The Witcher - Netflix **Spoilers**

Padre_Pio

matthewmurdock wrote: »

The fact that the website is even required is indicative of the terrible, unclear structure of timelines and the complete lack of clarity regarding location and politics.

You explain this stuff in the show, not after.

Ah, I like it. It pays off for those who are paying attention.

Paddy Cow

matthewmurdock wrote: »

The fact that the website is even required is indicative of the terrible, unclear structure of timelines and the complete lack of clarity regarding location and politics.

You explain this stuff in the show, not after.

That's why I don't think the show will become mainstream the way GOT did. I was hooked on GOT after the first episode and after the first season I went out and bought all the books. I enjoyed The Witcher but I've no interest in the books. They're also leaving a massive gap between first and second seasons. Maybe the second season will make more sense timeline wise. It's a good show but to someone not familiar with the books/games, it's not great.

Gbear

Potential-Monke wrote: »

There's this image which Netflix have allegedly released showing the timeline of the show. Going by it, Yenn is so much younger than in the books. Confused me for a while until someone said it was deliberate.

Is it not more that Geralt is older?

I was under the impression that he should be about 60/70 during the betrothal of Pavetta, rather than being about 100.

pixelburp

Padre_Pio wrote: »

Ah, I like it. It pays off for those who are paying attention.

It depends. TV is still a medium with a rich stock of methods to tell a story, or indeed draw attention to important things through sound, visual cues or dialogue.

The Witcher, as much as I've been enjoying it, makes absolutely no attempt to use any device to give the viewer a chance to know "this is important". It leans on exposition a lot, but in a fantasy world with its own rules and customs, dialogue is already doing a lot of work just catching you up on how The Continent works.

Basically, so far watching season 1 of this feels like I've somehow time traveled and am, in fact, watching season 7.

Homelander

I see a lot of people making claims that basically amount to "it's easy to follow if you put your phone away", almost in a very deflective, defensive fashion. It is confusing/muddled and does a pretty bad job with supporting exposition. Most people I've spoken to with no prior knowledge of the game/books found it challenging in that sense. (not saying they found it good or bad, just that it absolutely is, and was, confusing and/or ill-explained for an enormous number of people)

Really I felt like the show almost expected you to already be somewhat familiar with the source material before watching to be honest. I find none of the characters are at all developed, they're all so horribly flat and fantasy-generic, apart from Geralt himself. Cavill is pretty decent and has some charisma I will admit.

Each to their own I suppose, but I found it very average.

ItsHoggie

pixelburp wrote: »

It depends. TV is still a medium with a rich stock of methods to tell a story, or indeed draw attention to important things through sound, visual cues or dialogue.

The Witcher, as much as I've been enjoying it, makes absolutely no attempt to use any device to give the viewer a chance to know "this is important". It leans on exposition a lot, but in a fantasy world with its own rules and customs, dialogue is already doing a lot of work just catching you up on how The Continent works.

Basically, so far watching season 1 of this feels like I've somehow time traveled and am, in fact, watching season 7.

Completely agree

Padre_Pio

ItsHoggie wrote: »

Completely agree

I was confused up until ep4, but there was a good deal of satisfaction when I worked out the timelines were all over the place.

seligehgit

Potential-Monke wrote: »

I wouldn't say rebuilt, more living in the current state of it, but you do work towards building some of it back up iirc. It's not destroyed per se, but it's not safely protected anymore either. Well, in the game anyway.

I thoroughly enjoyed this, but due to an intoxicant of choice when I binged it, I may need a second viewing to get everything it had to offer.

But, having only played the games, I have a few small issues, which some have echoed above. The timeline is all over the place, and only for having played the games, I was able to recognise scenes which definitely took place well before Ciri. But for people who have no previous Witcher knowledge, or even people who have some, it could be very hard to follow. I agree more should have been put into making it obvious that the timelines were different for each character.

And as mentioned above, a few quick minutes in the first episode to show the lay of the land, the different factions and who was the boss of where, it may have run a bit more smoothly. An intro like GoT would serve really well here.

I couldn't take to Triss, albeit the few scenes she's in. I'm a game Triss fan, so it was just too much of a change to accept. #justiceforredheads :pac:

I knew the background for Yenn, but I watched it with 2 other lads who have only played the games (well, one of them has only played 3). So I saw that coming, but it blew the 2 boys away with the reveal. Really well done imo.

Cavill is a great Geralt. I was worried he'd show too much emotion, but his wooden acting works here. He's not Witcher games Geralt, but he's close enough!

Again, as mentioned above, the decoctions could have been explained better, but they are referenced, but even a quick shot of the label with the name on it would have been better than little bottles of liquid. I could guess what he took, but again that's down to the hours upon hours put into the games (and them being a key component of the battles).

Overall, it felt a bit disjointed, and a bit rushed at times, but I did enjoy it. I will know with the second viewing if it was just the initial awesomeness of more Witcher making it appear better, or if it actually it good.

I recommend it, but don't go expecting Game of Thrones: Monsters. It's not, and as other have said, it's more like LotR, lots of magic, lots of monsters, and lots of fantasy. But darker.

Forgive my ignorance but what was the big reveal or am I missing something?

ItsHoggie

Padre_Pio wrote: »

I was confused up until ep4, but there was a good deal of satisfaction when I worked out the timelines were all over the place.

That’s the thing, I seen people here post about how it became clear about the timelines after episode 4 but for me they didn’t until I actually read about them. Really liking the show, but it is a bit all over the place at times.

pixelburp

Episode 6 and has me wondering ... why are Dwarves always Scottish? Even before the Lord of the Rings movies they always had (bad!) Scots accents, be it in games or the odd fantasy film. It's such a weirdly persistent trope, presumably having an origin. Real Groundskeeper Willy version here ...

Grassey

“What you get is a sense of Celticness,†says Dominic Watt, Senior Lecturer in Forensic Speech Science at the University of York. Watt explains that many of the virtues associated with the stereotypical fantasy dwarf are also associated with the Scottish accent. “Scottish accents tend to be evaluated pretty positively,†he says. “Shrewdness, honesty, straight-forward speaking. Those are the sorts of ideas that the accent tends to evoke.†Watt also says that there are similar cultural stereotypes surrounding the drinking habits of dwarves and Scots.

Padre_Pio

Grassey wrote: »

“What you get is a sense of Celticness,†says Dominic Watt, Senior Lecturer in Forensic Speech Science at the University of York. Watt explains that many of the virtues associated with the stereotypical fantasy dwarf are also associated with the Scottish accent. “Scottish accents tend to be evaluated pretty positively,†he says. “Shrewdness, honesty, straight-forward speaking. Those are the sorts of ideas that the accent tends to evoke.†Watt also says that there are similar cultural stereotypes surrounding the drinking habits of dwarves and Scots.

Fairies are usually Irish for the same reason.

Untrustworthy, sly, tricksy

Thargor

pixelburp wrote: »

Episode 6 and has me wondering ... why are Dwarves always Scottish? Even before the Lord of the Rings movies they always had (bad!) Scots accents, be it in games or the odd fantasy film. It's such a weirdly persistent trope, presumably having an origin. Real Groundskeeper Willy version here ...

Cant be arsed Googling it on my crappy internet tonight but the guy who invented Dungeons and Dragons was heavily influenced by a fantasy novel where all the dwarves were hard drinking Scots and it all flowed from there.

duridian

The novel Thargor mentioned
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Three_Hearts_and_Three_Lions

The D&D guy
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gary_Gygax

Ahem... Blatant excuse to show my own handle’s nerdy origins in old games LOL
(Not D&D but in a similar sort of vein.)
http://www.gamecrafters.com/gamecrafters/maddog/index.html

Potential-Monke

Started watching this again, finished the first 2 episodes and due to the way it was first watched (by 4 of us, 1 of which seemed to want to comment on everything), I missed a lot of dialogue. As mentioned above, there's a lot to take in and a lot is said, but can be easily missed. I already feel like it's better the second time through, knowing the timelines, etc. A lot more making sense too on the second watch.

c.p.w.g.w

Potential-Monke wrote: »

Started watching this again, finished the first 2 episodes and due to the way it was first watched (by 4 of us, 1 of which seemed to want to comment on everything), I missed a lot of dialogue. As mentioned above, there's a lot to take in and a lot is said, but can be easily missed. I already feel like it's better the second time through, knowing the timelines, etc. A lot more making sense too on the second watch.

I think the problem with the first 4 or so episodes, is that if your totally new to the Witcher world you get lost because its jumping back & fourth. Will definetly give the series a 2nd watch in the next few weeks. But found from episode 5 onwards, it was much easier to follow

https://pasteboard.co/IQBsGay.jpg

EoinMcLovin

The Witcher‘s series creator Lauren S. Hissrich and scribe Beau DeMayo are working on The Witcher: Nightmare of the Wolf, which will feature animation from Studio Mir, the Korean banner that worked on The Legend of Korra and Voltron: Legendary Defender.

https://ew.com/movies/2020/01/22/the-witcher-anime-film-netflix/

heebusjeebus

EoinMcLovin wrote: »

The Witcher‘s series creator Lauren S. Hissrich and scribe Beau DeMayo are working on The Witcher: Nightmare of the Wolf, which will feature animation from Studio Mir, the Korean banner that worked on The Legend of Korra and Voltron: Legendary Defender.

https://ew.com/movies/2020/01/22/the-witcher-anime-film-netflix/

Sweet, Korra is an amazing looking show.

Potential-Monke

I would have preferred Ufotable, but I'd imagine they're quite busy right now. But, more Witcher is not a bad thing!

Standman

I'm on ep 6 and finding it pretty middling. Some of the character relationships are so rushed that it's actually comical - characters professing love/risking lives for each other with minimal to no setup. Once I thought I must have skipped an episode. Some of the plots are pretty hard to follow as well and seem to come out of nowhere.

It's got a weird endearing quality though, like watching a kid try to do magic tricks or something.

pixelburp

I think the key is that it has charisma through its cast, and doesn't play itself too seriously. The pitfall I've sometimes found with High Fantasy is that it can turn out insufferably po faced and humourless; thinking of the recent Carnival Row for instance. The Witcher has its tongue just enough in its cheek to understand what a remarkable yet macabre this world is, and the actors seem to play their parts with this in mind. At least, that's my reckoning. Geralt has the "seen it all before" approach that endears, with every weary 'f*ck' uttered.

Agree about the pacing: finished Episode 7 last night and even as certain threads come together, there's still that rushed, sudden shotgun approach to information and plot development. The mages

deciding to go to war, came out of nowhere while the outrage of Niilfgard conscripting magicians had absolute no setup

. And yet I like the show despite these structural issues.

awec

Just finished the series.

It's ok. If I hadn't played the Witcher 3 I'd be absolutely lost and given up long ago.

Can not believe I have not finished it yet. I have looked forward to it so long now that I thought I would watch it in a weekend. But I have not had the time.

And now I have a visitor that I want to show it to because he loved the games and character so much. So I might be starting from episode 1 again with him after dinner!

Potential-Monke

Finished my second watching last night, and yes, with the knowledge of the Timelines it's a lot easier to follow. Stood up to a second viewing too, which isn't a bad thing. Still miffed about Triss, but heyho, what can you do. And similar complaint about the last episode with

Geralt just being on deaths door for most of the episode

. Hope it lasts long, it's actually a really good show just let down by some bad choices. And again, I'll agree that Cavill does a great Geralt.

pixelburp

If Netflix's publicly released stats are to be believed, it has been a phenomenally successful show for them, while I think the show runners said they have a 7 season run planned. Barring a collapse in the viewers I can see that coming to pass...

Slydice

Sounds like Cavill really got into the role.. the story.. even the universe

riffmongous

I just finished it... I enjoyed it, but they are just adaptations of the short stories from the book.. and not exactly good adaptations either, if I didn't know all the extra info from having read them first I imagine I'd be really confused.. but that's classic Witcher, always assuming you know everything already

I really didn't like the final episode though, and in general there's not a whole lot of Geralt in some of the episodes

Sudden Valley

I think netflix is known for juicing their viewing figures so hard to judge this against even their old shows so hard to know how it will last. I agree with mosto f the posts that episode 8 was disappointing, that the casting of Yen and Geralt was good, Triss not so good and Ciri, promising. Tbh There is no real fantasy type show competitor at the moment to compare it against til the wheel of time and lord of the rings shows come put.