Henry Cavill lifted this average show on his shoulders when he killed that first monster in the first shot of the first episode, and proceeded to carry it all the way to the finish line like an absolute boss. This show's survival in the long run basically depends on him.
@Regarded i know it was two years ago but I do agree...he wasn't that good as Geralt tbh...but imo he was still better than most other elements of the show and I definitely wouldn't mind him as Geralt if the show itself was better
“Can’t make up my mind about whether I like this guy, or absolutely hate him” In all fairness, this is pretty close to how the other characters in the book perceive Dandelion
For all those who are unfamiliar with the lore, without giving out any spoilers, I'll just say: wait and see... If the showrunners ever delve deep into his character, which they should, you'll find out why he's so loud, self important and obnoxious most of the times... There is perfectly good reason for that 😉 On a side note, "music" they've written and chose to go alongside him, is annoying and terrible... He's a "medieval" minstrel with a lute, not a one man band who'se music sounds like it came from a 2022 studio. I mean, it did, but, you get the point...
I think they try to hard with him. In the games he's almost dead on to how he acts in the book. Like he's cocky, witty, charismatic, definitely not a fighter, but can be an ass. Otherwise is a great friend to Geralt. In the show he tries too hard to make a joke like every 5 seconds. Like where's that caring and serious side that comes out sometimes.
@Mark Kringle God, this entire conversation is so disturbingly influenced by Americanism, it's terrible. This entire conversation is an absolute non-starter from a European perspective. But what do you expect from a nation that has no history, nor a working educational system, that would mitigate that fact. I'm saying a) The "races" as in men and elves (which is actually more akin to species) very seldomly intermarried, as it was heavily societally shunned. B) human "races" ('black' and 'white' ) didn't get to intermarry, as there were no opportunities to. In a feudal, pre-technology, pre-medicine, low-trust-society world, in which economic welfare is more or less the same everywhere and travel is extraordinaryly dangerous, people had no incentive whatsoever to migrate. Therefore there would be no intermarriage even if there were people who wouldn't shun strangers. C) In such a pre-technology pre-medicine world, the selection pressures would have been so high, that over the couple thousand years since the conjuction of the spheres any blacks in Kovir and any Gingers in Zericania would have died out by the time of Geralt. And that is entirely disregarding the fact, that the populations would have genetically homogenized in that timeframe. And most importantly: d) The witcher books were written decades ago, in a time before anyone outside of America knew what 'diversity' is, by a polish author, living in a country that was and is to this day almost exclusively ethnically polish (as in "white" for any stupid Americans) surrounded by other European countries that were almost exclusively ethnically European (as in "white") and said author set the books in a world inspired by his historical homeland, as in the medieval Europe which was for all practical purposes mono'racially' European (again for any ridiculously poorly educated Americans, Europe is the continent where 'white' people are the natives, and used to be the only population) The thought that there even could be anyone but "white" people in the northern kingdoms, except for rare exceptions, didn't even cross the authors mind. As to Geralt, he is an exception, as he travels through the entire world in search of work, isn't bound to a single society and therefore the rules of wider society don't apply to him.
I feel that the opening of Game of Thrones with the map, and how it changed across seasons, did alot more world building than people give it credit for.
Having sense of a place and time is very important. I remember when I read Metro 2033-35 series having map inside the book helped immensely. So when I read Witcher books years ago, I had a massive map of the world in my phone to check where characters are and where they are going.
The short stories are actually pretty good and are solid source material for a show. Problem is Netflix decided to ignore most of it and make 75% of the show Yennefer fan fiction, and the few short stories they used were abridged. And of course Henry gets the character of Geralt, he's a huge fan of the books and the games.
i dont think there is a single person who would be a better cast than henry. he is just the perfect witcher. from the body to the voice plus he is a witcher fanboy
He did what he could with what he was given. Too young, too bulky and handsome but with butt nose, but damn, he showed he can portray Geralt. Mad respect for the guy nad trying to correct the course of the show. Too bad modern screen writing won.
Henry Cavill is great as Geralt and when he's, you know, doing Witcher stuff. The problem is thats like 5% of the show while the rest is Yenifer and and bunch of "diverse" characters that look extremely out of place. I don't know why Netflix is determined to ruin every great piece of writing they can.
whats wrong with "diverse" charcters? the Witcher is a fantasy, if elves and a "diversity" of monsters can exist in this world I cant see why one would complain that a diverse array of human could exist also
@Anedime I agree to a certain point that Conjuction of spheres made the world diverse but not with people but with monsters and other races like dwarfs, elves, higher vampires. And if you are familiar with the lore you know that there are diverse characters in Witcher just not in Norther realms but in Skellige or Offier or Zerrikania. Just like Critical drinker pointed out they could do similiar thing to Game of Thrones where Dothrakki and Unsullied had their own side of the world and not spinkling black people in every other scene especially prominent lore characters that were black washed. And I dont agree with Cavill being a bad Geralt I think him being handsome and rugged at the same time explains why Geralt was such a womanizer in books and why he slept with almost every witch from the Lodge. Because Geralt was good looking scarred but he had great physique because of the amounts of crazy training and mutations he went through as a child.
@Anti Bull Fringilla Vigo says hello. She is as whit as it should be because she is Anna Henriettas cousin who is Beauclair which is fantasy land of old and most northern Nilfgaard territory before third war. Also Triss is blackwashed since she looks like mexican even though in original she was pale green eyed witch with chestnut hair in games she is ginger. And what they did to my boy King Foltest its unnacceptable he was in his thirties when Geralt went there to break curse of striga not old Robert Baratheon clone ffs.
I agree about most of this. Except that medieval kings, and princes often took enormous personal risks in the thick of battle. Ask blind king John of Bohemia about that. Or the Black Prince or his dad Edward III. Or Francis I of France. Or Richard I or Henry IV or Henry V, or Edward IV, or Robert Bruce, etc. Also, if you look at extant effigies the knights were not that beefy. The Black Prince, who was one of the most warlike men of his age (or any other) was tall but also pretty thin.
@Liam Collins It's not how medieval soldiers were thinking, but it's how humans think. In our times it works exactly the same. Imagine that you are working in some company and your boss is some rich kid that took over company after his father death, knows nothing about work and he is only giving you orders. You probably won't respect someone like that. On other hand try to imagine working in company where your boss started from nothing, worked exactly like you and when there is a need to replace someone he will work beside you like everyone else. That's the person you will respect and be loyal to, even when he will be late with your paycheck. Times may changed but people are still the same.
And these examples are all men, who generally, had had years of training. And often ended up dead-which is one of his points. A dead monarch doesn't do a lot of good for the kingdom.
Well, leading troops from the front lines is a double edged sword. At one side it is incredibly dangerous, as the ruler dying is damn close to an instant loss, on the other hand it may grant great morale. Also, Calanthe has the reputation of being a hardened and skilled warrior. Perhaps they should've casted an actual ripped/ buff woman in the role, that would've been more realistic.
@TheOne Neo big difference between a warrior and someone who's forced to fight a few times in their whole life. Also there would not have been "many" such societies even if you were right
@Bukkebruse Actually there were many societies throughout history that had "warrior" women. Germanic tribes, Mongolians, and others had women who fought because they had to in order to survive. Yes, they wouldn't have looked like body builders but they would have definitely had more muscle and athletic ability than this actress.
@Kyle Williams you are proving my point. But you must not have read my second comment. Go back and read. There is a HUGE difference between true feminism, and modern day “feminism”. My comments are 2 years old yet WAY more relevant now than when I wrote them.
@Kevin Clark You realise that being a feminist means you believe women should be able to make their own choices right? It doesn't mean being a strong independent woman, you can be a house wife and be a feminist.
One thing that stood out after i read the short stories was that Geralt's relationship with Dandelion is portrayed as more strained in the tv shows, whereas in the books they are far far more chummy (this is going by the first two short story collections - last wish and sword of destiny) . For instance, theres a moment at the end of sword of destiny where Dandelion's trying to cross a river and says to Geralt 'Don't leave me behind or ill drown!' and Geralt replies along the lines of 'I would never let you drown, dear friend' The portrayal of Geralt in the shows is more along the lines of 'reserved dickhead', but in the books he's actually a lot more human/friendly in interactions with the people *that are close to him*. Also one thing off about this review, I would say is your point about Calanthe only being shown as strong even though she's just a wamen. That was still fairly accurate to the books i thought.
Hannibal Barca did not lead from the front. He was a brilliant tactician, not a battle hardened warrior. Hell the dude lost one eye halfway through his campaign so no way he could fight properly.
Making Ciri interesting would have been a great challenge considering that she basically doesn't exist until the 3rd book, and spends that entire book in school in no danger whatsoever. This is also why the timelines are so screwy in season one, you would not have seen ciri until the last episode. The first two books are basically just geralt having random unconnected adventures, you get virtually no ciri, and little Yennifer. Great for world building but would not have done well on screen for new fans.
and the way the show did it makes someone who hasn´t read the books and knows the plot already take at least a quarter of the episode to make sense of WHEN this happens. and having 2 out of 3 POV characters not age doesn´t help that. some indication would´ve been helpful
Game of Thrones was also aided by a brilliant opening to each episode, highlighting where every scene will take place throughout. It was probably one of the best things it did.
Ciri... Well... In books and Polish series she was young, very young (8-9 yeras old) and she was daugher of Pavetta, princess of Cintra, and Duny (Hedgehog of Erlenwald). She was doomed to become someone great, but with Suprise Law she was connected with Geralt, witcher, good in his job, but not as good in political view as as prince. When Pavetta and Duny died in sea catastrophy, there was only tho rulers: old CValnthe and young Ciri. During siege od Cintra Ciri was abducted (and not only by some knight with feathers on his helmet - young, nilfgardian special task officer, Cahir) - and she was nine years old - in best. She was traumatizes but not by damned doppelgangner!!!! "Nilfgard invaded for reasons" - in novels it was clear that Calanthe was afraid of Nilfgaard as upcoming power and she searched for help, she married a yarl whose fleet was important at strategic map - even by giving her daughter to most powerfull ally. Yeah, in real life princess role in not looking for beloved prince. But Duny claimed his suprise law, some witcher helpled in it, and he and Pavetta several years later died in sea catastrophy. And Nilfgard stormed until they conquered Cinthra. Ciri was claimed to die in siege And it is entrance for whole, but still side story Niflgardian story in five novels. Series RUINED it by claiming that Niflgard send and idiotic doppelgangner with no memory of it's clone when scritoprs want to him to don't know how to write it forward.
5:45 they mentioned Queen Calanthe nickname which is the Lion and they mentioned also how many successful battles she fought, so I think it's a prestige for her to fight in the middle of the battle, as many leaders did in medieval times... (Richard the Lionhearted also did this many times) generals fought in the rear only become a common thing after the renaissance era (so I think the show has many flaws but this one I do not count)
Actually Calanthe died the same way in the books, she fought, was wounded and then she jumped out of a window so that she is not captured. Or was it Eist who died in the battle? I am not sure right now but Calanthe was a fierce warrior who stood beside their man. At least thats how I remember her from the books
@enotdetcelfer the Problem I had with this, is that Cintrians met them on a battlefield, and didn't just defend themselves inside the walls. Books or show
One thing I enjoyed about how they did the timeline, is it made it enjoyable to watch multiple times. Ive probably seen it through 8 times now and each time I feel like it gets better, which is because there is more I understand and catch.. But admittedly the first go through felt pretty bad. As far as just throwing you into the story, I felt that way in the games also... They were extremely hard for me to force myself to play and get into. But once I did I understood why people liked them so much.
I recently bought Witcher 3 ....for the Switch (it actually runs pretty well) ... anywho, I was looking for a game that was basically Zelda set in the Darksouls world. A friend told me to get Witcher 3 and within an hour of playtime it became one of the greatest games I've ever played. If anyone hasn't played it yet, my god... go buy it now
@Falken Phil I liked it, too. It felt good when I figured out about halfway through the story that they weren't telling the story chronologically. I really liked the first season. It was the 2nd season where it kind of lost me.
This was the first show in a long time that I actually had to pay attention to while watching. Even then I was about halfway through before I realized there were multiple time periods, and almost to the end before I actually figured them out. All in all, I thought it was pretty good. The fights were well choreographed and I liked the flawed characters that showed growth/redemption. I didn't notice the forced diversity, as I generally assume fantasy settings are made up of whatever (unless they're based on real world places), and so, when there's someone who wouldn't have been in a climate (like the black general), I will just accept it, unless it becomes overly forced or their character is poorly written.
So odd - I kind of felt seeing that Black General in Cintra as jarring the first time I saw him..his portrayal just didn't fit. Forcing diversity into situation where it doesnt belong is just regressive. The youtuber is absolutely correct - I was trying to find out what was wrong with Witcher - this forced shake up of the demographics was just not organic. It feels flat out artificial...and thats what Witcher feels like....
I was watching it as background noise while working on some other things and every time I would look up I would be confused as hell by the plot line. If you couldn't completely pay attention you'd easily miss a bunch of important things. I had no idea who important characters were and what the heck was going on so I thought it was weird, and all the time things completely flew over my head
@dash4800 I was smashed out of my tree when it first came out and I didn't know what the fuck was going on when it all started to piece back into the original time period as one. Thankfully I was that blasted I couldn't remember half of what I watched and rewatched it recently sober. * honestly, I still haven't a clue what its about.
There's no need to feel bad about praising the early seasons of GOT. They were legitimately great. Its only the later seasons that went down the toilet
@Frenchbrutus yep definitely a shit take, but they definitely showed signs of their potential for fuxking up in season 2, particular with Danny who was amazing in season 1. It got better before it got worse of course and I don’t believe for a second that guy stopped watching😂
@Jess A I got bored the first time I watched try season 1-4 but this time pay heavy attention to the dialogue put on subtitles if you have cause that's where alot of the shows juiciness comes from
I actually know why it's called Witcher. Talked to Sapkowski himself some 15 years ago, probably more. Apparently he was wondering why there is no male equivalent of the word witch (wizard is a bit different), and decided to create a world in which there is.
In the Polish language wiedźma (a feminine noun) is the word for "witch" in English. That's the problem with the Modern English language, compared to most other European languages, it has lost its grammatical gender for nouns. Some European languages even have one gender for the singular form and the opposite gender (yes, there are ONLY TWO genders) for the plural form.
I felt like I had the same problem with the geography of The Witcher when I read the book series. I felt like I was constantly saying "What is this place and what is it near by? Which Kingdom is this?"
I absolutely detest what Netflix has done to the base material, they completely butchered the short stories to get to the saga as fast as possible. Out of the 14 tale-like short stories, which are connected and gradually introduce Geralt, his work, his skill, his character, his backstory, his personal phylosophy and problems, and later Dandelion, Yen and Ciri as side characters, Netflix chose to adapt about 7 of them, poorly, and inflated the rest of the show with Yennefers/Ciris backstories/fanfictions. You could compare Witcher to the Hobbit/LotR. You want to get to the juicy long story of LotR asap, so you trim down the Hobbit to only the most crucial parts: you introduce Gandalf and Bilbo, the ring and Gollum, and rush through the journey in about three episodes. Then you want to set-up the other places and characters important for LotR, so you fill the rest of your season with Aragorn, Legolas, Gimli, Saruman and Frodo-fanfiction. That is exactly what Netflix did with the first season of witcher, a major set-up for the real story of season two. To me, it shows an absolute lack of respect for the book material, and if the writers are not skilled enough to adapt the series without butchering the stories and characters in this way, they should never have been placed in charge of the project. I don't mind the acting, diverse casting decisions, cgi and other stuff, some of it is good, some not so much. But I hate how they carved up the story.
Agreed, and this all comes down to the fact that they are copying the GoT formula. Unlike The Witcher, GoT is written from the perspectives of multiple characters. This is why it worked when the TV show did the same - they could show what Jon Snow, Tyrion, Daenerys etc. were doing in different places and had plenty of source material to do so. However, Sapowski's short stories are solely from Geralt's perspective, so trying to copy GoT and give Yennefer and Ciri comparable screentime and back stories was inevitably going to be a failure due to the lack of source material.
I am watching 1st ep of Season 2 and have to stop midway because I'm so mad how they butchered the short stories and characters almost entirely. S2E1 introduces us to Nivellen, from chapter A grain of truth. Netflix just had to make Niv know all about the north-south war AND the Wild hunts. Then, when Geralt was asked why he came to look after a young girl, Ciri, "what changed" him, he answered "who" - "Yennefer of Vengerberg". And I just became speechless. Netflix just threw the "Child of destiny" out the window and made it a story about child adoption for a rom-com couple. I get that they want to "merge" characters and plots into the main saga plot but holy cow this is all bad and rushed writing. It just destroys Geralt's character entirely and the relationship between him and Ciri. In S1 they alrd made Geralt x Yen a rom-com thing with no chemistry, no bittersweetness nor passion like in the books, just merely LOLs. Damn, even Tissaia is having way more chemistry with Yen than Geralt with her. This may be the only thing I'm liking about the series.
Fun Fact: The elves in this world actually came from an alternate reality world that basically "collided" with this one during a very rare phase shift event thousands of years prior to this story. That's also basically how all the "evil" creatures appeared. This would have been useful information that could have been included somewhere in the show's narrative.
Actually, the world of the Witcher was first inhabited by the Elves (the Aen Seidhe), some 2000 years before the arrival of humans at the time of the Conjunction of the Spheres. Humans, although late to arrive on the Continent, proved able to “out breed” the long lived elves, and so the Age of Elves would come to an end, and humans would become the dominant species on the Continent.
As someone who's read the books, while watching the show, I consistently thought "Wow, this is confusing as fuck. Will people even be able to understand what's going on?"
No. We will not. Can’t recall how long it even took me to understand that time hopping was happening. Not that I couldn’t keep track of such a thing. But, just, fucken let me know first!
I'm usually pretty good at following complex and/or disjointed storylines but on this one, I didn't even pick up on the separate timelines till halfway through the season 😅
Honestly, i played the third game, and i was told by bookreaders that the game doesnt tell the story as well as the books, which may be true, but fuck me, this is a clusterfuck I know this is all backstory, before the events of the third game, so thats why i dont know any of this, but i cant understand whats going on either. Also, the politics just feel off. Again, in the game they felt really well made, here it just confuses me, like whats going on even
@Maxawe Some They did it because the books are also like that. They also jump timelines. So I guess they were kind of remaining faithfull to the source material, although they changed a few things and did not actually adapt the first book.... but I thought it was a good adaptation. It can be hard to understand at first, the books are also like that and not everyone likes them. I did, but its not like I fell inlove with them, they were ok, maybe good for me, but nothing too great (that's only my take on the books, I am not stating a fact, but my own opinion)
I actually really liked the way they did it non-sequentially, however i completely agree with your second point in that i had no idea where they were in relation to where anyone else was at any given time, nor the rules or idiosyncrasies or even the social norms of the world they were trying to build.
Thanks for another great review. I agree with almost all you said, however I did thoroughly enjoy it and was happy to not be sure what the world was about or what exactly was going on, trusting and hoping that it'll be revealed later. This was a strength of it I think. Really looking forward to your review of the next season.
You have a real talent for taking lengthy, excruciating pain and disappointment and turning it into twenty minutes of real information and entertainment
I didn’t realize until you mentioned that there was very little worldbuilding that I don’t remember them bringing up the Conjunction of the Spheres at all which is a pretty big detail
The 2 bishes helping the dragons are the only use of “inclusion” that makes sense considering it explains they came from Zerekania which is Witcher Arabia/Africa
That doesn't explain why they cast Bantus as Zerekanians. They should have been more like Afghans or Lybians. Sub-Saharan Africa and northern Africa are very different.
Except this isn't even true. It's a non-canon speculation that was placed into the Witcher games, and never appeared within the books. Tea and Vea are common nicknames in certain parts of Europe. Zerrikania, book-wise, is never given any mention as to being Africa or Arabia. Ofir is more Middle Eastern, and Zangwebar (Zanzibar) is the African analogue via the books' lore. Tea and Vea are also noted as having blonde hair. Not exactly an African or Arabian trait, and the only real defense someone MIGHT be able to muster are Melanesian blondes, but I think that's an extremely vast stretch to believe that Sapkowski was thinking of Melanesia regarding this particular nation/landmass.
@Eli Odum tea and vea are zerrekanian which is a combo of arabia/middle east and almost an Australian vibe with weird animals and an aboriginal feeling. The people who kidnap you in the witcher 3 are Ofieri which is a north African inspired peoples
I’m weird but I enjoyed the Anthology style of stories for an opening season to set the world before the real meat of the story hits. I agree though it was a gamble. Casting Cavill was smart though he brought big star power and enough interest to get a second season
Don't know if you'll see this, but having a general/king/queen/whatever in the frontline can be a HUGE advantage, seeing as it gives a great moral boost to the men. The risk to the commander is also fairly small, seeing as that person would have the best soldiers around for protection.
I think it might have been better if they had left Ciri and Nilfgaard's whole thing off until season 2, because then they could have taken season one to do the world building and explain Ciri's connection to Geralt. Then we might have actually cared more about Nilfgaard trying to kill Ciri (well, cared about it more than you usually care about people trying to kill a girl). At the very least, they shoulda done SOMETHING to show what time each episode was in. With the two anthology books that this season pulled from, there is at least a sense of a cohesive timeline. I only read them once, but I don't think you meet Ciri until after you meet her parents.
I finally got around to watching this and the first episode did struggle a bit with the Geralt storyline ultimately holding it together, the second episode began to loose me with its pacing but then things picked up in the third episode as we have a bloody fight between Geralt and a fetus monster in an old abandoned keep. This one episode best shows what the show can do, with lies, political and family intrigue and Geralt stubbornly investigating through all that shit till he knows what he’s hunting then gets to work with a mixed level of cgi monster fun. The show had me there, right up to the end where it takes a weird turn as they write off Geralt for pretty much the entirety of the last episode instead following a bunch of witches trying to hold off a besieging army and dying one by one. Oh no, not, um, her, oh dear, not them, and so on but I neither knew any of these characters nor cared and I don’t know what the writers were thinking on this one. Still, overall it turned out to be a lot of fun this show, I was worried that the hundred + hours I’d played the Witcher 3 would colour things too much when watching the show, and it did a little, but not enough to take away the enjoyment of the series. I’d give it a go again, now if only I could get the metal cover of toss a coin to your Witcher out of my head.
There was a decent way to introduce the "diversity" quotas : the Ofieris. Raiders, Merchants, Runewrights... Got to admit, nothing ruins a setting more than having this feeling of out of place demographics in a very specific context and setting.
I love this show and can't wait for season 3! By the way it has the best song ever! Toss a coin to your witcher was an inspiration to many on KZclip with cover after cover
Rulers often led their armies from the front like Frederick the great. Hiding in your fancy head quarters like a ww1 general is a modern concept. In mid evil times you had to show strength on the battlefield by leading your army like Joan of arc, Richard the Lion heart, Julius Caesar and Alexander the great so that scene makes sense.
Watching the series, I felt that it was meant to be understood by the ones familiar with the video games at least. So many things where left missexplained that I knew only because I have played (and not even fully) the first two video games. But I think it's going to be unfolded in the next seasons slowly. Still found it to be a great series.
The people from the forest were not elves, they were Dryads, but still, Dryads weren't black in the books, they have green skin, but their phenotype features are Northern European as well
@KindredBrujah Reread my comment, I say pretty much that very thing. Tolkien is basically responsible for the revival in popular culture of Elves/Elfs being seen as tall and powerful and more than just little furtive fairy folk.
Tbh i don’t care about their skin color, since they are some unique society living in symbiosis with a living forest….but it is so fucking laughable that they made a tribe of a few women out of it…in general, the whole Brokilon part where Geralt and Ciri met in the books was one of my favorite chapters…can’t believe how they ruined it that bad.
Dryads being green (and nude) is actually from the games. In the books it only says some of them take on a greenish, brownish or redish hue (presumably leaf and wood tones).
Isnt this the exact same problematic aspect of putting starfire from the titans and her entire planet black while they actually have orange skin and green eyes. Thats 2020 hollywood for you
I love this show, mainly because I love the Witcher series (mostly the games, unfortunately I have yet to finish all the books in order). Though I will say, there are some flaws that I can see, and much like the source material, the show suffers from a disjointed story that only makes itself readily apparent if you are actually paying attention (I love that, but I know that it will confuse many others.), and it makes some of the stories feel jankily paced. I also am unawares how they met in the book, but Geralt and Yen's meeting felt a little rushed. Again, still haven't read the entire series, so i could very well be wrong. Everything else though I greatly enjoyed. Kinda wish they got a more game accurate look for Triss though. It would make sense to maximize the audience by getting both the game AND book lovers interested.
Being required to find things out yourself makes it stand out in my opinion. I was afraid that they over expose like in the Avatar movie but they had a simple plot to follow for everybody + a complex one for those interested. Loved it!
Once again you nailed it drinker! I almost dropped it at the end of the first season because I was so confused about who is who, why armies fight, are the invaders good or bad, why they invade, etc. season 2 is better because we learn a little bit (not too much) but we also learn to ignore the geopolitics to focus on the Witcher and his quest. Good show overall!
I re-watched this series back in Oct. Even the 2nd time around it was a little difficult to follow. Although slightly easier. At least knowing about the bouncing around in chronological order part was more understanding.
@MatVey TuomA SvibeR you say that like there is 3 caltures white black and Asian each of this countrys regardless of their color have different cultures saying that making a movie about persia is the same as making movie about Poland because both are white is purely wrong and blind racism I'm from somewhere that is underprestend in it own local tv but when I see presentations like this forced actors I honestly want to throw up because calture is so much more then skin color I rather there be a movie about my country's unlike culture rather then having 1000 of actors of my country stick out like a sore thumb in a nordic movie so you can call me a racist for hating to see a black charcter in the witcher but I liked the black panther movie because tachela wasn't sticking out like the ugly duck ( no pun intended)
Oh man, i cant believe you didnt like Jaskier. Literally the best cast of the show :O Guy is hilarious in his delivery, and pretty much sums up the character in every scene. Much better than game versions thats for sure.
Thanks again Drinker. Since I don't Stream from any sources, I've been waiting for this series to come out on Blu-ray and 2 1/2 years later, I'm STILL waiting. I'm a huge fan of the games (built a new computer expressly with the desire to play Witcher 3) and postponed watching your review(s) of the series, with the sense of dread one gets from realizing just how many shows of this ilk Hollywood has F-d up. As I am (via the games) pretty familiar with this world and the characters in it, I'm thinking I should be able to keep pace but still, was the disjointed timeline really necessary? That rarely works and I get the impression from your synopsis, this would have been better if done in a more linear fashion. Still, I'm willing to give at least S-1 a shot, if they get off their butts and give us a Blu-ray. Nervously gonna click on your S-2 review now...
One correction is needed: on 6:23 those women Tea and Vea, are from Zerricania which is sort of North African / Middle Eastern region in the lore. So it was the time when a diverse cast actually fitted perfectly.
I thought they were gonna give Yennefer the Captain Marvel treatment. I was surprised she actually had to work for what she wanted and wasn't just instantly good at everything.
@Idrees Khan Ciri is/was a sheltered teenager that did not have the decades time jumps that the other 2 had. Now that they are all running on the same time line, I am hopeful that Ciri will start developing from the blank canvas she is.
@Liam Patrick she was powerful from the get go from the moment she was given her powers tho. N although she did have to go through training with Jude Law,she would've n could've easily beaten him at anytime if it wasn't for her not bein able to use her powers. N so it's still bs.
Despite its drawbacks I still hope there will be season 2 and beyond... I mean there is so much to work with and I would love to see some of ther main plotline of the Witcher saga on screen (with possible exception of The Tower of a Swallow wittch is crap). I would like the to at least get to introduction of my favorite character Regis.
I wanted to like this so badly, especially with Henry's commitment to the role but not having seen the game or read the books I had simply no idea what was going on and gave up after 5 episodes. Only now I'm learning of time jumps.
@Kai Bit late but your right. She is not in the The Last Wish. She is mentioned in the book but not present so I guess I just had that conflated in my mind somehow.
@tyrannosaurus imperator which book are you referring? The first book in the novels? S1 was clearly based on The Last Wish (book) which is the first "book" in the franchise, but is a collection of short stories and not a extended narrative like the novels that followed it. It has been a while since I read it however so I could be mistaken but I don't recall the section you speak of in The Last Wish. To my knowledge Triss is only mentioned in that book off hand.
I tried watching this and got 6-8 episodes in before falling off for about a week then came back and was completely lost, I didn’t even know that there were timelines crossing more then a few years so just shows how much I was paying attention I guess. Anyway I like to think I am fairly good at keeping track but the way it’s set up is completely incoherent if you aren’t laser focused on a story you have no previous experience with or investment in and asking that much attention right off the bat is a pretty tough ask even if it was directed in a way that made it slightly easier to follow. Thinking about it now by the 4-5th episode I was loving it but by that point I was so confused it was not something that could be understood because so much context had been lost
While I overall enjoyed the show in itself, it has some huge flaws and I think the biggest is that they rushed the firs two books. While they are shortstories, most are still connected in their themes and events and do a great job setting up the characters and world. While you don't need every single one to capture that, there were some significant storys either missing or getting butchered. The story that introduces the elves has important events missing, so we can get Yennefers Backstory and glimpses of whatever the fuck Ciri was doing. If they had stayed closer to the books it would have lead to a more cohesive and interesting story.
The mages aren’t all infertile, she forfeited her ability to procreate in order for the magical beauty surgery to work. It was pretty cut and dry terms the surgeon laid out before her. Just an FYI there drunko.
The entire first season is world building, character introductions and shows events that were briefly mentioned in the books. In the first book Geralt and Ciri are already together
I would have liked more Geralt but had no problem with Yennefer's story. It was pretty good character development considering they only had 8 episodes to do it. I wish they had cast someone ethnically more accurate but the actress did a great job.
I've watched the season twice, with the second time of watching with a youtube recap after each episode. After that I fully understood which made it worthwhile.
The 'elves' in Brokilon Forest are actually Dryads. The books don't explain enough imo but much more than the show. Too much is omitted or hinted at in the books eg Yen's backstory.
Geralt: "I like Fringilla because she looks like Yenn and reminds me of her." Writers: "Better make sure she's inexplicably black with no similarities."
I’m really looking forward to the drinkers review of season two. In my opinion they seem to have taken on board what he says here and made a much more coherent production.
I'd love to know what the Critical Drinker thinks how a novel like the Use of Weapons could be made, considering jumping back and forth from the protagonist's narrative.
Haha! I laughed thru this one. I managed to stich together the story that was presented differently, and got another experience, but I do understand your perspective. And in that regard it do seem kind of confusing. Anyway, I would recommend this to anyone that likes fantasy. It does get better and I sincerely miss the main characters now that I plowed thru the series.
Yes, this season required a bit too much from audience (it's ok for ppl who read the books, but others probably have hard time following events) and the problem is, it's based on short stories and adds Yennefer story (which wasn't bad). While Jaskier is close to source material (with his sometimes annoying character), I can't forgive creators destroying some characters (Cahir and Vilgefortz are jokes for example) and I don't like making up things (like reason for which Yennefer couldn't have kids - in original almost all mages lost their fertility due to influence of magic - and those who don't would probably prefer to lose it as well, as their offsprings are nothing more than deformed midless corpses or vegetables at most. And while I understand low budget and far from perfect monsters and cgi, power level of wizards in serie is also a (very saddening) joke - what Yennefer showed in the battle as "great spell" was something any mage in books could achieve with a little more than wave of hand. I have much less problem with forced "diversity" than I thought I'd have with some exceptions, for example: while Dryads might have been played by black woman, they should have green painted skin and BOWS, not spears, and Fringilla Vigo was described as person with "ghastly pale" skin and big similarity to Yen...
I agree that it was fragmented and difficult to follow. However, I liked it enough to watch it again a year later and enjoyed it a lot more the second time.
After having a slog of Mary Sue female characters (namely one Star Wars character) Yennefer was SUCH a breath of fresh air: learns from her failures, struggles/isn’t a prodigy and earns her success and power. Then as you say the complexity of her feeling everything she fought for wasn’t worth her current situation and she’s jaded and now motivated to amend what’s she done to herself. Nothings given, everything is earned and that’s why I love her
This show is unique. It’s mature. It doesn’t tell you there’s 3 story lines in different time lines, you have to figure it out. The fight scenes are great but rare so when they happen your excited. I don’t like how they went all political representation bullshit with some of the characters though.
My biggest complaint with the plot was they really only developed Yennefer. But the show kept breaking immersion with all the forced diversity. Fringilia was paintful to look at.
It’s not really mature compared to book. The fact that timelines are confusing for average Netflix viewer doesn’t make it mature. There’s clear distinction between good and evil and none important themes are well made in opposite to great novels
Wait is a Gormenghast adaptation actually happening? It's #1 on my list of awesome/weird books that I would never expect to be adapted, even though it's already happened at least once.
Yeah I know the CW shows generally suck, but I think you’d like this one for a while. You should do a review of the first three seasons of arrow. It’s similar in the functionality of the chronology, but it does it way better
actually, the non-chronological order of the episodes makes a lot of sense. The book this season is (largely) based on does the same. Im not sure if reordering the stories would have benefitted the narrative on the big screen. If they continue this way, we should be getting more linear storytelling from season 3 and onward (corresponding to the 3rd + books)
Just on that bit about Medieval battles.....At the time it was not uncommon for Kings to be leading their troops into battle (yeah might not of been the smart thing but it happend) as for the safety of the ruler well for one they would have the best armour available which despite movies and tv shows was actually effective, and no one would WANT to kill you because you were far more valuable as a hostage than as a corpse
Loved the asynchronous story telling mechanism, and I disagree that it was hard to keep track of. You had 3 characters with three different timelines that converge. was almost my favourite bit of the show.
And honestly, that age is where the show failed her. Yennefer in the books and the game had a sort of gravitas, an air of power and experience. This show's version kinda tries to act like she has it, but she absolutely doesn't. Part of that might be looking too young. True, sorceresses are supposed to look young and attractive (with exceptions), but they went too far here. Imo, they should have gone with someone who looks around 30 but well preserved, just to take off that edge of too young looking inexperienced.
Yeah I agree. The Yennefer plot was interesting. I didn't agree with them casting an Indian, however. The actress did a great job, but Netflix deliberately cast non-whites in material inspired by Polish folklore.
Want to help support this channel? Consider subscribing on Patreon for exclusive content: www.patreon.com/TheCriticalDrinker
3:01
You're a beast! 👊🤣
You got a spammer on here posing as you. You might want to look into that, mate
The non-chronological structure is from the novels. It really confused me, when I read the first book.
06:22 its explained in the books,but only for the 2 women,they were from zerikania.
4:32 SERIOUSLY STOP THAT!!!!!!!!! IT'S!!!!!!! NOT!!!!!!!! FUNNY!!!!!!!!!!!
Henry Cavill lifted this average show on his shoulders when he killed that first monster in the first shot of the first episode, and proceeded to carry it all the way to the finish line like an absolute boss. This show's survival in the long run basically depends on him.
@Regarded i know it was two years ago but I do agree...he wasn't that good as Geralt tbh...but imo he was still better than most other elements of the show and I definitely wouldn't mind him as Geralt if the show itself was better
This comment aged so well
The show is burning hot garbage but it can get worse 😊
This aged well
And now he is gone .
Your comment aged like wine
Xenophobia is supposed to be a big issue in the Witcher world, yet it is barely even acknowledged in the show.
Wtf is xylophonia?
yeah because they decided to make the targets of xenophobia diverse. and you cant have that in current year
Yeah the same people who are rounding up elves seemingly have no issue with people from different races
Wait what how? I didn’t see any Xenomorphs in any episode??? Was there something I missed?
@XoddamCXVII yeah, with that, that’s not gonna happen
“Can’t make up my mind about whether I like this guy, or absolutely hate him”
In all fairness, this is pretty close to how the other characters in the book perceive Dandelion
I'm utterly shocked that they didn't make Danelion asian, gay or trans. Or all of this combined.
For all those who are unfamiliar with the lore, without giving out any spoilers, I'll just say: wait and see... If the showrunners ever delve deep into his character, which they should, you'll find out why he's so loud, self important and obnoxious most of the times... There is perfectly good reason for that 😉
On a side note, "music" they've written and chose to go alongside him, is annoying and terrible... He's a "medieval" minstrel with a lute, not a one man band who'se music sounds like it came from a 2022 studio. I mean, it did, but, you get the point...
Keep watching. You'll fall in love.
I think they try to hard with him. In the games he's almost dead on to how he acts in the book. Like he's cocky, witty, charismatic, definitely not a fighter, but can be an ass. Otherwise is a great friend to Geralt. In the show he tries too hard to make a joke like every 5 seconds. Like where's that caring and serious side that comes out sometimes.
@Mark Kringle
God, this entire conversation is so disturbingly influenced by Americanism, it's terrible.
This entire conversation is an absolute non-starter from a European perspective.
But what do you expect from a nation that has no history, nor a working educational system, that would mitigate that fact.
I'm saying
a)
The "races" as in men and elves (which is actually more akin to species) very seldomly intermarried, as it was heavily societally shunned.
B)
human "races" ('black' and 'white' ) didn't get to intermarry, as there were no opportunities to.
In a feudal, pre-technology, pre-medicine, low-trust-society world, in which economic welfare is more or less the same everywhere and travel is extraordinaryly dangerous, people had no incentive whatsoever to migrate.
Therefore there would be no intermarriage even if there were people who wouldn't shun strangers.
C)
In such a pre-technology pre-medicine world, the selection pressures would have been so high, that over the couple thousand years since the conjuction of the spheres any blacks in Kovir and any Gingers in Zericania would have died out by the time of Geralt.
And that is entirely disregarding the fact, that the populations would have genetically homogenized in that timeframe.
And most importantly:
d)
The witcher books were written decades ago, in a time before anyone outside of America knew what 'diversity' is, by a polish author, living in a country that was and is to this day almost exclusively ethnically polish (as in "white" for any stupid Americans) surrounded by other European countries that were almost exclusively ethnically European (as in "white") and said author set the books in a world inspired by his historical homeland, as in the medieval Europe which was for all practical purposes mono'racially' European (again for any ridiculously poorly educated Americans, Europe is the continent where 'white' people are the natives, and used to be the only population)
The thought that there even could be anyone but "white" people in the northern kingdoms, except for rare exceptions, didn't even cross the authors mind.
As to Geralt, he is an exception, as he travels through the entire world in search of work, isn't bound to a single society and therefore the rules of wider society don't apply to him.
I feel that the opening of Game of Thrones with the map, and how it changed across seasons, did alot more world building than people give it credit for.
Having sense of a place and time is very important. I remember when I read Metro 2033-35 series having map inside the book helped immensely. So when I read Witcher books years ago, I had a massive map of the world in my phone to check where characters are and where they are going.
Agreed, that opening was a stroke of genius.
The short stories are actually pretty good and are solid source material for a show. Problem is Netflix decided to ignore most of it and make 75% of the show Yennefer fan fiction, and the few short stories they used were abridged.
And of course Henry gets the character of Geralt, he's a huge fan of the books and the games.
S1 should have followed the short stories to establish geralts background and dandelions personality. Then everything with Ciri holds more weight
i dont think there is a single person who would be a better cast than henry. he is just the perfect witcher. from the body to the voice plus he is a witcher fanboy
"The fresh Prince of Rivendel". This fucking killed me, well done
Lmao
Best line I’ve heard in a long time 🤣
Same. Had to pause to laugh it off :D
Prince of Rivenhood
The only part of this show that was near perfect was Henry Cavill as Geralt. He was amazing.
@Acesahn Chest voice vs throat voice.
he was the worst part )
@Acesahn Bro... he sounded like that in the video game... don't be dissing my boy for doing something right.
Henry cavill will play mechwarrior or warhammer with you at the comic shop hes a cool guy
Henry Cavill really got the look and feel and attitude right for the Geralt of Rivia role. Spot on in my eyes
He did what he could with what he was given. Too young, too bulky and handsome but with butt nose, but damn, he showed he can portray Geralt. Mad respect for the guy nad trying to correct the course of the show. Too bad modern screen writing won.
Henry Cavill is great as Geralt and when he's, you know, doing Witcher stuff. The problem is thats like 5% of the show while the rest is Yenifer and and bunch of "diverse" characters that look extremely out of place. I don't know why Netflix is determined to ruin every great piece of writing they can.
whats wrong with "diverse" charcters? the Witcher is a fantasy, if elves and a "diversity" of monsters can exist in this world I cant see why one would complain that a diverse array of human could exist also
if they wanted diversity why not cast slavic actors? we have almost ZERO slavic representation in Hollywood/Western media.
@Anedime I agree to a certain point that Conjuction of spheres made the world diverse but not with people but with monsters and other races like dwarfs, elves, higher vampires. And if you are familiar with the lore you know that there are diverse characters in Witcher just not in Norther realms but in Skellige or Offier or Zerrikania. Just like Critical drinker pointed out they could do similiar thing to Game of Thrones where Dothrakki and Unsullied had their own side of the world and not spinkling black people in every other scene especially prominent lore characters that were black washed. And I dont agree with Cavill being a bad Geralt I think him being handsome and rugged at the same time explains why Geralt was such a womanizer in books and why he slept with almost every witch from the Lodge. Because Geralt was good looking scarred but he had great physique because of the amounts of crazy training and mutations he went through as a child.
@Anti Bull Fringilla Vigo says hello. She is as whit as it should be because she is Anna Henriettas cousin who is Beauclair which is fantasy land of old and most northern Nilfgaard territory before third war. Also Triss is blackwashed since she looks like mexican even though in original she was pale green eyed witch with chestnut hair in games she is ginger. And what they did to my boy King Foltest its unnacceptable he was in his thirties when Geralt went there to break curse of striga not old Robert Baratheon clone ffs.
@Anti Bull Yennefer and Triss to name a few
I remember for the first five episodes, I actually thought the kingdom was called Milfgaurd. I'm like, that doesn't sound like too bad a place.
Aye, lore has it that the cougars dwell in great abundance there.
In Cyberpunk 2077 (created by the same company that also did the Witcher videogames), there's actually a porn movie called "Milfguard" 🤣
I was thinking that for the porn parody 😂
*wink*
Oh yeah it doesn’t ;)
I agree about most of this. Except that medieval kings, and princes often took enormous personal risks in the thick of battle. Ask blind king John of Bohemia about that. Or the Black Prince or his dad Edward III. Or Francis I of France. Or Richard I or Henry IV or Henry V, or Edward IV, or Robert Bruce, etc. Also, if you look at extant effigies the knights were not that beefy. The Black Prince, who was one of the most warlike men of his age (or any other) was tall but also pretty thin.
@Liam Collins It's not how medieval soldiers were thinking, but it's how humans think. In our times it works exactly the same. Imagine that you are working in some company and your boss is some rich kid that took over company after his father death, knows nothing about work and he is only giving you orders. You probably won't respect someone like that. On other hand try to imagine working in company where your boss started from nothing, worked exactly like you and when there is a need to replace someone he will work beside you like everyone else. That's the person you will respect and be loyal to, even when he will be late with your paycheck. Times may changed but people are still the same.
@Honk Honk Joan of Arc?
And these examples are all men, who generally, had had years of training. And often ended up dead-which is one of his points. A dead monarch doesn't do a lot of good for the kingdom.
Hah, when he said that John was exactly who I thought about. The man was a certified (and certifiable!) badass.
Well, leading troops from the front lines is a double edged sword. At one side it is incredibly dangerous, as the ruler dying is damn close to an instant loss, on the other hand it may grant great morale. Also, Calanthe has the reputation of being a hardened and skilled warrior. Perhaps they should've casted an actual ripped/ buff woman in the role, that would've been more realistic.
@TheOne Neo big difference between a warrior and someone who's forced to fight a few times in their whole life. Also there would not have been "many" such societies even if you were right
@Bukkebruse Actually there were many societies throughout history that had "warrior" women. Germanic tribes, Mongolians, and others had women who fought because they had to in order to survive. Yes, they wouldn't have looked like body builders but they would have definitely had more muscle and athletic ability than this actress.
a medieval buff woman? yeah sure.....
She was such a bad casting decision. She's a really good actress but had no clue how to sell this character enough to make her believable.
Honestly I was amazed that their was a woman in a piece of media who's goal was to be a mother.
@idontwannaliveonthisplanetanymore the gymnastics you do to make sure the point goes over your head is hilarious
@Kyle Williams you are proving my point. But you must not have read my second comment. Go back and read. There is a HUGE difference between true feminism, and modern day “feminism”. My comments are 2 years old yet WAY more relevant now than when I wrote them.
@Kevin Clark You realise that being a feminist means you believe women should be able to make their own choices right? It doesn't mean being a strong independent woman, you can be a house wife and be a feminist.
You probably meant to say “there” instead of “their”
One thing that stood out after i read the short stories was that Geralt's relationship with Dandelion is portrayed as more strained in the tv shows, whereas in the books they are far far more chummy (this is going by the first two short story collections - last wish and sword of destiny) . For instance, theres a moment at the end of sword of destiny where Dandelion's trying to cross a river and says to Geralt 'Don't leave me behind or ill drown!' and Geralt replies along the lines of 'I would never let you drown, dear friend'
The portrayal of Geralt in the shows is more along the lines of 'reserved dickhead', but in the books he's actually a lot more human/friendly in interactions with the people *that are close to him*.
Also one thing off about this review, I would say is your point about Calanthe only being shown as strong even though she's just a wamen. That was still fairly accurate to the books i thought.
Contact me for your reward 🎉❤️🎉
“There’s a very logical reason generals lead their armies from the rear” *laughs in Julius Caesar and Hannibal Barca*
@Brink Hannibal led at the frontlines in the battle of Cannae
Hannibal Barca did not lead from the front. He was a brilliant tactician, not a battle hardened warrior. Hell the dude lost one eye halfway through his campaign so no way he could fight properly.
Theres this time were the entire Portuguese line of succession was obliterated in battle...
I think even King Baldwin was on the front lines ever so often. Before his illness got serious that is.
As far as I know at least
Making Ciri interesting would have been a great challenge considering that she basically doesn't exist until the 3rd book, and spends that entire book in school in no danger whatsoever. This is also why the timelines are so screwy in season one, you would not have seen ciri until the last episode.
The first two books are basically just geralt having random unconnected adventures, you get virtually no ciri, and little Yennifer. Great for world building but would not have done well on screen for new fans.
and the way the show did it makes someone who hasn´t read the books and knows the plot already take at least a quarter of the episode to make sense of WHEN this happens. and having 2 out of 3 POV characters not age doesn´t help that. some indication would´ve been helpful
Game of Thrones was also aided by a brilliant opening to each episode, highlighting where every scene will take place throughout. It was probably one of the best things it did.
Ciri... Well... In books and Polish series she was young, very young (8-9 yeras old) and she was daugher of Pavetta, princess of Cintra, and Duny (Hedgehog of Erlenwald). She was doomed to become someone great, but with Suprise Law she was connected with Geralt, witcher, good in his job, but not as good in political view as as prince. When Pavetta and Duny died in sea catastrophy, there was only tho rulers: old CValnthe and young Ciri.
During siege od Cintra Ciri was abducted (and not only by some knight with feathers on his helmet - young, nilfgardian special task officer, Cahir) - and she was nine years old - in best. She was traumatizes but not by damned doppelgangner!!!!
"Nilfgard invaded for reasons" - in novels it was clear that Calanthe was afraid of Nilfgaard as upcoming power and she searched for help, she married a yarl whose fleet was important at strategic map - even by giving her daughter to most powerfull ally. Yeah, in real life princess role in not looking for beloved prince. But Duny claimed his suprise law, some witcher helpled in it, and he and Pavetta several years later died in sea catastrophy. And Nilfgard stormed until they conquered Cinthra.
Ciri was claimed to die in siege And it is entrance for whole, but still side story Niflgardian story in five novels. Series RUINED it by claiming that Niflgard send and idiotic doppelgangner with no memory of it's clone when scritoprs want to him to don't know how to write it forward.
I really liked the striga episode. It felt like a very well-crafted mini horror movie.
Rewatch "A Night to Remember" launch cinematic for the Witcher III: Wild Hunt.
That creature really creeped me out.
@TheFatMob I mean, how's that a problem? I loved that intro and seeing them turn it into a full blown cinematic story was awesome.
Mini horror
Yes
5:45 they mentioned Queen Calanthe nickname which is the Lion and they mentioned also how many successful battles she fought, so I think it's a prestige for her to fight in the middle of the battle, as many leaders did in medieval times... (Richard the Lionhearted also did this many times) generals fought in the rear only become a common thing after the renaissance era (so I think the show has many flaws but this one I do not count)
Actually Calanthe died the same way in the books, she fought, was wounded and then she jumped out of a window so that she is not captured. Or was it Eist who died in the battle? I am not sure right now but Calanthe was a fierce warrior who stood beside their man.
At least thats how I remember her from the books
@Fera 8748 for sure, this is just one thing that bothered me in the books and in the show not just one
Given they diverge from the books, I think it makes sense to review the season "as is", relying only on the explanation from the show itself.
@enotdetcelfer the Problem I had with this, is that Cintrians met them on a battlefield, and didn't just defend themselves inside the walls. Books or show
She also says she is not the type of leader who stands behind their men, she wants to lead from the front.
Lioness of Cintra. They called that for a reason
I was confused as well but after rewatching it, the whole show made so much sense and kinda built the world with each episode.
One thing I enjoyed about how they did the timeline, is it made it enjoyable to watch multiple times. Ive probably seen it through 8 times now and each time I feel like it gets better, which is because there is more I understand and catch.. But admittedly the first go through felt pretty bad. As far as just throwing you into the story, I felt that way in the games also... They were extremely hard for me to force myself to play and get into. But once I did I understood why people liked them so much.
I recently bought Witcher 3 ....for the Switch (it actually runs pretty well) ... anywho, I was looking for a game that was basically Zelda set in the Darksouls world. A friend told me to get Witcher 3 and within an hour of playtime it became one of the greatest games I've ever played. If anyone hasn't played it yet, my god... go buy it now
@Falken Phil I liked it, too. It felt good when I figured out about halfway through the story that they weren't telling the story chronologically.
I really liked the first season. It was the 2nd season where it kind of lost me.
@John Doe ummmm…. Ok…. I suppose no one else can enjoy an aspect of something you didn’t then.
This was the first show in a long time that I actually had to pay attention to while watching. Even then I was about halfway through before I realized there were multiple time periods, and almost to the end before I actually figured them out. All in all, I thought it was pretty good. The fights were well choreographed and I liked the flawed characters that showed growth/redemption. I didn't notice the forced diversity, as I generally assume fantasy settings are made up of whatever (unless they're based on real world places), and so, when there's someone who wouldn't have been in a climate (like the black general), I will just accept it, unless it becomes overly forced or their character is poorly written.
So odd - I kind of felt seeing that Black General in Cintra as jarring the first time I saw him..his portrayal just didn't fit. Forcing diversity into situation where it doesnt belong is just regressive. The youtuber is absolutely correct - I was trying to find out what was wrong with Witcher - this forced shake up of the demographics was just not organic. It feels flat out artificial...and thats what Witcher feels like....
I was watching it as background noise while working on some other things and every time I would look up I would be confused as hell by the plot line. If you couldn't completely pay attention you'd easily miss a bunch of important things. I had no idea who important characters were and what the heck was going on so I thought it was weird, and all the time things completely flew over my head
Same her on all counts.
I didn't realize the different times zoned until I rewatched it just before season two released and thought it was much better second time around.
@dash4800 I was smashed out of my tree when it first came out and I didn't know what the fuck was going on when it all started to piece back into the original time period as one. Thankfully I was that blasted I couldn't remember half of what I watched and rewatched it recently sober.
* honestly, I still haven't a clue what its about.
There's no need to feel bad about praising the early seasons of GOT. They were legitimately great. Its only the later seasons that went down the toilet
@Frenchbrutus yep definitely a shit take, but they definitely showed signs of their potential for fuxking up in season 2, particular with Danny who was amazing in season 1. It got better before it got worse of course and I don’t believe for a second that guy stopped watching😂
@Jess A I got bored the first time I watched try season 1-4 but this time pay heavy attention to the dialogue put on subtitles if you have cause that's where alot of the shows juiciness comes from
@James Carr the 4th season is the best season in the show....
The first 4 seasons are masterpieces!
The show never really lived up to the promise of those fantastic first three seasons
I actually know why it's called Witcher. Talked to Sapkowski himself some 15 years ago, probably more. Apparently he was wondering why there is no male equivalent of the word witch (wizard is a bit different), and decided to create a world in which there is.
In the Polish language wiedźma (a feminine noun) is the word for "witch" in English. That's the problem with the Modern English language, compared to most other European languages, it has lost its grammatical gender for nouns. Some European languages even have one gender for the singular form and the opposite gender (yes, there are ONLY TWO genders) for the plural form.
@Vince R Including the negative vibe? Like in witch hunt, bewitched etc. My understanding at the time was that was his point :)
The male counterpart to a witch is a warlock. It's better he came up with something new though.
Yen's message to 'some women' ends up being something about 'don't let the baubles cloud your eyes, family and children is the road to happiness'.
I felt like I had the same problem with the geography of The Witcher when I read the book series. I felt like I was constantly saying "What is this place and what is it near by? Which Kingdom is this?"
I absolutely detest what Netflix has done to the base material, they completely butchered the short stories to get to the saga as fast as possible. Out of the 14 tale-like short stories, which are connected and gradually introduce Geralt, his work, his skill, his character, his backstory, his personal phylosophy and problems, and later Dandelion, Yen and Ciri as side characters, Netflix chose to adapt about 7 of them, poorly, and inflated the rest of the show with Yennefers/Ciris backstories/fanfictions.
You could compare Witcher to the Hobbit/LotR. You want to get to the juicy long story of LotR asap, so you trim down the Hobbit to only the most crucial parts: you introduce Gandalf and Bilbo, the ring and Gollum, and rush through the journey in about three episodes. Then you want to set-up the other places and characters important for LotR, so you fill the rest of your season with Aragorn, Legolas, Gimli, Saruman and Frodo-fanfiction. That is exactly what Netflix did with the first season of witcher, a major set-up for the real story of season two.
To me, it shows an absolute lack of respect for the book material, and if the writers are not skilled enough to adapt the series without butchering the stories and characters in this way, they should never have been placed in charge of the project. I don't mind the acting, diverse casting decisions, cgi and other stuff, some of it is good, some not so much. But I hate how they carved up the story.
Agreed, and this all comes down to the fact that they are copying the GoT formula. Unlike The Witcher, GoT is written from the perspectives of multiple characters. This is why it worked when the TV show did the same - they could show what Jon Snow, Tyrion, Daenerys etc. were doing in different places and had plenty of source material to do so. However, Sapowski's short stories are solely from Geralt's perspective, so trying to copy GoT and give Yennefer and Ciri comparable screentime and back stories was inevitably going to be a failure due to the lack of source material.
I am watching 1st ep of Season 2 and have to stop midway because I'm so mad how they butchered the short stories and characters almost entirely.
S2E1 introduces us to Nivellen, from chapter A grain of truth. Netflix just had to make Niv know all about the north-south war AND the Wild hunts. Then, when Geralt was asked why he came to look after a young girl, Ciri, "what changed" him, he answered "who" - "Yennefer of Vengerberg". And I just became speechless. Netflix just threw the "Child of destiny" out the window and made it a story about child adoption for a rom-com couple.
I get that they want to "merge" characters and plots into the main saga plot but holy cow this is all bad and rushed writing.
It just destroys Geralt's character entirely and the relationship between him and Ciri. In S1 they alrd made Geralt x Yen a rom-com thing with no chemistry, no bittersweetness nor passion like in the books, just merely LOLs. Damn, even Tissaia is having way more chemistry with Yen than Geralt with her. This may be the only thing I'm liking about the series.
Fun Fact: The elves in this world actually came from an alternate reality world that basically "collided" with this one during a very rare phase shift event thousands of years prior to this story. That's also basically how all the "evil" creatures appeared. This would have been useful information that could have been included somewhere in the show's narrative.
Actually, the world of the Witcher was first inhabited by the Elves (the Aen Seidhe), some 2000 years before the arrival of humans at the time of the Conjunction of the Spheres. Humans, although late to arrive on the Continent, proved able to “out breed” the long lived elves, and so the Age of Elves would come to an end, and humans would become the dominant species on the Continent.
I remember the narrator from Witcher 3 saying that, something like "Ahh the conjunction of the spheres". That narrative was great and well done
As someone who's read the books, while watching the show, I consistently thought "Wow, this is confusing as fuck. Will people even be able to understand what's going on?"
@j p Yea.... Its not exactly obvious that these are taking place at different time periods....
No. We will not. Can’t recall how long it even took me to understand that time hopping was happening. Not that I couldn’t keep track of such a thing. But, just, fucken let me know first!
I'm usually pretty good at following complex and/or disjointed storylines but on this one, I didn't even pick up on the separate timelines till halfway through the season 😅
Honestly, i played the third game, and i was told by bookreaders that the game doesnt tell the story as well as the books, which may be true, but fuck me, this is a clusterfuck
I know this is all backstory, before the events of the third game, so thats why i dont know any of this, but i cant understand whats going on either.
Also, the politics just feel off. Again, in the game they felt really well made, here it just confuses me, like whats going on even
@Maxawe Some They did it because the books are also like that. They also jump timelines. So I guess they were kind of remaining faithfull to the source material, although they changed a few things and did not actually adapt the first book.... but I thought it was a good adaptation. It can be hard to understand at first, the books are also like that and not everyone likes them. I did, but its not like I fell inlove with them, they were ok, maybe good for me, but nothing too great (that's only my take on the books, I am not stating a fact, but my own opinion)
I actually really liked the way they did it non-sequentially, however i completely agree with your second point in that i had no idea where they were in relation to where anyone else was at any given time, nor the rules or idiosyncrasies or even the social norms of the world they were trying to build.
Thanks for another great review. I agree with almost all you said, however I did thoroughly enjoy it and was happy to not be sure what the world was about or what exactly was going on, trusting and hoping that it'll be revealed later. This was a strength of it I think. Really looking forward to your review of the next season.
You have a real talent for taking lengthy, excruciating pain and disappointment and turning it into twenty minutes of real information and entertainment
I didn’t realize until you mentioned that there was very little worldbuilding that I don’t remember them bringing up the Conjunction of the Spheres at all which is a pretty big detail
Perfectly reviewed. Basically mentioned everything I thought about when watching and researching the show just a few days ago 👍🏼
The 2 bishes helping the dragons are the only use of “inclusion” that makes sense considering it explains they came from Zerekania which is Witcher Arabia/Africa
That doesn't explain why they cast Bantus as Zerekanians. They should have been more like Afghans or Lybians. Sub-Saharan Africa and northern Africa are very different.
That one was ok. It was funny that they were following around a short old white man whom they called beautiful.
Except this isn't even true. It's a non-canon speculation that was placed into the Witcher games, and never appeared within the books. Tea and Vea are common nicknames in certain parts of Europe. Zerrikania, book-wise, is never given any mention as to being Africa or Arabia. Ofir is more Middle Eastern, and Zangwebar (Zanzibar) is the African analogue via the books' lore.
Tea and Vea are also noted as having blonde hair. Not exactly an African or Arabian trait, and the only real defense someone MIGHT be able to muster are Melanesian blondes, but I think that's an extremely vast stretch to believe that Sapkowski was thinking of Melanesia regarding this particular nation/landmass.
@Eli Odum tea and vea are zerrekanian which is a combo of arabia/middle east and almost an Australian vibe with weird animals and an aboriginal feeling. The people who kidnap you in the witcher 3 are Ofieri which is a north African inspired peoples
Main villain of W1 was from Zerrikenia and he looked like Middle-Eastern or Arabic. Even those bodyguards in gwent cards looked more arabic.
I’m weird but I enjoyed the Anthology style of stories for an opening season to set the world before the real meat of the story hits. I agree though it was a gamble. Casting Cavill was smart though he brought big star power and enough interest to get a second season
Don't know if you'll see this, but having a general/king/queen/whatever in the frontline can be a HUGE advantage, seeing as it gives a great moral boost to the men. The risk to the commander is also fairly small, seeing as that person would have the best soldiers around for protection.
The Battle of Goose Green in 1982 , where Colonel H Jones was killed leading the battalion, but led to victory.
The Gladiator!!
The fact that this video featured Kristen Britain's Green Rider series for even a split second made my heart swell with joy 😊
I think it might have been better if they had left Ciri and Nilfgaard's whole thing off until season 2, because then they could have taken season one to do the world building and explain Ciri's connection to Geralt. Then we might have actually cared more about Nilfgaard trying to kill Ciri (well, cared about it more than you usually care about people trying to kill a girl). At the very least, they shoulda done SOMETHING to show what time each episode was in. With the two anthology books that this season pulled from, there is at least a sense of a cohesive timeline. I only read them once, but I don't think you meet Ciri until after you meet her parents.
I finally got around to watching this and the first episode did struggle a bit with the Geralt storyline ultimately holding it together, the second episode began to loose me with its pacing but then things picked up in the third episode as we have a bloody fight between Geralt and a fetus monster in an old abandoned keep. This one episode best shows what the show can do, with lies, political and family intrigue and Geralt stubbornly investigating through all that shit till he knows what he’s hunting then gets to work with a mixed level of cgi monster fun. The show had me there, right up to the end where it takes a weird turn as they write off Geralt for pretty much the entirety of the last episode instead following a bunch of witches trying to hold off a besieging army and dying one by one. Oh no, not, um, her, oh dear, not them, and so on but I neither knew any of these characters nor cared and I don’t know what the writers were thinking on this one. Still, overall it turned out to be a lot of fun this show, I was worried that the hundred + hours I’d played the Witcher 3 would colour things too much when watching the show, and it did a little, but not enough to take away the enjoyment of the series. I’d give it a go again, now if only I could get the metal cover of toss a coin to your Witcher out of my head.
I heard Cavill is an actual fan of the games and this was his dream role. It's too bad the writers don't share his passion for the source material.
The is geek-god. He almost missed an audition call because he was playing World of Warcraft.
There was a decent way to introduce the "diversity" quotas : the Ofieris. Raiders, Merchants, Runewrights... Got to admit, nothing ruins a setting more than having this feeling of out of place demographics in a very specific context and setting.
The games aren't the source material. It's books.
It's not based on the games. It's based on novels, kinda like GoT, and that's why this show is utter garbage to someone who actually read the novels.
@IBeg Show does a very poor job at following the books.
I love this show and can't wait for season 3! By the way it has the best song ever! Toss a coin to your witcher was an inspiration to many on KZclip with cover after cover
Contact me for your reward 🎉❤️🎉
Sapkowski's novels are a good read, dude's a decent writer.
Rulers often led their armies from the front like Frederick the great. Hiding in your fancy head quarters like a ww1 general is a modern concept. In mid evil times you had to show strength on the battlefield by leading your army like Joan of arc, Richard the Lion heart, Julius Caesar and Alexander the great so that scene makes sense.
Watching the series, I felt that it was meant to be understood by the ones familiar with the video games at least. So many things where left missexplained that I knew only because I have played (and not even fully) the first two video games. But I think it's going to be unfolded in the next seasons slowly. Still found it to be a great series.
Watching the first season is basically having someone who just read the cliffs notes explain the books to you
The people from the forest were not elves, they were Dryads, but still, Dryads weren't black in the books, they have green skin, but their phenotype features are Northern European as well
@KindredBrujah Reread my comment, I say pretty much that very thing. Tolkien is basically responsible for the revival in popular culture of Elves/Elfs being seen as tall and powerful and more than just little furtive fairy folk.
@REB Jr The fair folk use of 'elf' long predates the Victorian era. It's existed in Celtic folklore for centuries. Perhaps a millenium.
Tbh i don’t care about their skin color, since they are some unique society living in symbiosis with a living forest….but it is so fucking laughable that they made a tribe of a few women out of it…in general, the whole Brokilon part where Geralt and Ciri met in the books was one of my favorite chapters…can’t believe how they ruined it that bad.
Dryads being green (and nude) is actually from the games. In the books it only says some of them take on a greenish, brownish or redish hue (presumably leaf and wood tones).
Isnt this the exact same problematic aspect of putting starfire from the titans and her entire planet black while they actually have orange skin and green eyes. Thats 2020 hollywood for you
I love this show, mainly because I love the Witcher series (mostly the games, unfortunately I have yet to finish all the books in order). Though I will say, there are some flaws that I can see, and much like the source material, the show suffers from a disjointed story that only makes itself readily apparent if you are actually paying attention (I love that, but I know that it will confuse many others.), and it makes some of the stories feel jankily paced. I also am unawares how they met in the book, but Geralt and Yen's meeting felt a little rushed. Again, still haven't read the entire series, so i could very well be wrong. Everything else though I greatly enjoyed. Kinda wish they got a more game accurate look for Triss though. It would make sense to maximize the audience by getting both the game AND book lovers interested.
Priceless!!! “Dated worse”, “gets sad” and “fresh prince” were amazing!
Being required to find things out yourself makes it stand out in my opinion. I was afraid that they over expose like in the Avatar movie but they had a simple plot to follow for everybody + a complex one for those interested. Loved it!
Once again you nailed it drinker! I almost dropped it at the end of the first season because I was so confused about who is who, why armies fight, are the invaders good or bad, why they invade, etc. season 2 is better because we learn a little bit (not too much) but we also learn to ignore the geopolitics to focus on the Witcher and his quest. Good show overall!
I re-watched this series back in Oct. Even the 2nd time around it was a little difficult to follow. Although slightly easier. At least knowing about the bouncing around in chronological order part was more understanding.
"The heavyhanded 'diversity' grates on the nerves after a while." Sums up eighty percent of television nowadays, doesn't it?
@Barryallen821 I'm not shure if your answering me and I don't even remember the context
@MatVey TuomA SvibeR you say that like there is 3 caltures white black and Asian each of this countrys regardless of their color have different cultures saying that making a movie about persia is the same as making movie about Poland because both are white is purely wrong and blind racism I'm from somewhere that is underprestend in it own local tv but when I see presentations like this forced actors I honestly want to throw up because calture is so much more then skin color I rather there be a movie about my country's unlike culture rather then having 1000 of actors of my country stick out like a sore thumb in a nordic movie so you can call me a racist for hating to see a black charcter in the witcher but I liked the black panther movie because tachela wasn't sticking out like the ugly duck ( no pun intended)
death note🤢
Definitely interested in season 2. I really enjoyed season 2 and it does away with most of the time hopping.
Best show i saw in a long time. Can't wait for season 2.
Oh man, i cant believe you didnt like Jaskier. Literally the best cast of the show :O Guy is hilarious in his delivery, and pretty much sums up the character in every scene. Much better than game versions thats for sure.
Thanks again Drinker. Since I don't Stream from any sources, I've been waiting for this series to come out on Blu-ray and 2 1/2 years later, I'm STILL waiting.
I'm a huge fan of the games (built a new computer expressly with the desire to play Witcher 3) and postponed watching your review(s) of the series, with the sense of dread one gets from realizing just how many shows of this ilk Hollywood has F-d up.
As I am (via the games) pretty familiar with this world and the characters in it, I'm thinking I should be able to keep pace but still, was the disjointed timeline really necessary? That rarely works and I get the impression from your synopsis, this would have been better if done in a more linear fashion.
Still, I'm willing to give at least S-1 a shot, if they get off their butts and give us a Blu-ray. Nervously gonna click on your S-2 review now...
Contact me for your reward 🎉❤️🎉
One correction is needed: on 6:23 those women Tea and Vea, are from Zerricania which is sort of North African / Middle Eastern region in the lore. So it was the time when a diverse cast actually fitted perfectly.
I thought they were gonna give Yennefer the Captain Marvel treatment. I was surprised she actually had to work for what she wanted and wasn't just instantly good at everything.
@River46 stop stop! he's already dead *cries*
@Idrees Khan Ciri is/was a sheltered teenager that did not have the decades time jumps that the other 2 had. Now that they are all running on the same time line, I am hopeful that Ciri will start developing from the blank canvas she is.
@Liam Patrick she was powerful from the get go from the moment she was given her powers tho. N although she did have to go through training with Jude Law,she would've n could've easily beaten him at anytime if it wasn't for her not bein able to use her powers. N so it's still bs.
They needed something for fillers n probably couldn't think of anything else n so had to chuck that in. Lol
@Vlad Tepish III yeah I guess she must have had an amazing audition
"i do find myself hoping the gamble pays off"
it definitely did not pay off
Showing Max and Paddy at 0:37 as the doormen gave me a big laugh haha 😂
Despite its drawbacks I still hope there will be season 2 and beyond... I mean there is so much to work with and I would love to see some of ther main plotline of the Witcher saga on screen (with possible exception of The Tower of a Swallow wittch is crap). I would like the to at least get to introduction of my favorite character Regis.
Yen wasn't infertile because of being a mage, she was infertile from curing her ailments and having her powers dramatically increased.
I wanted to like this so badly, especially with Henry's commitment to the role but not having seen the game or read the books I had simply no idea what was going on and gave up after 5 episodes. Only now I'm learning of time jumps.
I can't help but notice you didn't mention Triss in the show even once...which is fitting because for me she was poorly portrayed and cast
@Kai Bit late but your right. She is not in the The Last Wish. She is mentioned in the book but not present so I guess I just had that conflated in my mind somehow.
@tyrannosaurus imperator which book are you referring? The first book in the novels? S1 was clearly based on The Last Wish (book) which is the first "book" in the franchise, but is a collection of short stories and not a extended narrative like the novels that followed it. It has been a while since I read it however so I could be mistaken but I don't recall the section you speak of in The Last Wish. To my knowledge Triss is only mentioned in that book off hand.
@David Szaks the first book is all about Triss complaining about how the Witchers are raising Ciri and basically kidnapping her to go to witch school.
What is it with Hollywood just not casting people that look like their characters
she's fall into 6:02
I like how the "go away now" changes based on how good was the review
I read all the Witcher books when I was young. The show was a great reminder of how great reading was. I liked it.
Love your videos. I'd love a short series as well if ever an option!
I tried watching this and got 6-8 episodes in before falling off for about a week then came back and was completely lost, I didn’t even know that there were timelines crossing more then a few years so just shows how much I was paying attention I guess. Anyway I like to think I am fairly good at keeping track but the way it’s set up is completely incoherent if you aren’t laser focused on a story you have no previous experience with or investment in and asking that much attention right off the bat is a pretty tough ask even if it was directed in a way that made it slightly easier to follow. Thinking about it now by the 4-5th episode I was loving it but by that point I was so confused it was not something that could be understood because so much context had been lost
While I overall enjoyed the show in itself, it has some huge flaws and I think the biggest is that they rushed the firs two books. While they are shortstories, most are still connected in their themes and events and do a great job setting up the characters and world. While you don't need every single one to capture that, there were some significant storys either missing or getting butchered. The story that introduces the elves has important events missing, so we can get Yennefers Backstory and glimpses of whatever the fuck Ciri was doing. If they had stayed closer to the books it would have lead to a more cohesive and interesting story.
“The Fresh Prince of Rivendale” I almost spit out my drink on that one
🤣🤣🍺
A.K.A RIVERDALE.
facts lol
The mages aren’t all infertile, she forfeited her ability to procreate in order for the magical beauty surgery to work. It was pretty cut and dry terms the surgeon laid out before her. Just an FYI there drunko.
Yeah that was golden. 😆
The entire first season is world building, character introductions and shows events that were briefly mentioned in the books. In the first book Geralt and Ciri are already together
U explained it a lot better in 13 minutes than actually watching the show thanks drinker 👍
I really liked the series and yes Yennifer was probably the best thing about it. Her arc is amazing
I would have liked more Geralt but had no problem with Yennefer's story. It was pretty good character development considering they only had 8 episodes to do it. I wish they had cast someone ethnically more accurate but the actress did a great job.
I've watched the season twice, with the second time of watching with a youtube recap after each episode. After that I fully understood which made it worthwhile.
The 'elves' in Brokilon Forest are actually Dryads. The books don't explain enough imo but much more than the show. Too much is omitted or hinted at in the books eg Yen's backstory.
Geralt: "I like Fringilla because she looks like Yenn and reminds me of her."
Writers: "Better make sure she's inexplicably black with no similarities."
Fringilla was paintful to look at.
@Danisa Lusha You're lying to yourself
@Danisa Lusha none of these people are racist
@cally anderson yes lol that is how public opinion works. My comment is old asf, go get a hobby
I’m really looking forward to the drinkers review of season two. In my opinion they seem to have taken on board what he says here and made a much more coherent production.
I'd love to know what the Critical Drinker thinks how a novel like the Use of Weapons could be made, considering jumping back and forth from the protagonist's narrative.
Haha! I laughed thru this one. I managed to stich together the story that was presented differently, and got another experience, but I do understand your perspective. And in that regard it do seem kind of confusing. Anyway, I would recommend this to anyone that likes fantasy. It does get better and I sincerely miss the main characters now that I plowed thru the series.
Yes, this season required a bit too much from audience (it's ok for ppl who read the books, but others probably have hard time following events) and the problem is, it's based on short stories and adds Yennefer story (which wasn't bad). While Jaskier is close to source material (with his sometimes annoying character), I can't forgive creators destroying some characters (Cahir and Vilgefortz are jokes for example) and I don't like making up things (like reason for which Yennefer couldn't have kids - in original almost all mages lost their fertility due to influence of magic - and those who don't would probably prefer to lose it as well, as their offsprings are nothing more than deformed midless corpses or vegetables at most. And while I understand low budget and far from perfect monsters and cgi, power level of wizards in serie is also a (very saddening) joke - what Yennefer showed in the battle as "great spell" was something any mage in books could achieve with a little more than wave of hand. I have much less problem with forced "diversity" than I thought I'd have with some exceptions, for example: while Dryads might have been played by black woman, they should have green painted skin and BOWS, not spears, and Fringilla Vigo was described as person with "ghastly pale" skin and big similarity to Yen...
I agree that it was fragmented and difficult to follow. However, I liked it enough to watch it again a year later and enjoyed it a lot more the second time.
After having a slog of Mary Sue female characters (namely one Star Wars character) Yennefer was SUCH a breath of fresh air: learns from her failures, struggles/isn’t a prodigy and earns her success and power. Then as you say the complexity of her feeling everything she fought for wasn’t worth her current situation and she’s jaded and now motivated to amend what’s she done to herself. Nothings given, everything is earned and that’s why I love her
This show is unique. It’s mature. It doesn’t tell you there’s 3 story lines in different time lines, you have to figure it out. The fight scenes are great but rare so when they happen your excited. I don’t like how they went all political representation bullshit with some of the characters though.
My biggest complaint with the plot was they really only developed Yennefer. But the show kept breaking immersion with all the forced diversity. Fringilia was paintful to look at.
It’s not really mature compared to book. The fact that timelines are confusing for average Netflix viewer doesn’t make it mature. There’s clear distinction between good and evil and none important themes are well made in opposite to great novels
I kinda like the non-linear story telling it makes you more attentive to what is happening.
This was surprisingly enjoyable. Henry Cavill is ideal as a fantasy James Bond. I enjoyed Gormenghast back when Henry VIII was the lead.
Wait is a Gormenghast adaptation actually happening? It's #1 on my list of awesome/weird books that I would never expect to be adapted, even though it's already happened at least once.
Contact me for your reward 🎉❤️🎉
Yeah I know the CW shows generally suck, but I think you’d like this one for a while. You should do a review of the first three seasons of arrow. It’s similar in the functionality of the chronology, but it does it way better
If you can't tell whether you like Jaskier or hate him - that means they really got this character right.
that was pretty spot on. still enjoyed to show. really looking forward to season 2.
actually, the non-chronological order of the episodes makes a lot of sense. The book this season is (largely) based on does the same. Im not sure if reordering the stories would have benefitted the narrative on the big screen. If they continue this way, we should be getting more linear storytelling from season 3 and onward (corresponding to the 3rd + books)
Just on that bit about Medieval battles.....At the time it was not uncommon for Kings to be leading their troops into battle (yeah might not of been the smart thing but it happend) as for the safety of the ruler well for one they would have the best armour available which despite movies and tv shows was actually effective, and no one would WANT to kill you because you were far more valuable as a hostage than as a corpse
Loved the asynchronous story telling mechanism, and I disagree that it was hard to keep track of. You had 3 characters with three different timelines that converge. was almost my favourite bit of the show.
Contact me for your reward 🎉❤️🎉
Really want to see the reaction to season 2.
Just to clarify a thing about Yennefer, during the events of this she is in her 70s-80s. I think that explains her getting bored fairly well.
And honestly, that age is where the show failed her. Yennefer in the books and the game had a sort of gravitas, an air of power and experience. This show's version kinda tries to act like she has it, but she absolutely doesn't. Part of that might be looking too young. True, sorceresses are supposed to look young and attractive (with exceptions), but they went too far here. Imo, they should have gone with someone who looks around 30 but well preserved, just to take off that edge of too young looking inexperienced.
@FastenedCarrot I found out that the show kinda changed her character. In the books she was just lot more badass and mature to put it simply.
She acts like a bored teenager most of the time though, not an experienced mage.
@Nebula Yeah Yen is like a 100+
I loved it. It has some flaws. But I'm looking forward to the next season.
Yennifer is one of the best written female characters done lately. I was really able to connect with her in aspects of my own life. it was beautiful
Yeah I agree. The Yennefer plot was interesting. I didn't agree with them casting an Indian, however. The actress did a great job, but Netflix deliberately cast non-whites in material inspired by Polish folklore.