I bet that book stuff will come into play in show too once things start to evolve. Too big things for motives to be ignored.
-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
-
We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.
The Witcher |OT| Something More (Dec. 20th Netflix) - TAG SPOILERS WITH EPISODE
- Thread starter WadiumArcadium
- Start date
- OT
I bet that book stuff will come into play in show too once things start to evolve. Too big things for motives to be ignored.
Now now, I love the show to bits. The hair just looks quite wiggy when its dry :)
I'm not fatalistic, and it's too cliché of a literary trope for my tastes, but it's unavoidable in the Witcher saga, so I'm just rolling with it.
But yes, the idea that Cintra is sacked because someone didn't fulfill their destiny is unique to the show.
I mean, there are others who are clamoring for more male nudity....
Most part of the game was overly saturated to my liking. Toussaint and Skellige are good though.
I'm confident that S2 will be better because it's linear, unlike the two short story collections.
The show certainly presents her that way because she's a main character; this is consistent with Sapkowski's love for strong women characters.
S2 will start off well for her, but I hope you're a True Fan during the finale....
Alright, after finishing the season, one thing doesn't make sense to me in the overall timeline of Nilfgaard/Vilgefortz (basically main plot of the book saga)
Books and episode 8 spoilers follow:
Books and episode 8 spoilers follow:
In the books, Nilfgaard starts the first war, gets trashed at Sodden Hill by the Northern Kingdoms + mages led by Vilgefortz. Some years later, Vilgefortz and Duny/Emhyr get in cahoots. Duny+Pavetta are "lost at sea", teleported to Nilfgaard by Vilgefortz's extractor magic device.
Then Nilfgaard attacks the second time, destroys Cintra and proceeds to invade the Northern Kingdoms. Ciri meets Geralt again, the saga starts here.
But the show, it seems, completely does away with the first war with Nilfgaard. Vilgefortz (nothwithstanding his weird face-heel turn) is shown still fighting against Nilfgaard in earnest during the successful invasion, years after Duny and Pavetta are lost. So... he presumably wasn't the one who was responsible. That seems like a major change and I don't see how it wouldn't impact the plot of the saga in a significant way.
Just a weird decision, idk why they did that or where are they planning to go with that.
Then Nilfgaard attacks the second time, destroys Cintra and proceeds to invade the Northern Kingdoms. Ciri meets Geralt again, the saga starts here.
But the show, it seems, completely does away with the first war with Nilfgaard. Vilgefortz (nothwithstanding his weird face-heel turn) is shown still fighting against Nilfgaard in earnest during the successful invasion, years after Duny and Pavetta are lost. So... he presumably wasn't the one who was responsible. That seems like a major change and I don't see how it wouldn't impact the plot of the saga in a significant way.
Just a weird decision, idk why they did that or where are they planning to go with that.
For sure, 1st season was very much about establishing core characters and shove Saga ball gently at the end.
They tried with Episode 3, but the sword fight in Ep1 was sadly the action highlight of the season.
I was actually kind of surprised that we didn't get other great sword fights as the season went on.
Except maybe that one bit in Ep8. Still not nearly as good if you ask me.
I was actually kind of surprised that we didn't get other great sword fights as the season went on.
Except maybe that one bit in Ep8. Still not nearly as good if you ask me.
While watching with my brother (who has read none of the books) we were referencing the Gwent decks in TW3 to remember who was who lol
Wait people are actually bored of this show? This is a neat fun fantasy show where the main character is great, and Cavill is a good actor. 5 episodes in and I love this. Waaay better than Mandalorian from Disney.
Handling dwarves through CGI or contrived LOTR-style framing wouldn't have improved a show that's already struggling with basic cinematography.
I liked how they handled it here because it allowed the dwarves to share scenes with other actors instead of existing mostly in close-up shots.
Agreed. The critics are Way off the mark with this one.
This show has been a very pleasant 8/10 experience for me.
It's a pretty good show. I like it a lot. For what that's worth
This show is definitely working way better for me than the Mandalorian is. Probably because even though Geralt isn't the MOST emotive person at least he has a philosophy on life. A character.
Mando is just a blank slate.
Mando is just a blank slate.
Starting on Episode 4, I think the progression in how Jaskier has built up Geralt's reputation is well played. That the tune he came up with is basically Geralt's anthem for crowds to play up when they realise that, oh shit, the stories are true*
*The bard takes no responsibility for however embellished they may be
*The bard takes no responsibility for however embellished they may be
That song is great - even though too modern for the Witcher setting but whatever :D
I heard now the original English version but Polish and Czech version too and all 3 of them are great
The reception for this compared to Mandalorian is kinda blowing my mind. I like Mandalorian alright but it has a lot more problems. Horrendous acting, no real characters, and a really clunky script when people even are talking. But I guess it has a cute meme?
Again, I like both shows but they should really be more similar in ratings than they are.
We've only got the last two episodes left but I am absolutely loving the show. It really feels more like The Witcher than I thought it was going to be. I think Cavil has been fantastic as Geralt, and I love how true to the books it has been so far. My only criticism so far is the casting of Yennefer. The actress is good, but she just looks way too young for a sorceress of her age.
I feel that Yen was the only amazing character. Overall, it's a good show, though
I'm up to ep six and I'm loving the show. My only downsides are not really liking the Ciri actress/character so far, and that sixth episode had some rough cgi. Also a bit dissapointed in the sword fights past ep 1 or 2.
Yen, Geralt, Jevier are all amazing.
Yen, Geralt, Jevier are all amazing.
Her age makes perfect sense to me seeing the story they're telling.
She essentially stops aging when she becomes a full fledged sorceress. And that doesn't happen too long after being sold by her step dad. She couldn't really be sold if she were already like 30 or something.
I loved it!
Episode 2 is hot garbage but after that the show is great, I didn't know it was only 8 episodes, I just finished the last one and now I don't know what to do lol
I want more!
Episode 2 is hot garbage but after that the show is great, I didn't know it was only 8 episodes, I just finished the last one and now I don't know what to do lol
I want more!
Sure, and I do get that. But I'm coming at it from the direction that Geralt is another pseudo ageless character and he, you know, looks like someone who has lived as long as he has. She's supposed to be this beautiful sorceress, which is true, but for going as close to the books as they have been it just seems like one of the only sticking out points for me. That's not to diminish the actress though, I think she has been great so far.
Okay... so
everything that has been going on with Geralt, Yen, Jaskier, is not happening at the same time as the events of Ciri? The show makes it seem like everything is coinciding with one another.
Yen's events are also out of sequence. You see a very young Foltest in episode 3 while Geralt is interacting with him as an adult in the same episode.
No, it's not at the same time.
For example episode 4 involves Ciri's mother Pavetta as she's pregnant with her
what? The show goes to such extreme lengths to make it super obvious we are seeing multiple timelines. Everyone is constantly mentioning it, it actually is a bit much how often the point it out. For example,
The council talking about the previous king of Cintra.
Yen mentioning shes been 30 years at court
The Usurper plot in Nilfgaard
Man, the ending to the show really pissed me off - the ending to the short stories was perfect as it was, but for some fucked up reason they totally butchered that.. you only needed to add some 5 lines from the books and the ending would have been way, way more emotional.. what the fuck
Even the poor older Polish TV series done the ending justice
"It's like they said, Geralt! It's like they said! Am I your destiny? Say it! Am I your destiny?"
Yurga saw the Witcher's eyes. And was very astonished. He heard his wife's soft weeping, felt the trembling of her shoulders. He looked at the Witcher and waited, tensed, for his answer. He knew he would not understand it, but he waited for it. And heard it.
"You're much more than that, Ciri. Much more."
What the fuck Netflix
Even the poor older Polish TV series done the ending justice
"It's like they said, Geralt! It's like they said! Am I your destiny? Say it! Am I your destiny?"
Yurga saw the Witcher's eyes. And was very astonished. He heard his wife's soft weeping, felt the trembling of her shoulders. He looked at the Witcher and waited, tensed, for his answer. He knew he would not understand it, but he waited for it. And heard it.
"You're much more than that, Ciri. Much more."
What the fuck Netflix
Last edited:
Just a question for viewers who have not read the books but have finished the whole season:
How long did it take for you to realize the show is pulling a Dunkirk -- that the separate plotlines aren't presented in chronological order?
I ask because I'm in episode 3 right now and I'm thinking this would've been really hard to parse had I not already read the books, but there was already a big clue in episode 1. Not sure if I'd have caught that without book knowledge though.
I ask because I'm in episode 3 right now and I'm thinking this would've been really hard to parse had I not already read the books, but there was already a big clue in episode 1. Not sure if I'd have caught that without book knowledge though.
They couldn't have done that because they've spent the entire season ripping out the heart of that story (no biggie, it's only the single most important thing in the series).
They had an entire season to build up towards that scene, yet they chose to close it with the meeting of two complete strangers. Exchanging two meaningless one-liners is honestly all they could have done there because the characters don't mean anything to each other.
I don't know why these writers can't allow characters to grow fond of each other, why everyone has to be told who to care about.
my gf caught it around episode 2. They make it very explicit through dialogue.
Up to episode 4 right now I have to say I don't like the jumping from plotline to plotline. Might have been better to dedicate episodes to individual characters. I feel like this all must be pretty confusing to people who haven't read the books and even more so to people who don't know the world at all.
pretty much the same as you. Didn't notice until that episode.