TheRPGSite

The Lounge => Media and Inspiration => Topic started by: Doom on December 29, 2019, 11:25:52 pm

Title: The Witcher!
Post by: Doom on December 29, 2019, 11:25:52 pm
Even though I wasn't such a fan of the computer games, I found the series decent enough except for the ridiculous time-shuffling of storylines (done without segue or notice).

Anyone else binged it out yet?
Title: The Witcher!
Post by: HappyDaze on December 30, 2019, 03:43:23 am
I just finished Episode 3. It feels very slow to me, and I have been warned that there is "time-shuffling" but I do not yet know exactly how the pieces fit together. I watched the first two episodes > 1 week ago and then #3 yesterday. In between, I took the time to watch Lost in Space season 2 because, as ridiculous as the constant disasters might be, it kept my attention more than Witcher. I remain hopeful that Witcher will pick up and catch my interest, as I have two friends that have seen it and said it is good.
Title: The Witcher!
Post by: Kiero on December 30, 2019, 05:00:44 am
Watched it, thought it was pretty good barring the utterly confusing time-shuffling.
Title: The Witcher!
Post by: tenbones on December 31, 2019, 04:34:06 pm
I liked the time-shuffling, only because they managed to pull it off WHILE introducing all the main characters from the books. It was necessary because the books themselves are set up like this because of the age-differences between all the characters in relation to the setting events, where they all have to converge on Geralts story.

Pros: Cavill did a great job as Geralt. The cinematography captured the feel of the books and game by shooting it on location. Writing was pretty good, with a couple of exceptions for certain characters.

Cons: Honestly - I thought the writing for Yennefer was horrible. In the games and the books she's definitely got problems, in this show she's actually a villain. Totally take zero responsibility for herself, whereas in the books/game she knows exactly why all the shit swirls around her. But the circumstances in the show are bit different. The problem is... and this could be the SJW-views of the writers, is that it SEEMS they don't realize how unsympathetic they've made Yennefer. By showing everyone that not only are all her issues self-made BY CHOICE... the natural conclusion is she should be trying to own up to them instead of blaming everyone else. The writers think that somehow it's everyone elses fault she chose her issues... it's kind of gross.

The other thing that does jar me... from a world-building POV... Yep, the "RANDOM non-white people". I'll say it... because they make no pretense of having random ethnicities of a specific type arbitrarily in the show. It's glaring to me. All they had to do was make up some culture *for the show* and say they're predominantly - or you know, use the Zangwebar an "Africa" analog from the books, and simply give a reason for more prominence... But they don't. And I admit it feels forced. The did the whole Zerrikan is Black thing and made the characters from there black, but in the books they aren't black, they're steppelands and described differently. The whole North-African Arab thing comes from the comics... whom the author said didn't look as he described. But for some reason the "need" to make people fit the diversity-quota has persisted.

And hey - how about all my Asian representation? Oh yeah... we're ninjas. So therefore invisible. LOL. Anyhow... it seems arbitrary and forced. For all the obvious reasons.

Overall I like the show.
Title: The Witcher!
Post by: Doom on December 31, 2019, 05:44:12 pm
Quote from: tenbones;1117801
I liked the time-shuffling, only because they managed to pull it off WHILE introducing all the main characters from the books. It was necessary because the books themselves are set up like this because of the age-differences between all the characters in relation to the setting events, where they all have to converge on Geralts story.

Pros: Cavill did a great job as Geralt. The cinematography captured the feel of the books and game by shooting it on location. Writing was pretty good, with a couple of exceptions for certain characters.

Cons: Honestly - I thought the writing for Yennefer was horrible. In the games and the books she's definitely got problems, in this show she's actually a villain. Totally take zero responsibility for herself, whereas in the books/game she knows exactly why all the shit swirls around her. But the circumstances in the show are bit different. The problem is... and this could be the SJW-views of the writers, is that it SEEMS they don't realize how unsympathetic they've made Yennefer. By showing everyone that not only are all her issues self-made BY CHOICE... the natural conclusion is she should be trying to own up to them instead of blaming everyone else. The writers think that somehow it's everyone elses fault she chose her issues... it's kind of gross.

The other thing that does jar me... from a world-building POV... Yep, the "RANDOM non-white people". I'll say it... because they make no pretense of having random ethnicities of a specific type arbitrarily in the show. It's glaring to me. All they had to do was make up some culture *for the show* and say they're predominantly - or you know, use the Zangwebar an "Africa" analog from the books, and simply give a reason for more prominence... But they don't. And I admit it feels forced. The did the whole Zerrikan is Black thing and made the characters from there black, but in the books they aren't black, they're steppelands and described differently. The whole North-African Arab thing comes from the comics... whom the author said didn't look as he described. But for some reason the "need" to make people fit the diversity-quota has persisted.

And hey - how about all my Asian representation? Oh yeah... we're ninjas. So therefore invisible. LOL. Anyhow... it seems arbitrary and forced. For all the obvious reasons.

Overall I like the show.

Much to agree with the above...the unnecessary blackfacing wasn't too garish, at least (in a world where teleportation is possible, it's a bit easier to believe), and the obligatory interracial relationship was only a little annoying (it's all too predictable for Netflix). At least they didn't homosexualize the trees or monsters or something.

And you're right, Yennefer is a rhymes-with-witch more than witch, responsible for much of the harm in the show. It makes hard to accept Geralt's instant desire to have his fate bound to hers. Having the powerful female be such a villain might be why there is, yet again, such a huge divergence between the NPCs/professional critics on RT and what the humans who actually watch the show say.

Sorry about the invisible Asian thing...being in higher ed, I see that "minority" overlooked so much because it doesn't fit the narrative that it's automatic for me anymore.
Title: The Witcher!
Post by: Conanist on January 01, 2020, 05:40:37 pm
I thought it was pretty good. Henry Cavill did a great job as Geralt. For the other actors Triss seemed miscast but I thought the others were fine. If Poland is just "Redania", other Slavic countries like Montenegro are spitting distance from Africa. A few black people doesn't seem to much of a stretch. There are no obvious Turks/Ottomans, Christianity/Crusades etc so I don't know how far you can really take it. I've only played the 3rd game and not read the books, for what it is worth.

The time shifted storylines were not as jarring to me as the strange tonal shifts from "cable show" to "made for tv". Its almost like different teams were producing these. Early on you have nudity from main characters, good action scenes with cool choreography, decapitations, and the like, to go with a dark tone for the series. Later on, you've got some strange Beauty and the Beast story, and then what looks like an unused episode from Hercules or Xena where our heroes team up with a dragon for a set piece battle with minimal blood, highly generic action, and a cringe worthy capstone where the two leads kiss while casting a spell to save the day!

This is what I'm talking about. The first video has a fight that had some thought put into it other than "everyone fights", and the disarm at the end is cool and looks like something that would actually work. Possibly NSFW violence.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mBASUVS-9SE

The second video is much more saccharine, with some generic sword swinging and the kiss. Even the dragon is only implied to have burned the guy with his dragon fire.

https://youtu.be/1GrinnzwV30?t=25


I've seen that before on Netflix where you have Daredevil with excellent, cable quality action, and then they mail it in for the other Marvel series. But this is the first time I've seen it within the same show. Am I imagining this as some "Studman69" with impossible standards, or is there something to it? What do you think?
Title: The Witcher!
Post by: HappyDaze on January 01, 2020, 05:46:35 pm
I lost interest in episode 7 but forced myself to watch episode 8. It was an OK series, but not a great one. I found the story (once I found it) easily forgettable and I guess the world building of the Witcher's world just fell flat with me. Perhaps this is because I never read the books nor played the video games. I do own the R. Talsorian RPG in PDF, but I have only paged through it a bit before closing the file with a "maybe I'll get back to it someday but probably not" thought. That's the same thought I'm likely to have if a season 2 of this show is made.
Title: The Witcher!
Post by: Spinachcat on January 02, 2020, 01:00:01 am
I saw the trailers...and yearned for the bad cheese of 80s sword & sorcery movies. It's bad enough to watch Cavill as Superlame in the movies for 2 hours, but the idea of watching him an entire season just kept me from clicking the Play button.
Title: The Witcher!
Post by: HappyDaze on January 02, 2020, 02:11:56 am
Quote from: Spinachcat;1117921
I saw the trailers...and yearned for the bad cheese of 80s sword & sorcery movies. It's bad enough to watch Cavill as Superlame in the movies for 2 hours, but the idea of watching him an entire season just kept me from clicking the Play button.

There were only so many times I could stand watching Cavill/Geralt growling out "Hrmm..." before I felt like it should be a drinking game (and, sadly, I'm on a low-carb diet these days).
Title: The Witcher!
Post by: Doom on January 02, 2020, 09:36:24 pm
Yeah, it was weird that the show started with R-rated, movie quality production values, but dropped off sharply to decent Prime Time TV.

That said, they did an awesome job of capture the look of the computer games, especially the clothing and uniforms.
Title: The Witcher!
Post by: VisionStorm on January 06, 2020, 12:28:14 am
Quote from: Doom;1117965
Yeah, it was weird that the show started with R-rated, movie quality production values, but dropped off sharply to decent Prime Time TV.

That said, they did an awesome job of capture the look of the computer games, especially the clothing and uniforms.


True. While I enjoyed the show, it started out strong--like it was gonna be a solid, high production series--then around the time the bard showed up things started to get bad, or at least kinda rocky from time to time. I mean, Jesus Christ! All those crappy songs and modern references, like talking about "psychology" or how he should be talking a 10% agent's fee. Bard was the worst character in the show.

I liked Yennefer, though (but I didn't play the games or read the books)--she was kinda messed up at first but turned out alright in the end. She was a deformed and abused freak most her life so I bought her having a lot of pent up rage and misplaced anger.
Title: The Witcher!
Post by: tenbones on January 09, 2020, 07:13:04 pm
Quote from: Doom;1117806
Much to agree with the above...the unnecessary blackfacing wasn't too garish, at least (in a world where teleportation is possible, it's a bit easier to believe), and the obligatory interracial relationship was only a little annoying (it's all too predictable for Netflix). At least they didn't homosexualize the trees or monsters or something.

And you're right, Yennefer is a rhymes-with-witch more than witch, responsible for much of the harm in the show. It makes hard to accept Geralt's instant desire to have his fate bound to hers. Having the powerful female be such a villain might be why there is, yet again, such a huge divergence between the NPCs/professional critics on RT and what the humans who actually watch the show say.


Yeah I completely don't buy their relationship at all.

Quote from: Doom;1117806
Sorry about the invisible Asian thing...being in higher ed, I see that "minority" overlooked so much because it doesn't fit the narrative that it's automatic for me anymore.


No need to be sorry! I don't expect white, brown or black people to show up in Chinese Three-Kingdoms movies for the exact same reason. They're stories from a specific culture. The sad part is here in the Witcher - it's just tokenism. WEAK at that because hey could *easily* fix it with in-universe examples that exist, they just chose to ignore any of that in order to measure it by screentime or something. It weakens the worldbuilding and believability for me.

I have no requirement of any derived work in other mediums other than to be as true to the source as possible.
Title: The Witcher!
Post by: tenbones on January 09, 2020, 07:15:17 pm
Quote from: VisionStorm;1118204
True. While I enjoyed the show, it started out strong--like it was gonna be a solid, high production series--then around the time the bard showed up things started to get bad, or at least kinda rocky from time to time. I mean, Jesus Christ! All those crappy songs and modern references, like talking about "psychology" or how he should be talking a 10% agent's fee. Bard was the worst character in the show.

I agree. It was jarring.

Quote from: VisionStorm;1118204
I liked Yennefer, though (but I didn't play the games or read the books)--she was kinda messed up at first but turned out alright in the end. She was a deformed and abused freak most her life so I bought her having a lot of pent up rage and misplaced anger.

Do not play the games or read the books, then. LOL because you'll be like... oh yeah... this is not good. It COULD have been... but I think they made her too unsympathetic.
Title: The Witcher!
Post by: Antiquation! on January 09, 2020, 09:54:17 pm
To be honest I do not buy Henry Cavill as Geralt at all but I have not seen the show yet so I do not feel qualified to pass judgement there as far as acting. I can say the foreskin armor is absolutely ridiculous however.
Title: The Witcher!
Post by: VisionStorm on January 09, 2020, 10:52:06 pm
Quote from: tenbones;1118646
Do not play the games or read the books, then. LOL because you'll be like... oh yeah... this is not good. It COULD have been... but I think they made her too unsympathetic.


Damn, now I'm gonna have to play them. :o

Or maybe read the books, since game 1 might look too dated now and I'm not a fan of RPGs without character creation.

Quote from: Antiquation!;1118655
To be honest I do not buy Henry Cavill as Geralt at all but I have not seen the show yet so I do not feel qualified to pass judgement there as far as acting. I can say the foreskin armor is absolutely ridiculous however.


Yeah, I somehow managed to phase out the Nilfgaard armor (maybe cuz they don't show it very often), but it was just silly "subversive" BS.
Title: The Witcher!
Post by: Lurkndog on January 10, 2020, 08:02:29 am
I've only watched the first episode, but so far it mainly serves to remind me of all the things the LOTR movies did right.

Things like:
So far, The Witcher does none of these things.

The storytelling is poor, the settings look generic, and the overall production says TV.

The best bit is the introduction to the battle scene, but I've seen that exact scene before (Braveheart, maybe?). The swordfights are good, but they are basically doing on TV what the Lord of the Rings movies did 19 years ago.

I like Henry Cavill, but he's in danger of becoming this generations' Jeremy Irons.
Title: The Witcher!
Post by: Antiquation! on January 10, 2020, 11:17:06 am
Quote from: VisionStorm;1118657
Damn, now I'm gonna have to play them. :o

You should if you have the time. They're quite good, although the first one has fairly repetitive combat and the second one is still a bit janky despite being an 'action' RPG. The 3rd really comes into its own and has a fantastic world and very solid gameplay, but it's sort of the tail end of the story (as far as the games present it) and the plot as such is fairly focused around Ciri. Despite not being able to make your own character, at least in the 3rd one you have quite a lot of leeway in what sort of Geralt you choose to play (in terms of your affect on the world and how you respond to people and their problems, in addition to gear and skills and those usual suspects). With the first two, the story and atmosphere are what make it.



Quote from: VisionStorm;1118657
Yeah, I somehow managed to phase out the Nilfgaard armor (maybe cuz they don't show it very often), but it was just silly "subversive" BS.
At least they don't show it often, that's a mercy. I don't know what they were thinking with that design.
Title: The Witcher!
Post by: HappyDaze on January 10, 2020, 01:10:23 pm
Quote from: Antiquation!;1118673
With the first two, the story and atmosphere are what make it.

In that case, would it be better to just read the books? Serious question.
Title: The Witcher!
Post by: Antiquation! on January 10, 2020, 01:27:44 pm
Quote from: HappyDaze;1118685
In that case, would it be better to just read the books? Serious question.

I honestly can't say as I haven't read the books and I don't know the differences in the stories, which is one of the reasons I'm not in a huge hurry to see the show. I greatly enjoyed the story, world and characters as portrayed in the games, though (aside from Ciri who is a bit of a bore).
Title: The Witcher!
Post by: tenbones on January 10, 2020, 06:11:08 pm
Quote from: Lurkndog;1118665
I've only watched the first episode, but so far it mainly serves to remind me of all the things the LOTR movies did right.

Things like:
  • Presenting the setting
  • Introducing the major players and conflict
  • Giving us a real sense of a compelling world we've never seen.
  • Introducing appealing characters with distinct personalities
  • Showing grand natural vistas with sweeping music
So far, The Witcher does none of these things.

The storytelling is poor, the settings look generic, and the overall production says TV.

The best bit is the introduction to the battle scene, but I've seen that exact scene before (Braveheart, maybe?). The swordfights are good, but they are basically doing on TV what the Lord of the Rings movies did 19 years ago.

I like Henry Cavill, but he's in danger of becoming this generations' Jeremy Irons.

Give it a few more episodes (if you don't lose interest). It meets most of these requirements by the end. It's not perfect by any means, and comparing it to the LOTR with a movie-budget is probably not being fair, I've been personally pleased with the presentation over the course of the season. But my expectations were pretty low. So I'm pleasantly surprised.
Title: The Witcher!
Post by: tenbones on January 10, 2020, 06:16:22 pm
Quote from: HappyDaze;1118685
In that case, would it be better to just read the books? Serious question.

Different mediums should be consumed separately and evaluated thusly based on whatever criteria you find important. I think the show is worth a watch. The books are "okay". The games are excellent.

But they're all a little different from each other for obvious reasons.
Title: The Witcher!
Post by: Lurkndog on January 12, 2020, 10:19:36 am
Quote from: tenbones;1118739
Give it a few more episodes (if you don't lose interest). It meets most of these requirements by the end. It's not perfect by any means, and comparing it to the LOTR with a movie-budget is probably not being fair, I've been personally pleased with the presentation over the course of the season. But my expectations were pretty low. So I'm pleasantly surprised.


Fair enough. I'm not asking for Helm's Deep on a TV budget, but an hour into Fellowship of the Ring I had a much better understanding of what was going on in the movie. Of course, that may have been because I've read the books.
Title: The Witcher!
Post by: GeekyBugle on January 18, 2020, 12:21:18 pm
Quote from: Conanist;1117887
I thought it was pretty good. Henry Cavill did a great job as Geralt. For the other actors Triss seemed miscast but I thought the others were fine. If Poland is just "Redania", other Slavic countries like Montenegro are spitting distance from Africa. A few black people doesn't seem to much of a stretch. There are no obvious Turks/Ottomans, Christianity/Crusades etc so I don't know how far you can really take it. I've only played the 3rd game and not read the books, for what it is worth.

The time shifted storylines were not as jarring to me as the strange tonal shifts from "cable show" to "made for tv". Its almost like different teams were producing these. Early on you have nudity from main characters, good action scenes with cool choreography, decapitations, and the like, to go with a dark tone for the series. Later on, you've got some strange Beauty and the Beast story, and then what looks like an unused episode from Hercules or Xena where our heroes team up with a dragon for a set piece battle with minimal blood, highly generic action, and a cringe worthy capstone where the two leads kiss while casting a spell to save the day!

This is what I'm talking about. The first video has a fight that had some thought put into it other than "everyone fights", and the disarm at the end is cool and looks like something that would actually work. Possibly NSFW violence.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mBASUVS-9SE

The second video is much more saccharine, with some generic sword swinging and the kiss. Even the dragon is only implied to have burned the guy with his dragon fire.

https://youtu.be/1GrinnzwV30?t=25


I've seen that before on Netflix where you have Daredevil with excellent, cable quality action, and then they mail it in for the other Marvel series. But this is the first time I've seen it within the same show. Am I imagining this as some "Studman69" with impossible standards, or is there something to it? What do you think?


In a time where traveling that "spitting distance" took lots of time and risk yes it's jarring to have them included without an in-universe explanation, just like you had exactly zero Africans and Asians in Europe at that point in time. Maybe if they had been all mages you could have seen the logic after all they are detected the first time they use chaos and mages can make doors to teletransport.
Title: The Witcher!
Post by: GeekyBugle on January 18, 2020, 12:24:50 pm
Not having played the game or read the books I liked it, the time shifting presented no problem to me because I was warned there was time shifting and because many a book I have read has done the same. By the end of the season all timelines have converged, maybe they'll stop doing it?

Cavill did a great job from what I saw and what people really steeped into the lore have told me.

As for "Muh Representashun!" Why is it there's exactly zero Mayas? Kinda racist if you ask me.
Title: The Witcher!
Post by: VisionStorm on January 18, 2020, 01:43:55 pm
Quote from: GeekyBugle;1119445
In a time where traveling that "spitting distance" took lots of time and risk yes it's jarring to have them included without an in-universe explanation, just like you had exactly zero Africans and Asians in Europe at that point in time. Maybe if they had been all mages you could have seen the logic after all they are detected the first time they use chaos and mages can make doors to teletransport.


The issue with the idea that parts of Europe are within spitting distance of Africa is that North Africa is dominated by Arabs and related groups like Berbers, which aren't "black" Africans. So the amount of black people and black fey, like elves and dryads, begs credulity, yet there aren't many Arab looking people in the series--only one I remember is the Fighter-Mage guy from the group of mages that stood up against the Nilfgaard near the end.
Title: The Witcher!
Post by: GeekyBugle on January 18, 2020, 09:27:26 pm
Quote from: VisionStorm;1119458
The issue with the idea that parts of Europe are within spitting distance of Africa is that North Africa is dominated by Arabs and related groups like Berbers, which aren't "black" Africans. So the amount of black people and black fey, like elves and dryads, begs credulity, yet there aren't many Arab looking people in the series--only one I remember is the Fighter-Mage guy from the group of mages that stood up against the Nilfgaard near the end.

I know, but even if it was populated by black Africans, exactly how many Basques would you expect to see in medieval Poland? Zero, and that's even closer than Africa, traveling back then wasn't as easy, fast or secure. So maybe for a royal wedding or some political event you'd see people from other neighboring countries for a limited time, unless the marriage was between two nations, then usually the princess/queen got to keep part of her entourage if marrying to someone from another country.
Title: The Witcher!
Post by: danskmacabre on January 19, 2020, 07:30:26 pm
I was looking forward to watching this series and really wanted to like it and yeah, I DID enjoy watching the first few episodes.

Maybe I've just watched too much GoT and I'm tired of this sort of theme.
The Witcher series FEELS like GoT with a Witcher veneer painted over the top and TBH. I just got bored after a while.

I think I'll come back to this in 6 months to see if it appeals to me more.

Overall, it seems well made. I'm just having trouble getting drawn into it.

I loved the games BTW, so I do LIKE thew Witcher story (from a games perspective, not read the books).
Title: The Witcher!
Post by: Lurkndog on January 19, 2020, 08:52:08 pm
Episodes 2 and 3 were much better than the first. At least I have a sense of what is going on now.
Title: The Witcher!
Post by: BoxCrayonTales on January 19, 2020, 08:55:38 pm
My family disallows watching wannabe porn on our public space TV. The women in my family find it misogynistic because Western culture treats women's bodies as inherently sexual. So I never got past episode 2 (3?).

I was willing to put up with the wizard porn because it was just short snippets rather than long dragging wizard porn sequences like other shows I can name.

I was expecting some creepy Polish folklore since I enjoyed playing Polish horror games like Darkwood. Then Witcher tossed in tired fantasy cliches like elves and wizards. They should've hired Del Toro to handle that stuff. Christ.

One thot said she was "immune to magic." Is she also immune to that superheroine who can summon puppies from anywhere (https://www.smbc-comics.com/comic/2006-06-08)? What the fuck does that trivia even add? I thought she was boasting like an idiot and Witcher was humoring her.

From what little I did see, this show isn't worth my time. If I wanted yet another lazy D&D clone I'd watch a D&D-inspired movie on amazon prime. Or play D&D.

Christ. If this derivative crap is considered the height of entertainment today, then I want to live under a rock forever. Don't wake me until the nuclear holocaust has killed all these meatbags.
Title: Re: The Witcher!
Post by: Wicked Woodpecker of West on November 11, 2020, 09:36:04 am
Quote
In a time where traveling that "spitting distance" took lots of time and risk yes it's jarring to have them included without an in-universe explanation, just like you had exactly zero Africans and Asians in Europe at that point in time. Maybe if they had been all mages you could have seen the logic after all they are detected the first time they use chaos and mages can make doors to teletransport.

Technically - human species dropped on this planet via inter-dimensional travel like 1000 years ago.
They are not natural population in Witcher!world and they are not necessarily spread like natural populations would.

(Book suggest they are refugees from future post-apocalyptic earth destroyed by ecological cataclysm.)

Quote
I was expecting some creepy Polish folklore since I enjoyed playing Polish horror games like Darkwood. Then Witcher tossed in tired fantasy cliches like elves and wizards. They should've hired Del Toro to handle that stuff. Christ.

While there are some Slavic monsters - like strigha from book 3 is quite close to our folklore (though it should be vividly ginger haired) - overall Witcher books are much more based on Western fantasy because Sapkowski was great fan of it - there is lot of elements of Celtic and Germanic folklore, cities and cultures are much closer to medieval Germany, many monsters with slavic names are some mutated elements using Polish names of various insects and arthropods, there are basic D&D races, because muh D&D, there is Wild Hunt, names are mostly bit shfited Germano-Celtic names - Geralt, Yennefer, Triss, Cirilla.

And Sapkowski is quite oikophobic guy even denying possibility of proper Slavic fantasy because we lack proper epic mythos like Greek mythology or Arthurian legend.

So no this is aside of few elements not distincly Polish/Slavic story. Where it's Polishness and Slavicness shines, is sort of in mentality, in mix of cynism and romanticism, in vivid use of languages in dialogues. And unfortunately most great dialogues in the books - that were just asking to be played - were scrambled because we needed this extra Yennefer backstory, so short stories about Geralt were mostly castrated, and Geralt was changed from dude who love long bit pessimitistic and whiny discussions over vodka, to this utterly introvert piece of stone.

And look Cavill managed to push much much charisma in his Geralt, and his Hmmmmms are wonderful, but most of personality of book!Geralt is gone. Dunno if they thought that Cavill would not manage to do it well, or is it result of making witchers even more hated and mistrusted and isolated from society. In books there's quite a lot of prejudice against them, but over all Geralt usually can find place for himself, he have friends around who he visits regularly during his travels, for each person who is racists for witchers, there are two who believe that night of drinking with White Wolf is wonderful idea. Like in the first episode - Geralt should know Blaviken and be friend with it's mayor and his family (which makes it even harder - when he's banished from town after slaugher) - but no, let's cut it all together because our hero is so hated and misunderstood.

Bloody SJW hacks.
Title: Re: The Witcher!
Post by: Sparrowhawk131 on November 12, 2020, 01:30:01 am
As someone who read the boks, i don't really like the show. It fails to build upon the bonds and strong characterization that made the novels so good. CDPR did a much much better job preserving characters even with a spin-off story
Title: Re: The Witcher!
Post by: Hawkwing7423 on November 12, 2020, 11:02:10 am
I loved the show and watched season 1 twice. I don't get all the dislike for the Yennefer actress which was also all over Facebook.

I am reading the books and actually not that impressed so far. I'm on "Time of Contempt".
I guess I wasn't impressed by the games either. Action RPG, blech.

YMMV
Title: Re: The Witcher!
Post by: Wicked Woodpecker of West on November 12, 2020, 11:32:04 am
Then sir you clearly lack immortal soul :P
Title: Re: The Witcher!
Post by: Conanist on November 12, 2020, 05:37:21 pm
Quote
In a time where traveling that "spitting distance" took lots of time and risk yes it's jarring to have them included without an in-universe explanation, just like you had exactly zero Africans and Asians in Europe at that point in time. Maybe if they had been all mages you could have seen the logic after all they are detected the first time they use chaos and mages can make doors to teletransport.

Technically - human species dropped on this planet via inter-dimensional travel like 1000 years ago.
They are not natural population in Witcher!world and they are not necessarily spread like natural populations would.

(Book suggest they are refugees from future post-apocalyptic earth destroyed by ecological cataclysm.)

Since this thread has been resurrected I may as well respond! I hadn't heard that bit about post apocalyptic refugees. It seems strange, but then I haven't read the books. Is Triss a pale redhead in the books?

"That time" is naturally going to be vague, as its not an alternate history. You've got late middle ages tech with the longswords etc, and the Nilfgaardians who seem clearly based on the Black Army of Hungary, which came later. Somewhere in the 13-1400's would be my guess.

During that period you've got quite a lot of war with the Ottomans right across the border from Hungary. Before that, the Mongols had invaded Hungary, Poland, and others. Before that, Crusaders and/or Byzantines controlled large chunks of the Medditeranean coast on the Africa and Middle East sides, with established trade routes. And of course well before all of that the Romans were invading or being invaded by Carthage.

So I have to disagree. Certainly they were there, at minimum as invading armies. I don't think its that far fetched that some hirelings might be brought back from those places once controlled by the Euros, and I would imagine there would be at least some mixed race individuals as a natural result of invasion and occupation. There are still descendants of Ghengis Khan in Eastern Europe.
Title: Re: The Witcher!
Post by: Spinachcat on November 12, 2020, 08:13:22 pm
How would SJWs react if Wakanda suddenly had a bunch of Asians and Latinos running around? I'm not even talking about adding those evil honkies, but adding fellow non-whites into the Afro-fantasy concept.

Title: Re: The Witcher!
Post by: Wicked Woodpecker of West on November 13, 2020, 06:52:23 am
Quote
Is Triss a pale redhead in the books?

Not exactly.
She has chestnut brown hair, wearing them long and unbound, blue eyes not green, not sure how pale she is, but yeah description points to white, and she always dresses without cleavage in books after battle of Sodden due to scars.

Quote
"That time" is naturally going to be vague, as its not an alternate history.

It's not history at all. If any history is distant future of current humanity after cataclysm destroyed Earth - but it's not certain.

Quote
You've got late middle ages tech with the longswords etc, and the Nilfgaardians who seem clearly based on the Black Army of Hungary, which came later. Somewhere in the 13-1400's would be my guess.

You also have academics on unviersities using modern terms and for instance modern patterns of naming animals which was invented way after medieval period.
Nilfgaardians are based on Netherlands in terms on language, and mostly on Holy Roman Empire in times of it's strong cohesion with notes of Roman Empire proper and also Third Reich (especially early in books they are quite obviously nazi proxies)

Quote
During that period you've got quite a lot of war with the Ottomans right across the border from Hungary. Before that, the Mongols had invaded Hungary, Poland, and others. Before that, Crusaders and/or Byzantines controlled large chunks of the Medditeranean coast on the Africa and Middle East sides, with established trade routes. And of course well before all of that the Romans were invading or being invaded by Carthage.

So I have to disagree. Certainly they were there, at minimum as invading armies. I don't think its that far fetched that some hirelings might be brought back from those places once controlled by the Euros, and I would imagine there would be at least some mixed race individuals as a natural result of invasion and occupation. There are still descendants of Ghengis Khan in Eastern Europe.

I mean I doubt Middle Easterners and North Africans who are all variants of mediterranid "subrace" would be considered in Byzantium as very different race. Different cultures, yes, but half-Greek, half-Syrian would not look outside of norm.
With East Asians it's true both ancient Uralic invasion and Mongol one left few % of Asian DNA among Eastern Europeans.

Nevertheless that's bit different to have a guy with 1/4 of Mongol blood (and Mongol armies where only part EA - partially they were white people of Western Asia) and just random ethnicities around. But anyway such technicalities do not matter for Witcher world much.

Quote
How would SJWs react if Wakanda suddenly had a bunch of Asians and Latinos running around? I'm not even talking about adding those evil honkies, but adding fellow non-whites into the Afro-fantasy concept.

Just because SJWs are dumbass, I'm not gonna go and mirror them. Margaret of Anjou as black woman was retarded, Anna Boleyn - probably also unless they go really postmodern and anachronistic fully with this new show, I'd have a problem with black Rohirrim or Hobbits. With Witcher world I'm bit meh, but I don't care much - author himself claim he does not care about worldbuilding - world is just a stage to be shifted for his stories, it does not matter on it's own for him.

Asians in Wakanda would be also stupid, but some Asians in some fictional vaguely defined world based on Zulu legends - YES DO IT.

My greatest desire is to see cyberpunk thriller based on Zulu mythology, with exclusively Korean cast, written in Navajo, filmed entirely in Estonia by Persian director and Brazilian producers. Do it - and I can die happy.