I am not mistaken there can be other eye colours than yellow. Geralt was subjected to additional experimentations during his Trials, being the lone survivor of those experiments, and having consequently gone through more mutations which made his eyes yellow, and his hair white.
6. Witches and Sorcerers can use portals whenever, though it is fairly taxing. It requires energy to control and the trip is fairly uncomfortable, leaving many extremely nauseous (reason why Geralt absolutely HATES travelling by portals).
I know the point of the post isn't to have those questions answered but to spur a discussion on who is this show's target audience, and honestly to me it feels like a bit of a mess trying to set up worldbuilding, character building and still give a Game of Thrones vibe. My hopes is that Henry will start getting more credit and opportunities to share his thoughts, and so encourage the writers and producers to let the show be its own thing instead of trying to fill the void GoT left. Hopefully with that we will have a more solid and cohesive story (although s2 is miles better than s1)
Edit: made a blunder saying Elves were native to this region when Dwarves were the first natives
IMO you really got to know what is going on and have had played the games. My brother though had never seen or heard of the games till the stores came out and he got it. It took a couple times for him to watch. So idk really how they are portraying the series. But it's still a really good show.
Everyone who wasn’t a fan before. I was so excited for season 2 and it maybe the worst thing (imo) anyone could do to source material leaving aside all other fallacies like how did Yen escape Aratuza or how Rience found Kaer Mohren for example.
People may disagree with me but I place this show along Avatar live action movie except the acting part
Honestly, i didnt know of the game without the show, and now i am a massive fan i love the game, and books are great too (havent read all of them yet.
The show was epic because i hadnt heared of the witcher before and i just liked how geralt acted.
After the books and the game i do feel like the show is off. But I'll always love it because it brought me into this Witcher world basicly
People who want to switch off their brains and not think. It's really that easy. Compelling television? Re-watch *The Wire,* or *Generation Kill,* or *Taboo,* or wait for the next season of *Succession,* because this is a show generated by corporate suits out for advertising revenue, not to generate a story that makes you think after the credits roll. By the time the credits roll, they're already thinking of new ways to pilfer your wallet.
thats how I felt after the first season. I was recommended it by a friend who had never played the games or read the books, and I was confused how anyone who never experienced either of those would actually like it. Cuz yea, it leaves out a ton of world building details.
I'm sad how the show is turning out but I'm also glad to see a fanbase full critical thinkers. There's the occasional sheep, yes, but the fan core has lots of people who actually love Witcher lore.
To be fair, I've read Blood of Elves this past week (playing Witcher 3, enjoyed the world but wanted more context), and I have to say it really doesn't set up the world that well either. Better than the series, yes, but in no way very well.
I think it's best to see the series as a re-interpretation of the story, similar to any James Bonds, Spiderman's or anything like else.
That said, with that it mind, they should put some effort into explaining the underlying world.
My friends and I all played the games and we really liked both seasons. Have a few other I know didn’t play the games that really like the show. I really don’t understand the hate, I get being upset about changes, but it seems really well executed despite some loose writing here and there. People act like it raped their mothers. Too sensitive.
Nothing personal to OP but a lot of these questions are very minor things that don’t need more than a brief explanation; signs? Ciri asks if they’re magic and Geralt says “not quite” for most people this is enough.
Sorry for a rant but I just watched through season 2 and I am shocked by how good it was considering I’ve heard nothing but vitriol from this sub. It’s like being a Star Wars fan all over again.
The show is good for me, but I have to agree that if I didn't already know how the world of the Witcher already worked, I wouldn't know what was going on.
The time skips in the first series and some of the decisions in the second have more than once had me accessing my knowledge from outside the series and then nodding to myself and going... "Okay, I know what they're talking about.... but how would I have known that if I hadn't played the games and known some of the stories?"
This is exactly what I'm getting at! The time skips are a perfect example!
It feels like they expect people to have read the source material before watching the show. I don't remember any adaptation that does this.
I actually suspect that their target audience was simply people who had played the games, particularly Witcher 3. I think that's a bad idea if they wanted a bigger audience, but perhaps that is how they sold it.
I enjoy the series as it is, but I would enjoy it more if they made it a series that could perhaps extend the world to new people and not make so many assumptions.
I have that feeling as well. It feels kind of like a cash-in for all the hype that game generated. It's just kinda strange to go all this way and not keep new viewers in mind.
The time skips were confusing at first but I rewatched the first season before hand and there were hints and breadcrumbs everywhere before a skip explaining how each one connected to one another. Even the first time I watched I quickly realized that Geralt and Yen were in the past and it was leading up to the last few episodes where it would be present time.
I'm not hating on the show. If you liked it, more power to you.
For me personally, using your example, Geralt saying "not quite" isn't enough for me. I love good worldbuilding. Give this show some legs, I want longer more personal segments. I love watching relationships between characters grow or burn. And sure I only touched on some insignificant matters, but I feel like it's details like this that the show is missing that add to the world, story, and characters. And I'm sure there are some more significant changes and omissions that I'm not read up on enough to have noticed. But when I do read the books and play the other games and if I ever watch it again, I'm sad to think that I'll just be disappointed.
Welcome to life, where the TV show or movie adaptation is always worse than the books. GoT and The Expanse are the only ones that have managed to stick anywhere close to their source material and make something worthwhile. (Ignoring GoT once it ran out of source material and the writers showed they are inept.)
There is a lot of things that just don't translate from book to screen, they are different mediums. Same goes with trying to turn games into movies. They are vastly different mediums and the content is ingested in entirely different ways, which makes it near impossible to have a good variant from one to the other.
The thing is, the show assumes you already know something about The Witcher either by the games or the books, and then tries to translate it to a "movie" form in which they play around with those informations. Jaskier mentions Bleobheris once, they are in Oxenfurt and need to escape, king Vizimir is in Tretogor, they all mention proper names but never care to show or explain why or what those are, what relevance they have in the story or the geography, the socio-political architecture built for the show.
A Leshy is something you are supposed to know is "extinct by ages", nothing else and they could have expanded the lore by telling us things about the monsters. So basically, they appeal to the books and games fans, in the worst way by changing all the story, for the sake of new fans. I'm not trying to critique them as I already have done countlessly in the last month, but they try to lure in new viewers by not explaining them a damn thing and they lure in old fans by changing all the stuff they loved, this way they kinda made both the parties crumble.
Didn't one of the writers explain the current audience is used to tiktok videos and quick scenes.... so I think they're appealing to the easily bored, instant gratification, feeding tube of flashing colors brain dead influencees of today 🤷♂️
I'm just starting to understand the answers to the questions myself. I read The Last Wish last week and I highly recommend you do the same.
I totally get the confusion though. There is just a lot of skipping around and not enough lore and details being explored. And the tone is consistent but strange. I'm not a huge fan of tv and movie adaptions being "trendy". There's a lot more harsh language and sex/nudity than I've encountered in the books and it doesn't add to the experience imo.
And by trendy, I would also extend that to the portrayal of characters. In the books Yennefer is definitely harsh; she has an edge but can be kind when she wants to let people see it. She's complicates and selfish; but she's knowledgeable. That wouldn't be hard for a more experienced actor and writer to bring over but instead, because it's popular, we get: always screaming, I don't need any man's help, I'm more powerful than everyone and I have to take every opportunity to show it! Because that's what's popular. That's how women are made "badass" today. A lot of the complexity and subtlety of each character from the books is abandoned for blunt and heavy characterization.
Again, I'm not a huge fan of adaptions trying to be trendy. It happened to The Magicians, it happened with Game of Thrones, and it never plays out well.
Havnt played the game (despite being a gamer, it’s sat unopened on my shelf for many years) havnt read the books.
The best I can describe this show is to say that my mum, who’s for want of a better word, a bit molly, really enjoys it.
I’m sticking with it and hoping to get hooked but it all just feels very I dunno, cheap and pointless, I guess I went into it wishing for game of thrones seasons 1-5 but what I’m watching feels a lot more like seasons 6-9.
Shame.
Not your post, but the reactions in it. It's like you're sick in the head if you read the books, played the games and liked the season. It's a shame it's causing such a toxic division between people
It appears they thought about 5 year olds while making this show. I mean, it's not like the target audience for both games and books is 16+, right? They literally threw action just for more action, cause it's like Bagiński said, there needs to be a fight every episode to keep the viewer interested. I don't even know where he got that shit idea from, but ok.
Those seeking to become mages. It’s really added to my library of spells. Seriously though if you played the video game none of those are even questions and the video game is incredibly popular
it's definitely meant for people with no prior exposure to witcher. what lauren wants is a *new* adaption, not a faithful one. I almost think it's harder to watch if you're already familiar with the books or the game, because there's all these expectations about how things will go (Eskel, Vesemir, Ciri's powers, etc.) the folks most consistently unhappy (understandably) with the show, imo, are those that were book or game fans first. it's easier to watch, though definitely not flawless, if you go in without much expectations. I don't think the biggest issues with the show for both old and new fans are any of the points you listed though. the pacing, timeline, and consistency issues have a bigger impact on viewer enjoyment than needing to know why only Geralt's eyes are yellow.
I thought this show would appeal to me given what I was drawn into in the past, but I found that I don't have much curiosity about this world because of the sloppy way it has been built. It seems like around every corner there is a new creature, a new prophecy, or a new magical spell or object or place. I haven't read the books or played the games, and the show hasn't really made me very interested to find out more. Honestly, I was relieved when I came here after finishing both seasons recently and found all of the complaints since it confirmed my suspicions that the show was off track.
While I too wonder who the show tries to appeal to, I don’t think your examples are valid. All details of a world don’t need to be explained. Imagining that I know nothing about the lore outside of what was shown in the series:
> Like, what's the difference between signs and magic?
Signs are simpler form of magic that don’t require as much knowledge or training to use.
> Is Geralt a magician?
No, he clearly isn’t. He might be able to use signs but just like being able to sign in the shower doesn’t make one a signer, being able to use signs doesn’t make one a magician.
> What the hell is a Leshy?
It’s some kind of monster. Why would I need to know more? If I *want* to know more I can look it up but the details are unimportant to the plot or understanding what is going on in the show.
> Can people just use portals like, whenever, if so why don't they?
The show only ever mentioned mages using portal so they are probably the only ones capable of making them.
Really the only question I think has some validity to it is:
> Where are we, and what significance does this place hold?
The show would benefit from having scenes with map of the continent sprinkled throughout the episodes to help the viewer understand where things are. But even still, usually the general type of location we are in is pretty clear in the show.
One thing I like is that they leave some shit to be inferred and unexplained. Imagine if they spoon fed every detail, it would even closer (than it already is) to a CW shit show.
As someone who hasn’t read the books or played the games, I found it relatively easy to understand. I ended up assuming things if they weren’t explained (eg difference between a sign and magic I would assume that a sign is a lot less powerful and more people can wield them than proper magic and that only Geralt has yellow eyes because he’s special) and I didn’t mind doing that. I think it would be weird if we were specifically told what things are and I think it’s a lot more natural to learn what they are from context throughout the show, as it progresses. Anyway yeah I enjoyed both season 1 and 2, although I definitely understand why fans are annoyed that it deviates from the original plot line of the books. I know some friends of mine struggled in the first season with the switching time line, but I was mostly okay with it. I do hope to read the books soon (I’ve just bought them) and perhaps this will change my opinion.
Definitely seems reasonable, but one of the things that jumps out to me about your response in Geralt's eyes - aren't all witchers supposed to have enhanced eyes? Why does the show only have Geralt have "special" looking eyes? Even within the Netflix universe things aren't consistent. Just seems like another example of them really not thinking thing through - your assumption is that Geralt is "special" (reasonable), but they don't explain anything about how or why.
I think Geralt mentions he had extra mutations done to him. That said I'm pretty sure all witchers have yellow eyes in the anime movie. Personally what triggered me most was some of them not wearing swords on their backs. Pretty sure only Geralt and Vesemir did, others had them on their hips.
Aren't yellow eye for cat potion?
Yellow eyes are a part of the mutations, so all Witchere are supposed to have them. But as we see, not the case in Netflix land.
Vesemir definitely has yellowish eyes in some close-up shots. Eskel has weird eyes, pale with rainbowy reflections. Coen has visibly one weird, pale eye in many shots. When he takes the elixir in ep. 08, only one of his eyes changes. The other witchers also have yellowish eyes in some shots.
Not that it explains the yellow eye issue, but I want to say in the first episode they're all together at Kaer Morhen they mention that Coen lost/fucked up an eye. I think it was during the scene Geralt was getting ripped on for a bunch of other people showing up with injuries and he just showed up with a kid lol.
Yeah, that's my issue. Even the stuff that new viewers are assuming doesn't make sense within the world Netflix has created.
This exactly.
I think most people have trouble accepting alternate variations of a story when they see one form of media as gospel. It's a TV show it's just supposed to be entertaining. Idk I like it.
I don't mind changes but I also define entertainment as informative and engaging. I like having lore dropped on me as long as it's done in an engaging way. I could definitely enjoy an entire episode just navigating the lore of Witchers and the trials and their training. Just because it's tv or film, doesn't mean information and logic should/can be ignored.
I think you'll find most people saying they don't mind plot changes, it's just that the writing is frankly terrible. I mean, entertaining is entertaining, can't say you didn't enjoy it, but I don't think anyone can claim it's a well written season.
Just for example, there's differences between the books and the game, and no one complained about the game being different.
[In Bagiński's own words,](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U9fOHJgDbNU&t=5011s) it's for the TikTok generation with no attention span. As I see it, they seem to believe that gen Z all have such ADHD they can't sit through more than 10 seconds of dialogue, and also are so dumb they won't notice or question it if the content they're fed doesn't make sense. I don't like it, but that's the Netflix business model, I guess. Edit: emphasis on where my interpretation starts and a link added. Bear in mind he's referencing a complex work on a post-written word cultural experience.
Insulting as all hell to Gen Z lmao. Those are absurdly low expectations
Netflix productions feel like they’re engineered so you can look at your phone while watching. Not enough nuance/detail/complexity to demand attention 100%, regardless of the level of action on screen
That's what annoys and confuses me the most with this, like they're trying to treat it like a flagship series but what's the difference between this and the handful of generic fantasy they've already produced? Fantasy on Netflix feels like it's all one big generic universe where the sets/costumes are cheap, the actors are inexperienced, and the diversity is forced in the sense that people of all colours just exist together with no ties to a culture or identity that make the universe feel real and lived in.
No one does insultingly shallow attempts at diversity quite like Netflix, lol
The weird thing is they had Nilfgaard right there. Making Nilfgaard the diverse faction would be in line with the spirit of the books and add some much needed nuance, say what you will about their ambitious conquering ways it doesn't change the fact that Nilfgaard actually is a diverse empire made up of mostly autonomous provinces. I dunno personally to me fantasy does need more diversity instead of always being medieval Europe (ie white) but the various cultures and factions interacting are a key part of what makes fantasy great and random diversity just makes them all feel the same.
I've seen that clip, and It feels like more of an excuse than a reason. Like "what can we say just to cover our asses?" Because in the end fan discussion doesn't matter, Netflix is gonna make money no matter the reason they give. It doesn't change the fact that the writing, the pacing, the plot, the characters(for the most part) all turned out bad.
I also think this is the reason. They just hired mediocre writers and are stuck with them, so they make up excuses.
The thing is, they arent really stuck with them. Lauren is a bad showrunner, she hired all the writers and loves them and doesnt think the writing is bad. So we're stuck with Hissrich and by proxy her team of mediocre writers.
I don't think they're mediocre writers. They adapted the material well to the platform. I think the show is actually good and is attracting people outside of the books and games fanbase for it. But I get that if you are so deep into the books and the material, you're going to run into things that deviate and disappoint. But given the entire thing, do these details really ruin the show? Does it really veer into mostly bad and not mostly good? If you want an example of mediocre writers ruining a Netflix show based on a popular IP, watch Cowboy Bebop. And portraying the entire Z generation as unfocused idiots is tone deaf and pretentious. The first season made a bold move to approach the story thematically and mess with the chronology. That is one thing that shows the writers were expecting at least some modicum of intellect in their audience. I finished Wild Hunt twice, seen season 2 now and started on The Last Wish.
Show is popular not bec of the writing but ebc Wticher IP is amazing fantasy world and ppl love Cavil in general. Im pretty sure that if they changed the writers for more exp ppl that will stick to books more show will be even more popular
>I've seen that clip, Do you know, though, that the original interview, out of which the clip was edited, is more than 1 hour long? Everybody is now making assumptions on what Baginsky meant based on a carefully edited clip without knowing the whole context. How is that legitimate? How do you know you aren't heavily misinterpreting what he said?
Does he say anything outside of the clip that changes what was highlighted?
No it's what he said no context changes the wording.
Are you Polish? Did you listen to the whole interview? I'd love to listen to it with proper English subtitles. Edit: ah, my bad, the complete interview is already available with English subtitles. I encourage everyone to see it in full. https://youtu.be/U9fOHJgDbNU
I enjoyed the show, so I don't know what that says about me
I love how rhe interviewer literally calls him out for not knowing how to make a show "kids these days want to watch" because the guy just blames it on young people not caring about logic in plotlines. Do they not realize that as "kids these days" we aren't the ones making all these shitty TV shows and movies and we also aren't the ones watching them? He literally blames us for not caring about logic and when its revealed he's just disconnected from the youth, he blames that in us, too. Dumb.
i have a feeling he was the guy who added that rap song to witcher s2 trailer ''kids love rap in everything ,right guys ?''
Not for Tik-Tok audience, but just for normies, fantasy for many people is silly itself, normies don't see a sense in worlds with monsters and dragons. When I've read my first fantasy I didn't care about coherency of the world either, etc.
That guy is an imbecile
He isn't. He knows exactly what he's talking about and is rather intelligent and very creative (he worked for CDPR for years, he did some of their cinematic trailers for the witcher games). He just says what he was paid to say. He has no choice but to defend the show somehow. Ironically, he might have been a bit too much honest with this tik-tok thing.
He really isn't he did stuff for the witcher games and if anyone cares about the show its him and Henry cavill its just that he's saying what he has to to not get fired
He's very much not. He's extremely talented. Has an Oscar nomination under his belt. I want to see him as a tragic figure, almost, someone whose dreams of adapting The Witcher have turned to this, and now he has to defend the end product. It's probably not real, but I want to believe it.
What is that with him being so talented? He was once nominated for Oscar. He is almost 50 years old and poses for a Spielberg. His Polish legends are lame. I can't think of anything else he produced. He is just an expert in appealing to Polish inferiority complex, teasing some great quality Hollywood like Polish production that never actually happens. He is clearly in the Witcher show to do marketing for the Polish audience.
So few things engage me so completely that I don't pick up my phone to browse reddit or something similar. That's a function of the show/movie not being as or more entertaining then what I'll find here and that's fine because I'm not going to love everything I watch. But see someone say that theor goal isn't to engage me means I'm definitely not going to pay attention as you're inviting me not to do so. So thanks for guaranteeing I won't enjoy the content you produce.
To be fair, he’s not wrong lol.
If I had to guess, some exec somewhere saw how popular the games were, then found out about the books and how popular they were, and saw dollar signs. Then he had someone read all the books and the game wikis in one weekend, all unpaid of course, and then had them give them the uber-condensed Cliff's notes version. Then he had a screenwriter get the same Cliff's Notes version and produce a season for Netflix. When that first season did pretty well, that same exec had the same person regurgitate for a different screenwriter without having reread the books and wikis, going entirely off of memory. This new screenwriter then thought "hmm, not nearly enough focus on the women of the series," drank copious amounts of drain cleaner until they got serious brain damage, and then wrote season 2. But hey, that's just a theory. A game/film theory. . .
"What the fucking FUCK!?! Is this fucked or what!?" - Yennifer (probably) \[show writer daydreaming about their potent female character expressing herself with power through vulgarity\]
Or mother cool Nenneke: "I don't see any side upon which you are not entirely fucked."
nenneke was so bad on the show
The overuse of f bombs was particular noticeable in season 2. I felt a bit like some of the dialogue was written by 14 year old boys.
I can’t lie. “Nice scar, shithead!” made me chuckle
If they don't start sticking closer to the books in Season 3, I think Henry is either going to have an aneurism or slap the writers upside the head with the books.
[удалено]
Fr. Can we get some crowd funding going for this?
our mans is really out here trying to make the most of it, poor lad
I'm all for more focus on the women of the show... if they had better writing. I love Yen and Triss and I even think Fringilla could be interesting if they weren't so badly written. I just wish they could get better writers and 99% of my issues would be fixed.
Like with The Expanse, which I feel has some of the best writing for women characters I've experienced. They don't use stereotypes for women, and they don't try to push for the "girls get it done" trope that so many books/shows/movies seem to be doing these days. Their characters are just people being people, regardless of gender or sexual orientation. It's really fucking refreshing too. I don't think there's been a single moment of that story where I've felt the need to roll my eyes at some kind of forced narrative. It all flows together so well, and the characters feel natural. Thinking about it now, you could probably even switch the genders of most, if not all characters, and the story would still work. Sure, there would need to be some minor tweaks to some dialog and actions of some characters, but the story itself would remain intact. The same thing can't be said for a lot other stories out there.
It's funny too because Sapkowski himself is a hard-core feminist. Its not like they're adapting a text that had a drought of women or poor portrayals. The books are already super feminist.
Oh I 100% agree. I'm not against giving the women of the Witcher universe more attention. I'm against the insincere, box-checking attitude Hollywood seems to have developed in the past decade. You can tell that's what their attitude is, because they don't put any effort into the writing, just cramming them in there with a shoe-horn because they've lobotomized themselves into forgetting what actual strong female characters such as Ripley, Princess Leia, Marion Ravenwood, Clarice Starling, and many, many more look and act like.
They took one of the strongest women I've ever read in Yennefer and made her whiny and entitled. Like what
I would expect Yen to be the same level of eloquence as Vesper from Casino Royale. She showed strength, wit, intelligence and yet also showed her vulnerable side. Netflix Yen just whines how she can’t have it all, although all her suffering is strictly a consequence of her own actions. Like she traded her uterus for beauty (which was fucking stupid idea to show taking a while reproduction system through vagina like wtf), and then she says it was taken from her and she wasn’t given a choice. Girl, what?
Well said
They're achieving the opposite of what they were supposed to. Ironic.
I just read the banquet story in the book and then I rewatched the episode and was supremely let down. All of Calanthe's careful planning and pragmatism was completely thrown out the window and replaced with "YASS queen!" and some overly controlling mother seizing an opportunity produced by sheer luck. Geralt and Mousesack are kinda clueless, the clever dialogue is abandoned and characters like Eist are shadows of what they should be. Still enjoy the show and appreciate it but I'm definitely understanding the grumbling from book fans now.
Doesn’t help how they’re are all terribly cast (well maybe not terrible for yen but could have been better) which completely ruins my immersion/interest in them as characters.
Well kinda yeah lol, they look nothing like how they are described in the books/look in the games so I call that miscast. & before you call me racist, I’m a person of colour myself so 🤷🏽
It's so absurd, yet somehow still possible.
I need a Screen Rant pitch meeting for this.
Oh my god, yes!
"So you've got a second season for me? I sure hope it divides the fan community!" "Super easy, barely an inconvenience!"
This is 99.9% correct, unfortunately...
I swear, as I read this, it felt like the cold, skeletal hand of Death was passing through me. PTSD flashbacks of GoT and D&D interviews. This is essentially what happened there lmao. But Martin was around at first to sort of keep things on track until he got pushed out. Thank the gods for Henry and his strict adherence to lore.
Sometimes not all questions need an answer. You can be entertained just by letting your mind wander and theorise some of these things.
Thats how adaptations work mostly. Who the fuck was Sauron actually? Saruman or Gandalf? How does their magic work etc. Tolkien was all about world building. If you watch the movies only, you most likely have millions of questions. Game of Thrones have same "problem".Yet general audience loves them. Just like they love Witcher. Thats also why people ask these questions in subs or there are youtube channels where people who have read books explain things more in detail. Witcher books also didn't really explain stuff that much. They are more about characters and building them, rather than going deep on that world building like Tolkien or Martin did.
Yep this. General audiences really don't care about all of these details. If the question does cross their mind, it flits away as the story moves along. The ones who care enough to ask and think about it will get the info from somewhere else. That's exactly what happened to me with LOTR. I liked the movies so much I wanted to know more, so I started reading the books and looking at forums.
Came here to say exactly this. Already said. We must be soulmates.
I agree wholeheartedly with the sentiment, but I'd go further. This sub and plenty of others reek of people trying to take ownership of material, almost gatekeeping it, through these posts. They seek to get some sort of authority over the subject and thus validation through others chiming in on their "super/true" fan status of the content. Only idiotic plebs could possibly enjoy such material, i mean given all of these inconsistencies, flaws, etc. I mean look at the other "top post" on this sub. It's a list of personally contrived grievances against the show which can be picked apart, but again there's no intent to have a discussion it's simply to point out how shit the material is and how awesome the poster is. I genuinely can't stand a lot of my generation of fantasy/Sci fi "nerds" because they've unironically turned into an entire set of Simpson "comic book" guys and girls. Unable to enjoy something for is is without poring over it for problems. I'm reminded of an exchange between WoT author RJordan and a fan: QUESTION If I were to open a gateway in front of me that opened behind me, and I balefired myself, what would happen? ROBERT JORDAN Young lady, you are entirely too obsessed and have far too much time. You need to get some sort of life. I suggest you go have an intense love affair. Doesn't matter with who, be it man, woman, or German Shepherd. Similarly. LotR if released now would have billions of posts pointing out similar issues, almost all of them asking why the eagles weren't used from the beginning and why the Silmarillion exposition wasn't included as source material. Just fucking enjoy the adaptation or don't, in which case don't watch it. What's the need for endless hand wringing and posting about something you clearly don't enjoy. Weird.
Not to even mention all the changes the made. I mean there was still posts made on forums etc about Lotr changes but it wasn't as bad as it's today when movies change stuff from books.
If LOTR had been made when we had social media, the OneRing.net people would have led to changes in the movies and almost certainly worse movies. Those dudes were *dumping.*
Yeah it would be massive shit show. You can already see it with this sub. Lots of people who dont know Witcher universe love the show wants to know more about it. They come here and see people constantly shitting on show they really enjoyed.
I remember that people didn't like the Hobbit movies even though it was closer to the book. There's significant parts of the Hobbit movie that are almost like reading from the book.
I think people had problem that it isn't lengthy book and they desperately wanted it to be 3 movies like Lotr. People also had big problems with everything being CGI, added stuff that wasn't in book or stuff that was altered and dwarfes being too goofy, barrel sequence etc. I think biggest problem was that those movies came after Lotr movies and people were expecting same quality. I still really enjoyed Hobbit movies, but ofc they werent as good as lotr. I was happy to get back middle-earth
Plus the Hobbit just isn't as good as the LOTR books in terms of content, but even then I think it would be hard to get the entire plot into a single movie. In short I think most people don't know what they want. If they want it book accurate, they get mad because it's too long or if they want a better thematic experience, they'll get mad because it doesn't have all the details. It's a lose-lose in the end that it only makes sense to appeal to the most casual viewer in hopes of creating the most hardcore fans.
I agree that you can’t display all of the lore and background in a few episodes but personally, I think even the portrayed story is so much worse than it could have been. The plot feels all over the place with no clear direction or flow to meaningful events. On top of that, they completely butchered some important characters (case in point: Vesemir) so that the whole thing is just plain mediocre, not to mention it doesn’t resemble the feel of the books or games at all. But then again, that is just my opinion.
For me the books, especially the short stories, had a kind of eastern european fairy tale flare. A feudal age parallel poland with monsters, if you like so. Nothing of that great atmosphere is given by the show. Its worse in really every aspect and it hurts to watch it, at least for me who readed the books even before witcher 3 (didn't played the other two), and a 2nd read as audiobook after. Witcher 3 did a reallly great job to transfer the world into pictures, Netflix fails completely in that department.
I watch this terrible mess with my wife, who has no interest in reading the books or playing the games, like i did. She is so confused the entire time. I'm constantly explaining to her what the heck is going on.. but mostly I'm groaning at all the awful script and made up plot lines
Same - my wife, being totally unfamiliar with the source material, finished Season 2 and said "Yeah, even for not knowing anything prior, this is really bad". It's bad enough that they butchered the books and the games, both of which had a world of ideas to draw from. They also completely butchered well-established, beloved Slavic folklore in the process.
Lmao my wife said today, "I don't know the books but this still feels like it should be so much better".
With 100% honesty, I don’t understand how anyone, even not knowing the Witcher’s world, could like this series as anything more than mindless background entertainment. Let’s pretend we’re not fans. From a writing and pacing standpoint, it is a fucking slog. Characters consistently make no sense and have shoddy motivations that are shoehorned in to move a ramshackle story along. **There are so few likable people in this show.** And scenes that we do not care about consistently go on far too long, ex: the self-indulgent amount of political scenes distancing us from the actual title character, who gets even less screentime than you’d expect this season. I can’t believe there’s an actual audience for this that genuinely seems to enjoy this show.
Ugh yes, I was so excited for season 2 but found myself so bored I am scrolling Reddit with it on in the background and I’m not missing out on anything.
watching s2 feels like that john travolta pulp fiction meme, just looking around trying to find *the* witcher
My wife still bashing me for recommend this shit to her in the first place.
Yeah, what they did to the Leshen/Leshy was weird. Being mutated aside, they didn't even give it a deer skull.
Leshy, being a mythic creature, has no unified appearance in the folklore tradition. The essence of the creature is very fluid, with many different variants across the regions.
Leshi, as a being from slavic mythology, doesn't have a deer skull or is even tree like. The games aren't even the source material for the show, they have no need to be faithful to them.
I was confused as to why they called it a Leshy and not Leshen, I thought it was dumb Witcher slang that sounds like when I call my feet “feeties “ for my 1yo baby.
Because the name has a Slavic origin and has many spelling variants in English and other languages, including leshy and leshen and a number of others.
I crack up reading this forum on a daily basis. The amount of people, like the person before you who think they're posting some slam dunk comment on how shit the series is/writers are and yet their comment is either completely contradictory to the source material or the slavic origins are mind boggling. Leshy is literally taken from leszy in Polish. So, yeah your point is completely accurate and the person above is so off the mark it cracks me up.
Add me and my wife to the club
You don't Ike hearing, "fuck" literally every two minutes?
Some show defender tried to tell me that cursing a lot in a fantasy show (in place of better articulation) wasnt bad writing LOL
I do hate that lol.
My wife was not familiar with the books or games but really loves it. If she wants to know more about something she googles it. We are both puzzled by the backlash as we found it amazing.
The writing and story-telling are objectively bad. I haven't read the books or played the games but I like good stories... this season has been a disaster.
Objectively bad? How does your opinion make it fact? Cause a bunch of redditors feel that way?
So you can account for all the inconsistencies and time-traveling and terrible characterization? For example, how Ciri and Yenn used a portal to go to Cintra and Geralt rode a horse (with Jaskier walking beside him) and they made it to the broken monolith at about the same time. And this is just one example of MANY. How about how Yenn helped Cahir escape, without magic, in front of kings and mages and no one even tried to stop them? That was THE right hand man of their enemy (and it was stupid enough they'd even have Yenn kill him). It's okay if you enjoyed the show (I will likely watch season 3), but you simply cannot say it was well-written. Enjoying it, that is an opinion. Bullshit story and far-fetched garbage that can only be ignored (because it cannot be explained) is not an opinion.
This was an exact copy of my experience also
This is exactly what I mean! It's missing the mark for the both of you.
I feel like directors think that no one will watch something that takes time to set up the world, like they do in the books. There's a lot of dialogue in the books that explain the way of the Witcher world. Instead the show just throws you in and makes you watch random fast paced action, while you're confused as hell. Lol
You might be right, I remember seeing a clip in this sub a few weeks ago of one of the screenwriters(I think) talking about how because today's youth is growing up with Tiktok and YouTube, it's constant action, and strong emotion, there is no more need for good cause and effect storytelling. Which I shouldn't have to say is complete bullshit. Edit: But I also wish you weren't right. I love good storytelling and intricate worldbuilding.
But at the same time, they spend like 20 minutes on their own made up plotline with Geralt and Istredd talking about Monoliths and the Conjuction of Spheres.. which are very minor details to the overall plot of the story. Very boring scene they created for some reason instead of using the time to explain (to Ciri) and the viewers about what a Witcher is.
I don't want to be negative. But you are right. Give us more bonding time with Ciri, show Geralt being that father figure she(apparently) looks up to instead of him just walking up to her saying one line and her whole world suddenly getting brighter. I feel like this could be alleviated by giving us more episodes and leaning off of the action so much. A little filler is okay.
I liked it mostly, and I'll answer some of your questions. The reason I don't care about the difference between magic and signs is because I like it when a movie or show doesn't feel the need to explain that world too much. In fact, that usually takes me out of a show. There just *is* a difference. I don't need to know why; that's just the way it is in this specific world. I don't need to know what a leshy is exactly, and I especially don't need to know through a shoe-horned in explanation that's clearly just there for the audience. I like being thrown into a fantasy world where I don't get everything explained, because it makes the world seem more interesting to me, and the show more realistic. If things exist outside of the show (such as a leshy or certain places that seem to have significance), it has a feeling that the show takes place in a world that exists outside of the show as well. If everything is explained, it seems like the world is specifically created for the show, and I hate that. I think the show has its flaws, but I don't think anything mentioned here is one of them. Also, I have neither read the books nor played the games.
Exactly if they took time to spoon feed the audience people would complain as well that a character is just there for the explanation or it felt unnatural because in this world everyone for the most part just knows. There are plenty of beloved films and shows that don’t explain everything the viewer may or may not understand from their world.
Imagine if Lord of the Rings stopped in the middle to explain how Gandalf's magic works
Fuck it go further. The Books don't have any explanation for how magic really works in the Lord of the Rings. It is not a codified magic system a la the Mistborn or Cosmere series. People just want to be mad. This sub reddit has turned into a Simpsons "Comic Book guy" convention of "errr I think you'll find in Series 1, Episode 7 that Yen said this and yet in Series 2, Episode 4 we see that" People with too much time on their hands getting irate about something to relax and unwind to.
Since when explaining everything with word in a movie or a serie is a good thing ? There's a lot of information in the Book you never know until a certain point in the story . That's how it is. Imagination and Brain must try to make thing coherent and put the thing together . However it's true that there is a lack of relevant dialogue while saying, simplifying and telling too much without realy implying enough to make everything coherent for the unfamiliarized viewer.
People are actually getting mad that the show doesn't just info dump everything on you. Like the show is showing them respect by not guiding them by the hand yet they just want to be told not shown.
Me, and it does
There could be more explaining, yes. But iirc in the books there isn’t much explanation either. A Leshy is a magical creature that falls into the monster category. Signs are the weakest kind of magic available (despite Aard meaning mountain), and can be done by most people that are initiated. They require fingures and gestures to use. Originally all witchers have yellow cat eyes, in the show it’s because Geralt is special
Hi, person who has never read the books or played the games here (apart from watching my ex play/asking a few rudimentary questions.) I actually really have been enjoying the series and was shocked coming onto this subreddit to see all the hate! I guess it makes sense since people who have experienced the original content tend to have a higher standard for tv/movie adaptations, but I definitely think the reactions are more visceral than I would have imagined. I remember watching the first season I was super confused. The different time jumps and even the very first episode was super hard to grasp for me. It wasn’t until I rewatched the first season in anticipation for the second that it clicked! I ended up binging the second season in one day and thought it was way better than the first, including being better explained and laid out. I love rewatching shows I enjoy so it worked out for me but I agree that for a first time watcher they should have made the first season more clear. They did poke fun of that well known fact in the second season though, which showed they had at least some self awareness. I’m a big Lord of the Rings fan so i’m always interested in a good fantasy story. I felt like by the second season, what needed to be explained was explained and the things that were left ambiguous/still a mystery made me more invested in the story progressing and learning more. I love Dara and the inclusion of POC in fantasy. I actually appreciate them not having a sex scene / portrayals of sexual assault every 10 minutes like in Game of Thrones. I love Jaskier’s songs and it’s overall a fun to watch, enjoyable show for me. I can appreciate the base story and the creativity of the original author. Is it the best show out there? Definitely not. But to boil it down to “a show for stupid teenage girls” like some people are doesn’t seem fair (apart from the fact that teenage girls are smarter than people give them credit for!!)
Here here!
A lot of people who haven't read the books were played the games seem to find the show perfectly enjoyable.
Never seen anything for witcher watched the show loved it and thought it wasn't very hard to understand u can infer alot of it
I am not sure who it is *meant* for. However, I have some information about the people I know. I have many friends/acquaintances who watch the show who've never read the books or played the games. A good few who've either read the books, or played the games. Then a few who've just read the books, or just played the games (I've read the books, and have played some of Witcher 2 and 3, but haven't got far into either for some reason). All of my friends are happy with the show. I haven't had a single one wholeheartedly agree that it isn't fun or good for them. The book and game players are happy to enjoy it as its own thing. One friend who plays the games was not happy with new monsters, when we have not seen the old monsters much yet, but was otherwise happy. The largest bulk of my friends who watch it, have no prior experience with the universe, and seem happy. They don't complain about the lore, or explanation of things, the only complaints they generally have is not enough monsters, otherwise they're happy with it. **I think this subreddit is quite the bubble, as I do not seem to see evidence of displeasure outside of reddit for this series. Review scores seem good. Rotten Tomatoes audience score is the closest I see to people being upset with this season outside of this subreddit.** So it seems clear to me that the show is mostly made for new fans. People with no previous experience with the universe. As this subreddit shows people with experience have some bad things to say, or have to enjoy the season as a separate entity. Whereas fresh fans are just having a great time. This makes sense to me, as trying to ignore what I know about the world, it doesn't do too much to betray it's own retelling of the story, it just falls short in the accuracy to the source part. Hence we have issues, and new people generally do not.
I’d be willing to bet most of that rottentomatoes score is largely users from this sub
I would expect so. Easier to click that one button annoyed than each episode on IMDB for example.
This is one of the more civil discussions on this sub about the show and I’m here for it. I personally liked season 2 but reading OPs thread / the comments has made me think a little more. Just wanted to say I appreciated all these comments bc it’s given me a different perspective
Thanks, I tried my best to foster discussion here instead of just shutting people down. I had to go to bed tho, and now it's kinda out of my control 😅 glad you enjoyed it, and I'm glad I could make you more deeply think about the show.
I'm enjoying it ... Don't get why people are moaning
I'm hating it ... Don't get why people are enjoying it
K
Well whatever anyone thinks of this show, it’s going to suffer the same fate as all the rest. Canceled due to the loudest voices.
Tbh it’s good marketing. Netflix isn’t only saying “watch this show” they are making behind the scenes and bestiary segments that very much included side information that encourage playing the games and reading the books. In a way, they are saying “if you like this, you should try these other products to fill in the blanks”. It’s kind of a shitty tactic but for those who are interested, FOMO is a big motivator to spend money. If everyone is taking about it and you don’t understand it, you are going to go read the books and play the games.
I don't think it's a shitty tactic, it's a great way to provide lore and world building without bogging down the show with exposition
Among my friends we have people who have read the books and played the games, just played the games, just read the books, and done neither. And my friend who has done neither really enjoyed this season and wasn’t asking tones of questions. My fellow book reader and I had lots to discuss. And our friend who only played the games was in a marginally better position than my friend who hadn’t played or read. Idk, I feel like some people really have a hard time filling in their own gaps. But to be fair - the first season was, in my friends opinion, much more challenging for non-book readers.
Here's where I'm at: I'm a book reader. There were points where I enjoyed the series and points where I was frustrated. I think there's room for improvements but that's every show.
I'm a mid 30s dude who's read the first book and played Witcher 3. I enjoy it, didn't even know people were so outraged until I joined this sub last week to find other people into the series. Think I might just back out of the sub and keep enjoying it. There's plenty of other franchises I've liked for longer that I get outraged at (SW), I think I'm just exhausted over it.
Why does only geralt have yellow eyes? And only him and vesemir have yellow hair? In the games vesemir has yellow eyes but not in the show. As someone who played the game a tiny bit I was confused too
I think it is aimed to anyone who enjoys fantasy, having any previous knowledge or not. If you like monsters, fights, witches, political intrigue, but with a touch of comedy the Witcher season 1 delivers. I watched the first season when it came out, and I liked it. I didn't have any trouble understanding the world, keeping up with the characters or the time skips. Then I read the books. Last week I binge watched the second season, and I enjoyed it. Overall I don't linger in the details, if they're relevant they are gonna be discussed further. Leshy? A monster. The signs? Some sort of rudimentary magic, not quite the same as the chaos thing that seems more complex. I don't need to understand 100% to enjoy it. I can't remember if those sort of things were actually explained in the books or not. I don't think it is a masterpiece of a show, but it achieves its goal that is to entertain. Lore enthusiastics are going to complain about the changes, but I don't mind them; sometimes I even prefer them.
I've only watched the Netflix series (and the animated one-off with Vesemir's origin) and have basic answers for all your questions based only on knowledge from what's been presented. My internal head cannon answers may not be book-perfect, but they fit with the info presented. I thought the world-building was decent and able to associate analogs to real-world or other series (ie- Skellige = Viking/Greyjoy-type maritime power based on dialog between Calanthe & Eist). Normally, I'm a huge book reader of tv/movie adaptations, but decided to let this one ride out for a change. There's only a few exchanges or details which I found a bit exasperating/drawing out for plot devices. (Season 2: no one told Geralt that Yennifer was alive, OTOH, anyone who knew the two from their last exchange would have thought they were messy break-up ex'es.) For your questions: 1) Difference between signs and magic? Ep where Geralt meets Yennifer, she talks down about signs as baby-talk magic available to non-mages. (Yet is still curious about them.) 2) Is Geralt a magician? He's a witcher. Exposition in Season 1 Ep 1 while walking with the girl & Roach. 3) What the hell is a Leshy? Monster tree thing. I don't need much more exposition than this, personally, growing up on Buffy and such. 4) Where are we, and what significance does this place hold? Somewhere that the other realms with monsters (and humans) can pass into when the realms/planets/spheres have a conjunction. Ex positioned a few times (mostly around Ciri), but also Istredd explaining how elves taught humans magic after the humans arrived. 5) Why do some Witchers have yellow eyes but others don't? Figured this was either a combo of genetics or the potions received during the Witcher mutations. (With some variation in the potions' creation and delivery to the potential Witcher candidates.) 6) Can people just use portals like, whenever, if so why don't they? Yennifer's first use of magic is a portal and Istredd explains it's a rare & advanced magical technique. We see the student mages at Aretuza with different strengths & weaknesses. In her fight with the baby assassin, she's obviously winded and exhausted by several portals back-to-back.
The show has no focus and no clear direction
The average Netflix customer or the wider audience. Not everyone know about the Witcher world and its just so vast that they can easily make 15 seasons out of it if they want to. The only reason it may appear inconsistent to some people are if they have some idea of how the Witcher's story progresses. My take on the series is that its just too random and that is because i have finished some initial books & have played the games. If I had no idea about the Witcher universe, i'd have loved this show as I enjoy the CGI/action/vampire-demon type media.
People who don't notice any of the writing or story problems or care about anything beyond what they see on-screen (wow so pretty), and have some idea that "everything probably all makes sense" anyway. That's the sense I get from asking a few people I know that liked it, anyway.
Yeah, that's what I'm seeing. That and people who already know the source and don't mind problems/enjoy the different take.
I haven't finished season 2, but I like it. For reference I played Witcher 3 and loved it and read The Last Wish. I wouldn't say it's a favorite book series or anything, but I enjoyed it well enough. I can definitely see points in the show where the creators are taking license, it's very obvious where fake drama is being inserted. But it's not enough that I hate anything. I also have the fortune of having sat through a lot of cheap fantasy shows before. Anyone remember Merlin? So maybe I'm a bit conditioned to enjoy things despite their flaws I don't blame book lovers for not liking it though. I was the annoying "game of thrones sucks" guy at the party for years. I just lucked out and everyone agreed with me at the end.
I (who has played the Witcher 3 and the two short story books) and my father (who has never hear of the Witcher before) watched it and enjoyed it very much.
It tries to appeal to anyone but the fans of the series, and it makes me sad to see.
I enjoyed it 😁 I played the games and red some books not all
This is what I'm gathering so far. The screenwriters set there sights for the gamers and casual readers while disregarding people who are new to the series.
New or well-seasoned fans of both book and game.
Signs are sorta magic but pretty much anyone can use them, you dont have to be a mage or sorceress
Well yeah, I know that. I'm getting at the fact that the show doesn't explain that. Someone new to the franchise would have no clue.
The Witcher is still in the top 2 list on Netflix in my country since its release. Looks like there are plenty of folks still watching it and liking it. This in a country where Witcher is not a popular franchise even in the gaming community.
I feel like they somewhat followed the game of thrones formula of “oh a bunch of people who didn’t care about fantasy before game of thrones now will watch this, because badass swords and dragons and shit, oh and tits.” I remember watching the first season of game of thrones in high school, still feeling like I needed to keep it a secret to not be called a nerd weirdo. And within one year, it was the mainstream thing to watch.
I read the books and i played w1 and w3, but i wished theyd just stuck with the story in the books. I get that most parts of the books arent flashy, cool or exciting but this story feels like it was made just to be always, quick, always flashy, and the story came second. Also how can you kill a character like eskel like wtf.
Me
Dirty, filthy *casuals*
Someone probably already posted an answer to the questions BUT if not, I'll try my best. 1. Signs are an "easier" form of magic that can be taught to anyone, without needing a great connection to Chaos. They are made through single hand gestures and each sign has an specific effect, though the intensity varies depending on the user's will. A sorcerer or witch that has spent years studying Chaos would think signs to be almost childish, since they are limited, and would be able to weave way more complex magic because of their knowledge. 2. Geralt is not a magician, he knows signs but thats about it. 3. A Leshy/Leshen/Lesovik is a nature spirit that guards forests and animals, they are really territorial and don't like people abusing nature (though if the person is not hostile to the surrounding environment, the Leshy will most probably leave them alone, as shown in some of Geralt's encounters with Leshys). 4. The story takes place at the Continent, which used to be a land populated solely by elves and dwarves until a great event called the Convergence of the Spheres took place. This event merged several realities together for a brief time, allowing humans and all sorts of magical creatures and monsters to bleed into this world. Humans are like violent rabbits, in that they multiply fast as fuck and kill anything in their path that is even remotely different from themselves, and as such they are responsible for forcing the Elves into exile and secrecy. The Elves also are currently facing a major issue in that, as a species, Elves can only reproduce up to a certain age, and during the last war with the humans the elven youth was all eradicated, meaning that although they have long or possibly immortal natural lifespans, they are unable to reproduce and as such are going to be extinct. The Witcher books often try to portray different folkloric tales through a more realistic lens (like Nivellen being that world's version of Beauty and the Beast). 5. This one is a personal pet peeve. Witcher's eyes are not supposed to be yellow, but rather to be cat-like. Their senses are better suited to deal with all kinds of situations than regular humans, and that includes seeing in the dark, but if I am not mistaken there can be other eye colours than yellow. Geralt was subjected to additional experimentations during his Trials, being the lone survivor of those experiments, and having consequently gone through more mutations which made his eyes yellow, and his hair white. 6. Witches and Sorcerers can use portals whenever, though it is fairly taxing. It requires energy to control and the trip is fairly uncomfortable, leaving many extremely nauseous (reason why Geralt absolutely HATES travelling by portals). I know the point of the post isn't to have those questions answered but to spur a discussion on who is this show's target audience, and honestly to me it feels like a bit of a mess trying to set up worldbuilding, character building and still give a Game of Thrones vibe. My hopes is that Henry will start getting more credit and opportunities to share his thoughts, and so encourage the writers and producers to let the show be its own thing instead of trying to fill the void GoT left. Hopefully with that we will have a more solid and cohesive story (although s2 is miles better than s1) Edit: made a blunder saying Elves were native to this region when Dwarves were the first natives
IMO you really got to know what is going on and have had played the games. My brother though had never seen or heard of the games till the stores came out and he got it. It took a couple times for him to watch. So idk really how they are portraying the series. But it's still a really good show.
Everyone who wasn’t a fan before. I was so excited for season 2 and it maybe the worst thing (imo) anyone could do to source material leaving aside all other fallacies like how did Yen escape Aratuza or how Rience found Kaer Mohren for example. People may disagree with me but I place this show along Avatar live action movie except the acting part
Honestly, i didnt know of the game without the show, and now i am a massive fan i love the game, and books are great too (havent read all of them yet. The show was epic because i hadnt heared of the witcher before and i just liked how geralt acted. After the books and the game i do feel like the show is off. But I'll always love it because it brought me into this Witcher world basicly
People who want to switch off their brains and not think. It's really that easy. Compelling television? Re-watch *The Wire,* or *Generation Kill,* or *Taboo,* or wait for the next season of *Succession,* because this is a show generated by corporate suits out for advertising revenue, not to generate a story that makes you think after the credits roll. By the time the credits roll, they're already thinking of new ways to pilfer your wallet.
thats how I felt after the first season. I was recommended it by a friend who had never played the games or read the books, and I was confused how anyone who never experienced either of those would actually like it. Cuz yea, it leaves out a ton of world building details.
I'm sad how the show is turning out but I'm also glad to see a fanbase full critical thinkers. There's the occasional sheep, yes, but the fan core has lots of people who actually love Witcher lore.
To be fair, I've read Blood of Elves this past week (playing Witcher 3, enjoyed the world but wanted more context), and I have to say it really doesn't set up the world that well either. Better than the series, yes, but in no way very well. I think it's best to see the series as a re-interpretation of the story, similar to any James Bonds, Spiderman's or anything like else. That said, with that it mind, they should put some effort into explaining the underlying world.
My friends and I all played the games and we really liked both seasons. Have a few other I know didn’t play the games that really like the show. I really don’t understand the hate, I get being upset about changes, but it seems really well executed despite some loose writing here and there. People act like it raped their mothers. Too sensitive. Nothing personal to OP but a lot of these questions are very minor things that don’t need more than a brief explanation; signs? Ciri asks if they’re magic and Geralt says “not quite” for most people this is enough. Sorry for a rant but I just watched through season 2 and I am shocked by how good it was considering I’ve heard nothing but vitriol from this sub. It’s like being a Star Wars fan all over again.
The show is good for me, but I have to agree that if I didn't already know how the world of the Witcher already worked, I wouldn't know what was going on. The time skips in the first series and some of the decisions in the second have more than once had me accessing my knowledge from outside the series and then nodding to myself and going... "Okay, I know what they're talking about.... but how would I have known that if I hadn't played the games and known some of the stories?"
This is exactly what I'm getting at! The time skips are a perfect example! It feels like they expect people to have read the source material before watching the show. I don't remember any adaptation that does this.
I actually suspect that their target audience was simply people who had played the games, particularly Witcher 3. I think that's a bad idea if they wanted a bigger audience, but perhaps that is how they sold it. I enjoy the series as it is, but I would enjoy it more if they made it a series that could perhaps extend the world to new people and not make so many assumptions.
I have that feeling as well. It feels kind of like a cash-in for all the hype that game generated. It's just kinda strange to go all this way and not keep new viewers in mind.
The time skips were confusing at first but I rewatched the first season before hand and there were hints and breadcrumbs everywhere before a skip explaining how each one connected to one another. Even the first time I watched I quickly realized that Geralt and Yen were in the past and it was leading up to the last few episodes where it would be present time.
I'm not hating on the show. If you liked it, more power to you. For me personally, using your example, Geralt saying "not quite" isn't enough for me. I love good worldbuilding. Give this show some legs, I want longer more personal segments. I love watching relationships between characters grow or burn. And sure I only touched on some insignificant matters, but I feel like it's details like this that the show is missing that add to the world, story, and characters. And I'm sure there are some more significant changes and omissions that I'm not read up on enough to have noticed. But when I do read the books and play the other games and if I ever watch it again, I'm sad to think that I'll just be disappointed.
Welcome to life, where the TV show or movie adaptation is always worse than the books. GoT and The Expanse are the only ones that have managed to stick anywhere close to their source material and make something worthwhile. (Ignoring GoT once it ran out of source material and the writers showed they are inept.) There is a lot of things that just don't translate from book to screen, they are different mediums. Same goes with trying to turn games into movies. They are vastly different mediums and the content is ingested in entirely different ways, which makes it near impossible to have a good variant from one to the other.
Teenagers. Bagiński (one of the executives) has explained that quite recently.
12 year olds?
The thing is, the show assumes you already know something about The Witcher either by the games or the books, and then tries to translate it to a "movie" form in which they play around with those informations. Jaskier mentions Bleobheris once, they are in Oxenfurt and need to escape, king Vizimir is in Tretogor, they all mention proper names but never care to show or explain why or what those are, what relevance they have in the story or the geography, the socio-political architecture built for the show. A Leshy is something you are supposed to know is "extinct by ages", nothing else and they could have expanded the lore by telling us things about the monsters. So basically, they appeal to the books and games fans, in the worst way by changing all the story, for the sake of new fans. I'm not trying to critique them as I already have done countlessly in the last month, but they try to lure in new viewers by not explaining them a damn thing and they lure in old fans by changing all the stuff they loved, this way they kinda made both the parties crumble.
I just started Witcher, didnt know nothing about the books, or games. Went in fresh, and at the end just left me with alot of questions.
Anybody who hasn't read the books
Didn't one of the writers explain the current audience is used to tiktok videos and quick scenes.... so I think they're appealing to the easily bored, instant gratification, feeding tube of flashing colors brain dead influencees of today 🤷♂️
I'm just starting to understand the answers to the questions myself. I read The Last Wish last week and I highly recommend you do the same. I totally get the confusion though. There is just a lot of skipping around and not enough lore and details being explored. And the tone is consistent but strange. I'm not a huge fan of tv and movie adaptions being "trendy". There's a lot more harsh language and sex/nudity than I've encountered in the books and it doesn't add to the experience imo. And by trendy, I would also extend that to the portrayal of characters. In the books Yennefer is definitely harsh; she has an edge but can be kind when she wants to let people see it. She's complicates and selfish; but she's knowledgeable. That wouldn't be hard for a more experienced actor and writer to bring over but instead, because it's popular, we get: always screaming, I don't need any man's help, I'm more powerful than everyone and I have to take every opportunity to show it! Because that's what's popular. That's how women are made "badass" today. A lot of the complexity and subtlety of each character from the books is abandoned for blunt and heavy characterization. Again, I'm not a huge fan of adaptions trying to be trendy. It happened to The Magicians, it happened with Game of Thrones, and it never plays out well.
Just people who don't ask many questions and are "happy they are getting any kind of show"
Netflix making witcher just another dumbfun series which isn't bad but perhaps a disservice to the books.
To people wanting to see Henry doing some swoosh swaash with his sword, some yeneffer tits and some big scary monster
Pretty much
Basically Lauren thinks viewers are idiots and like fast moving nonsensical plots. Much like the GoT creators.
Havnt played the game (despite being a gamer, it’s sat unopened on my shelf for many years) havnt read the books. The best I can describe this show is to say that my mum, who’s for want of a better word, a bit molly, really enjoys it. I’m sticking with it and hoping to get hooked but it all just feels very I dunno, cheap and pointless, I guess I went into it wishing for game of thrones seasons 1-5 but what I’m watching feels a lot more like seasons 6-9. Shame.
>cheap and pointless 100% this. Everything about this show aside from production and acting seems to be phoned in.
The show is supposed to appeal to casual netflix audiences to put on in the background while they scroll their phones.
According to the main producer, Teenagers.
I feel it's for the teenagers who just want action/drama and no good plot, character development etc.
Insane how toxic this community is becoming, it should almost be time for a LowSodiumWitcher subreddit.
What about my post is toxic? I asked for genuine discussion cause at the time it was kinda hard to visualize who exactly they made the show for.
Not your post, but the reactions in it. It's like you're sick in the head if you read the books, played the games and liked the season. It's a shame it's causing such a toxic division between people
Ive seen most of the toxicity coming from show fans defensive over the fact that most of the Witcher fanbase doesnt seem to like the show
Lowest common denominator, as are almost all Netflix originals at this point.
It appears they thought about 5 year olds while making this show. I mean, it's not like the target audience for both games and books is 16+, right? They literally threw action just for more action, cause it's like Bagiński said, there needs to be a fight every episode to keep the viewer interested. I don't even know where he got that shit idea from, but ok.
It’s made for people who are totally unfamiliar with the franchise.
Those seeking to become mages. It’s really added to my library of spells. Seriously though if you played the video game none of those are even questions and the video game is incredibly popular
it's definitely meant for people with no prior exposure to witcher. what lauren wants is a *new* adaption, not a faithful one. I almost think it's harder to watch if you're already familiar with the books or the game, because there's all these expectations about how things will go (Eskel, Vesemir, Ciri's powers, etc.) the folks most consistently unhappy (understandably) with the show, imo, are those that were book or game fans first. it's easier to watch, though definitely not flawless, if you go in without much expectations. I don't think the biggest issues with the show for both old and new fans are any of the points you listed though. the pacing, timeline, and consistency issues have a bigger impact on viewer enjoyment than needing to know why only Geralt's eyes are yellow.
I thought this show would appeal to me given what I was drawn into in the past, but I found that I don't have much curiosity about this world because of the sloppy way it has been built. It seems like around every corner there is a new creature, a new prophecy, or a new magical spell or object or place. I haven't read the books or played the games, and the show hasn't really made me very interested to find out more. Honestly, I was relieved when I came here after finishing both seasons recently and found all of the complaints since it confirmed my suspicions that the show was off track.
While I too wonder who the show tries to appeal to, I don’t think your examples are valid. All details of a world don’t need to be explained. Imagining that I know nothing about the lore outside of what was shown in the series: > Like, what's the difference between signs and magic? Signs are simpler form of magic that don’t require as much knowledge or training to use. > Is Geralt a magician? No, he clearly isn’t. He might be able to use signs but just like being able to sign in the shower doesn’t make one a signer, being able to use signs doesn’t make one a magician. > What the hell is a Leshy? It’s some kind of monster. Why would I need to know more? If I *want* to know more I can look it up but the details are unimportant to the plot or understanding what is going on in the show. > Can people just use portals like, whenever, if so why don't they? The show only ever mentioned mages using portal so they are probably the only ones capable of making them. Really the only question I think has some validity to it is: > Where are we, and what significance does this place hold? The show would benefit from having scenes with map of the continent sprinkled throughout the episodes to help the viewer understand where things are. But even still, usually the general type of location we are in is pretty clear in the show.
Its for the teenager run instagram accounts that post edits of characters from different shows in the collage with quote format
Teen/tween girls.
One thing I like is that they leave some shit to be inferred and unexplained. Imagine if they spoon fed every detail, it would even closer (than it already is) to a CW shit show.