Well, after 2nd episode I was like: This can now get only better. Oh boy, hard to describe how wrong I was. 3rd episode got everything as wrong as they could have. - - - - To bold part. You are the one who do not understand meaning of sentence which you wrote there. Neither meaning of absolute which I kindly underlined for you. Correct word should have been: "ANY". I mean, that when I predicted temporal issues after seeing 1st episode, I expected that it will be bad at places. But they mix up everything. So, to the relevance. Event that is supposed to happen years before is placed in show after. Which creates breakage in character relationships, behavior, ... I wanted to rate this show based on how close events are to those in books. Which is not hard to do for film makers who can read. But it was so bad in those 1st three episodes that I changed strategy and decided to rate show based on behavior of characters. (How close they are to book. If their code of conduct, morals, decisions match or not.) My bad again. Geralt in 3rd episode is 3/10 of book Geralt. Character at that point is not Witcher, but murderer. (Which they basically made him into right from the start in 1st episode... Since they actually did not show/spoke reasons for his actions.) For now, only one close to book character is Yenn, as long as one ignores actual story errors. So, please... Excuse those which you call butthurt. But I am calling: "Turd is a Turd regardless of dressing you put on it. But feel free to delight in its taste."
Finished all 8 episodes and I would give it a solid 8.5/10. As mentioned earlier I do have to fault it for how the timeline jumps around a lot which can make the viewer not knowing what's happening in current time or the past. So yeah I guess it comes down to the editing which could have been better imo. By the end though everything does come together and I'm looking forward to season 2.
Well, do you really call creative liberty when scene to scene jumps 80 years in time without letting viewer know. Then decade and back. But in the end, worst is when Ciri is degraded to mindless blob of a story superglue. Or when they show Brokilon's Dryads as some kind of Amazons with mostly spears and swords? 9/10 of them were like that. And that one with ranged weapon had F*ing crossbow. (How do they defend forest again? Doing hand to hand combat? What? Is that creativity or stupidity?) When error rate goes into 5~10 per minute at moments, it turns into "WTF show." One has to be on mental wave with cynical bard to really enjoy this show. If they did cut his talk to 1/2, and used freed time for actual important conversation that is missing, it would have been much better. When show makes events happen for completely different reasons, or no reason at all, they rob original characters of their minds. And sad part is that they have those robbed characters right in center of screen. Making them much emptier than they are. - - - - They should have named this show: Itcher And characters could have been: Erald, Riss, Iri, ... 4th episode made it clear. Names are obstruction for this show.
ah but bard has become one of my fave aspects of the show his place set to toward alterin public perception of Geralt while all the time bein dismissed largely by Geralt himself. the way he travels in turn in order to recite creationry songs of Witchers most fantastical tales the fact he is often so at odds with the very same person makes him a nicely set grey area in a world where witchers are either loathed or loved in a pretty stark black or white manner. bard is someone i think we can all relate as he comes over as way more modernistic than any other character presented to us especially in a never meet your hero forewarnin kind a way. that one scene where he was incapacitated in a room filled with orgy and could only react with his eyes had me bawlin lol and as wonderfuly dippy n clueless as he can be again i find him the most relatable who i want to learn more about as a character by far when he steps out fo his comedy relief role. one thing nrly everyone can agree on the timelines could do with far more prominence cos even my friend and i when watchin often get caught out momentarily forced to pause to ascertain exactly what timeline we are now in before we continue on. it can be jarrin time to time for sure but its neither somethin that spoils the entertainment value and will be no doubt fixed big time for a second season.
The most honest, educated, and open minded review yet from someone who really knows his witcher stuff. No spoilers.
I thought it was good, a few weird things though. - The pacing was a little bit off sometimes, not enough to make me think negatively about it but was a little bit weird. Switching very fast from a very serious narrative to sudden classic Witcher snarky responses. - Some of the characters are not really what I thought they would be having read the books and played the games, Triss Merigold for example. Also I always thought the witcher was meant to be loosely based on 12th or 13th century Poland and seeing so many black charachters was weird. Not that I mind but it seemed a bit weird. Also damn did they butcher my poor boy Foltest, loved that character. Now he's a fat lazy king.
Finished. Episode by episode => Story wise in terms of consistency: 7, 6, 5, 5, 2, 3, 1, 2 out of 10 Chronology consistency: 6, 4, 4, 5, 8, 6, 6, 8 out of 10 Character behavioral likeness: 6, 6, 5, 4, 4, 5, 5, 5 out of 10 Overall Impression: 7, 5, 5, 4, 3, 4, 2, 3 out of 10 I wonder if they were burning 1st two books on premiere... since 1st season does that to them anyway. What they did to Calanthe, Ciri, Triss, ... And they were not even consistent in between episodes. They will have to ignore what they did in 1st season to actually continue with Saga itself. Especially character strengths, weaknesses, morals, motivations. Way they repainted some characters as much more bad/evil served no purpose. Way they made things happen out of thin air when character that initiated them was right there... Way they glued random events as intentions of other characters. At times it was as if they took list of events. Made a big spinning wheel with character names. And randomly assigned stuff to them. Their portrait of Vilgefortz will bite them in the ass. Taking away his role in finale and giving it to Yennefer was stupid. Same way as they made most of mages weak. I wonder what they are about to do with Philippa Eilhart. And all the powerful forces to come. Will they repeat Djinn part? Will they reduce power levels to kittens and puppies? Will there be those unexplainable: "Geralt just knows" moments? Will it be full of: "I have never been here, but suddenly I know secret of this place." - - - - Sure, show must be wonderful to those who do not even ask about reasons why characters do things. For someone who does not question any contradictions and takes any behavior as justified w/o reason... 9,5/10 But those who think about characters will not like it even if they did not read books. There it would be like 6,5/10 And for me, who loves books... 3/10. (They had all the tools, and still did not use them properly.) - - - - I am just happy that I do not need to return to this thread till 2021 when 2nd season is out.
Man I'm so relaxed. I didn't read the books, I didn't played games. I just enjoyed a (good) fantasy series. Don't shoot me please.
Many people have sweetly written me, upset about the #Witcher reviews. Know this: Who do I care about? "Professional" critics who watched one episode and skipped ahead? Or REAL fans who watched all eight in one day, and are starting their rewatch? I am procreating THRILLED.?????? — Lauren S. Hissrich (@LHissrich) December 22, 2019
I didnt read the books only played all 3 games and just finished season 1 and i felt very entertained. The timelines, okay...not optimal, but still, if the show makes me to almost watch all 8 episodes straight and entertained me and i like what i saw, im giving it a 9/10. I only imagined Triss a little differently lookswise but i guess thats coming from the games. Dont forget, toss a coin to your witcher...
I watched it and it looks promising. Actually I am looking forward for the second season. One thing that got me confused at some points was the timeline back and forth - a warning: don't watch this after a couple (more) of beers or you will have trouble following the timeline... And one dilemma about the witcher's origin - maybe someone can confirm???
I didn't care much for it. Watched the first two and I almost shut it off when that devil showed up. It just looks so bad as a live action show. A big reason why early GoT worked for me at least, was, aside from the strong writing, there was minimal use of magic, no mythical creatures(aside from dragons), monsters,elves and dwarves. But as soon as the dragons, white walkers and dryads and whatever else there was got more screentime, it just looked more and more like a generic fantasy show with a budget. It's like superhero comics, most of them can't handle the transfer to film without looking cheesy as hell. And at times The Witcher is nearly Xena level bad. I don't know if I'll watch more episodes at this point. The pace of the story seems way too fast as well.
1st season encapsulates 1st 2 books. That's around 15~20 years. +They added Yennefer's origin story... Another 80 years of time jumps. Sadly, they decided to not take it chronologically and as result, they removed most of interactions and connections between some characters.
so I started watching this and i like on to episode 5 I finding it very hard to follow we see lioness and everyone dead from sacking of the castle then we seem alive, 1 point we see young foltest and his sister and yennefer in the same ballroom then we see foltest as old man and his sister dead and the whole curse that was on her. Even if I Didnt know what happen in witcher 1 and 2 and never read the books. and just came at this with know nothing, I still be confused. I like it but I confused If scene are gona be done in the past then present they need to say so I hate it when show and movies do that and say nothing. I mean it look like geralt was going back and forth in time to me. The fact the chronologically order was blatantly ignored made thing more confusing and even if you didnt know it was out of order it would still be confusing to follow cause how it done/presented. The whole yennefer story XX amount years in the past should of be presented as "XX year ago" and when it caught up to Geralt time line presented as "present" so on and so forth alot of confusion could be avoid. I mean I had to go on to the witcher wiki to read certain thing to even understand what was going on cause it just was not making sense. Henry Cavill is the star here he did justice to Geralt everyone else eh. with all that said I look forward to watching the rest of the episodes tonight and tomorrow
https://forums.guru3d.com/threads/the-witcher-netflix-to-make-tv-drama-series.414594/ Is this the difference between based on games vs based on the books.
