Netflix's Witcher: The Right & Wrong
Vložit
- čas přidán 21. 07. 2024
- In this video I breakdown what Netflix got right with the Witcher, and what they got wrong or still need to work on. What did you think of Netflix's #Witcher?
Merch: teespring.com/stores/fantasy-...
Patreon: / danielbgreene
Amazon: www.amazon.com/shop/danielgreene
Discord Server: / discord
Twitter: DanielBGreene?lan...
Instagram: / dgreene101
GoodReads: / daniel-greene
Subreddit: / danielgreene
P.O. Box 1016 Dublin, Ohio 43017
with the backup of:
715 Shawan falls Dr. Dublin, Ohio 43017 - Zábava
The person who did the fight choreographyfor the first episode wasn't actually the series choreographer, it was the fight choreographer to the mission impossible movies that Henry Cavill brought in for reshoots of the first episode. hopefully the other guy left so that the mission impossible guy can take over cuz the first episode clearly have the best fight scene
BeardedDudeFromSpace if that is true hopefully because the mission impossible fights are only beat be the John Wick movies for fight scenes
The difference in those fights were soo noticeable episode 1 he was a navy seal by episode 3 he was a cub scout with a sword
Vlad (The Night King) is not returning for Season 2 as he confirmed in Instagram.
@@torfinnzempel6123 he was fighting close quarters and he's a mutant, I had no problems with the reverse grip.
@@ObiWann90 i had far fewer problems with its use in The awitcher, then i had in SWTROS were it was awfully choreographed. At least in the Witcher he didn't do the whole fight in reverse grip, but rather used it as a transition, as he changed from one stance to another, so he was in and then back to a standard grip fairly quickly. Just that it is an awkward grip and it greatly reduces your fighting effectiveness, super fast Witcher or no.
I should add, that while it irked me a little, it didn't stop me from enjoying that fight scene iver all, it was well choreographed.
This might be my favorite flawed TV show. Usually, when a show has issues, the issues take away from the enjoyment. Not so much for the Witcher.
Ouzy 360 Well said. I agree. I think it’s because they focused on the characters, so it hit all the emotional notes, and we are still able to connect with the show, despite its flaws.
I'm offended that you didn't once bring up the performance of your and my favorite bard Jaskier. He was easily my favorite character and he played so so well off of Henry's Geralt. Plus each song for him was fantastic, and Her Sweet Kiss had so much meaning to it when you look back at the episode and the lyrics of the song
🎵Toss a coin to your Witcher, oh Valley of Plenty🎵
Trueeee
His songs were GREAT!
Cheeeeeesy
Being a book fan, I actually really didn't like the relationship between Jaskier and Geralt in the show. They didn't at all seem like unlikely friends. In the books, they squabble and disagree but it is very, very clear that they are friends that absolutely love each other. In the show, Jaskier just seemed like a groupy to Geralt, following him around and being enthusiastic and kind to him while Gerald totally disregards and dismisses him.
As someone who has read the books but not played the games yet, my biggest problem with the show is the portrayal of Nilfgaard. The religious fanaticism was completely unneeded and sort of distracts from the subtle politics throughout the story. It takes them from imperialists making decisions best for their country to oh yeah these are the bad guys because.... bad.
I kinda curious what they will do with the White Flame cult tbh
Yeah, when we met Fringilla grown-up, I was like “So, basically, she’s Melissandre...” and the show didn’t exactly tell me I’m wrong. I didn’t really feel like much was at stake during the big battle at the end.
@@quibily Yeh, the battle was a letdown tbh
I'm big on PC games, but I didn't like witcher3 the only reason I'm playing it is for the dialogues.
the fighting and mechanics ruin it
SPOILERS >>> Well i believe the religious thing is only to deflect attention for the big Reveal that Duny is the White Flame on the next season.
The Series creator mentions when they talk to IGN that the reason Seaon 2 comes out in 2021 is to have enough time without rushing it this time, since they realized that they did not have enough time in Season 1 and thus had tu rush the post-production
That makes me very hopeful for Season 2 since other issues like the timeline should not be a problem anymore
Best part of the show was just going off on a random adventure to kill a monster. And of course Jaskier. I could watch hundreds of episodes of Geralt doing sidequests.
Yesss!!! Also the pacing and atmosphere of the striga story was completely ruined by intercutting it with Yennefer's defining moments. Both stories could have been so much more if only they had some more time and no interruptions.
Me too. I am still a fan of old school episodic television so would love nothing more than this.
Also Yennefer seemed to forget she could teleport to places, like when the mages needed to get somewhere and when they hiked to the top of the mountain where the dragons were. It's like she convienently forgot for the plots sake. And I'm still confused on how Magic/chaos works
One simple flaw of the series, that I find people rarely mention:
In polish, it's a very polish book series. By which I mean, reading it, you don't get the sense that the story happens in a vaguely european setting. No, you get the sense it happens in the vaguely XIIIth century Poland or a Poland look-alike.
When Geralt meets Jaskier, far in the south and deals with the elves etc, you get the sense they're in a Spain inspired land.
Nilfgaard is very german... I mean.. it's a classic, polish caricature of Germany. They constantly want to conquer the slavic lands, they are massive sticklers for rules and laws, have no sense of humour, etc.
The dryads are a very clear nod to the myth of amazonians, which originated from the Greeks running into slavic tribes that let the women go to war alongside men... and to old descriptions of Poland, which when first visited by germans, was a heavily forested land. Slavs lived in the goddamn trees and had hanging pathways connecting different villages.
The fantasy races, to polish people, were both the minorities in Poland during the XXth century, but also the polish people throughout the past 3-4 centuries as we kept going into one uprising after another, all of them failed, draining us of the most patriotic and best educated, young people, generation after generation.
The show has none of it. It's just a generic, American show, set in a generic fantasy land.
no you are wrong about the dryads are essentially are wood nymph or more precise oak tree spirits nothing to do with Amazon people because they are part of the same thing the Greek mythology. and a lot the mythology in Witcher isn’t just Polish inspired they have nordic mythology Celtic mythology Anglo Saxon mythology.and dude the Amazon people are not Greek they were nomadic tribes Turkey if you considered that Greek then you have to consider turkey as Greek land
The elves are quite clearly coded as Jews from the Polish history (if you're ever in Warsaw, visit the Museum of the History of Polish Jews: www.polin.pl/en/wystawy-wystawa-glowna-galerie/first-encounters). So, yeah, the genocide and pogroms are not a coincidence...
@@berlineczka You wrote nothing that contradicts what I wrote.
I've been to that museum, it's around the corner from my place.
I've also known plenty before visiting it, as I've been in a Jewish school in Warsaw, since my grandmother and her family, survived the war, because their neighbours hid them in their basement... and grandma found it fitting to have me enrol in a friends/acquaintances school.
Bloody hell, my mom is Catholic, so she had me go to church etc. And the nuns in the church, when I was preparing for the first communion, were extremely rude towards me... since I was a jew, supposedly.
(not really, since you are a jew if you have a Jewish mother and mine wasn't)
My point was, that the magical races, aside from clearly representing the minorities in Poland (not just jews, we had and have gypsies and other minor groups), also behaved in a way, Polish people overall, behaved during the occupation.
@@cyryl3827 I didn't write to contradict you, I wrote to EXPAND what you wrote.
@@berlineczka Ah, the positive rarity on the internet.
Maybe I've been in a few too many arguments lately.
Cheers and have a nice day!!
My big problem is how they butchered Sword of Destiny and Something More. They really should’ve added one more episode to properly adapt Sword of Destiny so the payoff in Something More hits harder.
Yes! The emotions of something more are completely lost and this is my favourite moment of their storyline, i grieve deeply they did it so differently :(
I know! The book version defintley feels like the ending of the short stories and the beginning of a bigger story, and Netflix did not hit that mark
Yeah am I wrong or Ciri and Geralt di not meet at Brokilon? Their reunion in "something more" is also pretty lame, too bad they cut it too much
I just finished Sword of Destiny, and the thing that bothers me is why the show runners chose to make the relationships between Geralt/Dandelion(Jaskier) and Geralt/Yennefer different from the books. By the end of the season, he has alienated both of them. In the books, him and Dandelion are actual friends, and Yennefer doesn't hate him.
I felt like I missed an episode when Gerald and yen met again in the dragon episode. They talk to each other as if they have met several times after the incident with the genie. We as the audience should have seen them spend more time together I think as the moment when Gerald was sad about them "breaking up" felt like it came out of nowhere.
Well in the books it was 5 years after their first meeting including them LIVE TOGETHER in same house for a year:) They completely destroyed Yen and Geralt relationship in this show(they should actually get back together after dragon story).
Totally agree. I think it would’ve been better if they introduced Yennefer and Geralt’s relationship in episode, push the dragon hunt to episode 7 and replaced episode 6 as The Shard of Ice story where we see them living and being together (stuffed unicorn anybody?). During 6, we see it fall apart because of Istredd coming back into the picture, then move onto 7 with the dragon hunt where they have time apart and a chance to be together again, only to have that snatched away. While this does take up space from the Battle of Sodden Hill, I think it would be a better sacrifice in order to build up the main romance
@@thetiktokpenguin4343 Shard of ice is actually just AFTER dragon. They lived together just after The Last Wish story. I think they done their own version of Shard of Ice when she visited Istredd. As they done their own Ciri in Brokillon.Botch have Geralt cut off - we don't wan't bloody man to ruin strong woman adventures :) With Netflix witcher you have to really work hard to connect their content to books.
If season 2 is similarly non-linear, we could still get that.
To be fair, it's similar in the books. First two books are just short stories. It's consistently implied they have a connection, but you very rarely see it. (Only talking about the 1st two)
actors are easily blamed because they show up on screen, i go straight for the writers/directors instead.
Henry Cavill brought in Tom Cruise's team for the Blaviken fight scene in episode 1. So that was entirely different team. The rest of them weren't, so that might explain the difference in quality.
I was one of those people who, initially, said that I could follow what was going on. But what I should have said was, 'I could tell that they were jumping through time, but I didn't know how much time had passed between scenes.'
It would have been easier to figure out had the characters who should have aged, looked different in those scenes. But everybody looked the same. The only characters who should've looked the same are Garelt and I guess any of the mages/magic-users (I don't remember if they're ever called anything specific). But nobody else aged, when they should have
Yes! I figured out the time jumps fairly early one and was okay with it. But the idea that like 30-90 years were covered came out of left field. (I honestly still have no idea how much time season 1 covered.)
I agree. I've read the books but will say that time lines were "confusing." Not in the sense that I didn't know what was going on (I did), but in the sense that often when the time jumped happened I felt like I missed part of an episode. Almost like a large amount of what was filmed was left on the cutting room floor which is why many feel that the series could have benefited from at least one more episode to flesh out story arches better.
The only character I remember that ages is King Flotest. I think (it's been awhile) we first see him with Geralt in the Striga episode as an old man then in a later episode as a small child (I think with Yen). But the child Flotest scene is such a blink-and -you'll-miss-it moment that it doesn't really help.
"And that leads us to the final big star of the show"
Me: Dandel-
"Ciri"
-ion
yup. he was missing in this video
It needed ten episodes. Geralt carries the show. The bard, Yennefer's teacher and Ciri's grandparents were also good characters.
I'm gonna be honest chief. If it weren't for Yennefer's story arc and acting, I would not have continued with this show. I have no connection with the books or games so I was going in blind and she was easily the heart of the show for me, the same way Zuko is in Avatar.
The bard...THE BARD??? HOW COULD YOU FORGET THE NAME OF OUR LORD AND SAVIOR JASKIER? HERESY I SAY, HERESY!
Guys the bard has a name its Jaskier
Ive read the books and had No problem with the storyline, HOWEVER my mom was sooo confused. She watched GOT and knew what was happening with who so Its not the matter of her memory. At ep. 3 she asked me to watch with her and explain WHO THE HELL IS NILFGARD and SO IS THE DRAGON AND THE GUY FROM SKELIGE DEAD OR NOT
It doesn’t help that MORE THAN A DECADE (since Ciri’s aged up) goes on in the story yet characters that should age, don’t. Ok, Geralt doesn’t age as fast as humans, but Jaskier should, or at least comment on it. Why does Calanthe look the same before her granddaughter was born and when she is a preteen?
Yeah, those of us who read the books know what’s going on because, duh, we already know everything, but it would be dishonest to pretend that people who don’t understand the timeline are just dumb.
@@BigBadWolframio Calanthe lack of change in appearence is what prevent me from understanding the timelines for the longest time! I didn't read the books nor played the games, so I was reduced to make the craziest hypothesis to make it have sense. Like thinking is she her sister? Is she her from a parallel universe/another dimension, and where Ciri is an adult (don't judge it's a magical world after all, everything's possible.)?
Was it impossible to just give her fucking wrinkles and grey hair when Ciri is older??!!
I’ll admit I haven’t played the games nor read the books, I just heard some buzz about the series and decided to check it out.
It took me way too fucking long to realize the timeline was spanning decades, not just days/weeks/months. I had an epiphany midway through the season and thought “oh, did they actually just skip several years between the last episode and this one?” I then proceeded to realize the whole series was set up that way from the get-go.
I definitely think the lack of visible character aging was to blame. It’s such an odd mixture of hoping pre-established fans will figure out what’s going on and just simply forgetting to give crucial info to the viewers. It was an otherwise good watch for me, though.
The timeline is fine for me, its the execution that doesn’t work. They often skip pieces that are important for character development.
Furdik choreographed all fight scenes in the first season except one: the highly acclaimed Blaviken fight. It was choreographed by Wolfgang Stegemann who was brought into the project by Henry Cavill himself for the reshoots as the two have worked on Mission Impossible: Fallout. Maybe he will return for season 2...
I liked the performance by Anya Chalotra but I did not like how the character of Yennefer was used in the show. The over-exposure (and flat-out giving her an origin-story) takes away much of her enigmatic presence throughout the books (and Witcher III as well). I think she works much better as a supporting rather than a viewpoint character - she was never intended to be particularly likeable, she was intended to be a source of upheaval and chaos for Geralt's otherwise steady emotions. It is one of the best parts in the books to ride along with Geralt and wonder what kind of storm Yennefer brings with her the next time around. She's an unpredictable force of nature that always adds tension in the books, whereas in the show we know both Geralt's AND Yennefer's agenda, which takes away much of the great dynamic those characters present to readers/gamers in the books and in Witcher III. The episodes that focus heavily on Yennefer (2 & 8) are also the weakest of the season by about a mile, the mean Hogwarts mumbo-jumbo just isn't as interesting as any of the short stories adapted to the screen (yes, even the dragon episode was better imo, even though it looked atrocious).
For me, the show averaged out at about a 6/10 as well. At its best it had a similar charm to shows like Firefly and at its worst it got really, really cringey (Triss' thorns). I like most of the main casting choices so far, as well as a lot of the cheesy yet entertaining writing, and am looking forward to a more fleshed-out world in Season 2. Season 1 never managed to give me a 'sense of place' and almost everything feels like it's a day or two of travel apart. I hope they get more time to properly finish everything up and get a bit more budget to avoid embarrassments like Brokilonforest and the 'Dryads' (aka regular women wearing dreadlocks and sitting in bushes). Overall I hope they manage to deliver much more consistent content quality-wise. Speaking in gaming terms The Witcher show is more like Gothic 3 rather than Witcher III. Likeable but hella' flawed.
Agreed 100%.
exactly my thoughts. Anya's petformance does not save the fact that Yennefer back story felt super forced and wasn't interesting at all. She was written to be a supporting character and every minute she spent in the limelight took away from the enigma and mystique that usually accompanies her character. It also gave us less time with Geralt who was def the standout char/performance of the show.
I mean the final mage battle was super cringe and there were so many cringe moments like the aard kiss and cringe dialogues like "it's just magic, it's not real".
??? that fireball just killed a dude, yen, what do you mean its not real??
it's a 4/10 for me.
I like that you censor your swear but not his XD
Me and my husband had a good time taking a minute when they switched timelines to talking about when we thought the timelines were.
Being able to pause stuff is the best!
Glad you made this video, it was a good watch! And I appreciate how passionate you are about wanting to get your thoughts out precisely and correctly.
I'm going to disagree with you about the different timelines. For me this was one of the most awesome parts of the series. I have to preface that I have not yet read the books, but will soon. The moment I realized that it was 3 timelines in ep 4, I was like: 'Holy shit...' it was one of the best feelings I had ever watching a show. Every episode had at least one clue (some more) about the timelines. I also loved the fact that they did not make it obvious. This made the discovery of the difference in time that much more special... in a time of mindless entertainment (both tv/movies and music) this was a very refreshing change. A show that make you think. Just my 2c
I agree. I love that the show doesn't hold your hand, assuming the viewers are smart enough to figure out what's going on. In my opinion, the purpose of good writing isn't to appeal to the lowest common denominator, but rather to raise it.
Same! I’m currently halfway through the books but watching the show was my first look into the witcher universe and I loved it! I was kind of confused at times but when it brought it all together it was a great *chefs kiss* moment. Watching the second or third time around was even better, knowing what is going on lol
Hard agreeeee
I have Toss a Coin as my ring tone now haha...
Why Foltest look like that tho. He’s supposed to be very handsome as well as being a good king. When I saw him for the first time in the series, I thought he was the bloody baron for a second even though he’s not in the books. Come on man.
the time jumps would of been much easier to follow if they did a better job aging and deaging the actors. either with makeup or cgi. it didnt become obv to me until i saw the queen who died in a earlier episode show back up again. she jumped close to what 15 years and didnt age a day.
Why the heck does jennifer fight with a sword in the dragon scene? I'm up to book 4 and never once has she picked up a sword or weapon and fought. wtf.
The timeline doesn't skip, it's just a linear timeline for each character that is not at the same time until they intersect. Geralt's story is linear from Renfri to end. No events occur out of order for him. Same for Yennefer and Ciri, it's just that those timelines were not happening at the same time until they meet.
Yeah, and those of us who read the books know this.
They don't need to bludgeon you over the head to make this more apparent to casual fans.
Uh... I read the books and I was still confused
@@tahoerheanevada2997 Gatekeeping.
Yes it does, there are elipse of several years.
I definitely agree that Ciri could have been a good opportunity to clarify timeline. When something involves a non-linear timeline, it really is important to have some sort of thread to hold things together - like how the Last Wish isn't chronological, but The Voice Of Reason weaving throughout is what holds it together and helps the reader navigate between the different times, and that's really what the show lacked. Or, if not with Ciri, Jaskier is literally a bard, so they definitely could have utilized him telling stories as a frame for the nonlinearity.
That fight scene in Blaviken's my favourite fight scenes in the entire season! I watch that fight scene like everyday it's that good!
YOUR VIDEOS ARE EJOYABLE!!!!! KEEP UP THE GOOD WORK!!!!! THE EFFORT YOU HAVE PUT IN SINCE YOU STARTED IS VERY APPARENT!!!! There is some rage for you. Keep your head up.
Great review, thank you for taking the time to make this video.
Henry’s performance was flawless. With very few spoken words, I easily understood this character and what he was about. The only thing that bothered me even remotely were some scenes where his colored contacts were very obvious, and sometimes uneven, giving him a googley-eyed appearance that I found distracting (similar for Ciri). Conversely the color adjustments in Yen’s close-up shots were beautiful.
I the graphics issues were more distracting to me in the Duney and Pavetta scene and, of course, everything in episode 6. The rest I found to be at least pretty good.
I could have done without episode 6 altogether. This felt like an episode of Xena Warrior Princess. This only established more on the Geralt/Yen relationship and what she’s missing in her life (though that is covered in the Djinn episode). I would much rather have had more establishing back story on how they became close, as it is only implied that they continued to have some form of acquaintance after the Djinn. Without that, it made the “split” between them completely unbelievable and unimportant.
And WTF was that kiss attack in the cave? Like, what? I have no idea. Did they have the power of love? ROFL.
Other performances: Yen was great. Ciri was unimpressive, I found myself bored in her scenes. Sorry Ciri. Jaskier, though kind of a trope, I still loved. Cahir annoyed me, I don’t know why, just really did not enjoy him on screen. Vilgefortz had that “I’m really a villain” twinkle in his eye from the beginning that I wish played out more subtly. I enjoyed Queen Calanthe; there was definitely and over-the-top theater element to her performance that was slightly distracting, but overall I enjoyed her quite a bit.
I personally didn’t mind the time jumps (I am not a reader/player of the novels/games). I found it fun to discover the clues and try to assemble the timeline. It made a re-watch more fun for me too because I would catch so many more things I didn’t in the first go. I wish more was spent on Yen’s training to better establish how long she spent there, I would have liked to understand more about Renfri’s background and the moon girls (why did she have a prophecy for Geralt?), and as I said above, more on the Yen/Geralt relationship. There were a lot of little details in the show that I imagine have deeper meanings that I’m guessing are explained in the novels, such as; obelisks in the landscape, Geralt’s potions, pendant, and magic tricks, etc. This inspires me to grab the novels and give them a read.
Overall I would give this an 8/10 and I very much look forward to future seasons.
The most impactful moment in the whole 2 books that got covered here, that also really well tied together the themes of "sword of Destiny" was pretty much recreated but in a soulless way without any buildup. That ending scene with Geralt and Ciri reuniting had some actual emotional impact in the books and i dont really understand why one would change Ciris storyline in a way that made that scene feel completely shallow. The whole theme of Destiny was at least not completely abandoned but Geralts words that relationships can transcend Destiny where left aside.
Also Nilfgaards portrayal was just the "bad empire with bad guys".
The show by far did not abandon the books themes, but made many cuts to the point where it really bugs me more than any pacing, story structure or VFX issue. Would give a 5.5 to 6/10 its enjoyable but lacks what made the books or the games special, its a fine series that benefits from amazing acting in its main cast.
Regarding the timeline issue:
I have not read the books or played the games (yet). I can definitely see why people would miss the separate timelines, because you can't tell Geralts age at all. At some point it clicked and I realized what was going on, but I'd be surprised if people completely missed what was happening... maybe if it is not watched in a condensed timeframe?
But yeah, the performances of Geralt, Yennefer, and Jaskier were wonderful for me, really hooked me.
I watched the show recently, and I only give the show a C. I thought it was just "meh." Too confusing. No forward momentum from episode to episode.
While I am happy for the series success, all the changes from the books just bugged me too much to enjoy it :(
Agree absolutely! Yen actress was amazing and I am incredibly excited for next show!
Daniel, your channel single-handedly got me to start reading fantasy again. Thank you so much for your awesome content!
Henry, Anya, and Freya embody their characters so perfectly.
I read the first two books after having watched the show and then I had fun rewatching the show and noticing all the clues that had previously gone completely over my head because I wasn't familiar with the source material. Maybe the clues could have been made a bit more obvious, but I enjoyed the show even without having all the background knowledge.
0:00 Daniel just became a ping pong ball XD
Nice job with the deep dive. These are much more interesting than the superficial reaction vids. Good on you for listening to your fans.
I think Yennifer’s acting was great- but her story line makes some major leaps between episodes often that doesnt feel warranted
You're music is dope dawg, keep it up! 👍🏿
I watched three videos and subscribed. You seem to have direct and honest views, you make sure to properly frame criticisms, and you are clearly knowledgeable about your subject matter. Keep up the good work sir!
The audio even seemed to hide the lines sometimes. I just couldn't hear clearly enough to follow along. Agree with everything you noted.
Agreed! We turned on subtitles right from the beginning.
Just wanna let you know i recently subscribed, really admire how many consistently good and interesting videos you put out!
I watched the show without having read the books or played the games, and i was definitely pretty confused at times. However, the actors and writers did a good enough job that i decided to pick up the books and get more into it. So definitely a win there for me.
Have a nice day :)
Hey, great video and i agree with almost everything you said. I think it would be cool if you could include sources to pictures like the Netflix ranking @ 17:59. Maybe in the description below. Makes it much easier for us to look up the stuff you're referencing! :)
Two things: First, everyone I have talked to was confused by the timelines of the show. The only reason I wasn't is because of your videos leading into the show. Thank you!
Second, I never noticed the "controversy" surrounding Yennefer, but I think you addressed it perfectly. I could see other's opinions that it isn't good, but I think your explanation is the real takeaway. Bravo!
TLDR: Daniel set me up to LOVE the Witcher and he breaks it down well after the fact!
I was very confused up until I actually found out it wasn't linear at which point I kind-off just accepted it.
They really should have flashed up the year on screen at the start of a particular time period. I wasn't entirely clear on the dates regarding Geralt's stuff. How much time passed between Blaviken and Pavetta's betrothal?
ArmorFrog Entertainment preach!
One more post production gripe:I wasn’t big on all the washed out colors. I get the need for the dark and gritty look, but throwing in some warmer tones would’ve been nice. Might’ve helped make the difference in timelines stand out better, too.
Man, I was one of those who hadn't read the books nor played the games and was, as I can not put it any more eloquently, completely fucking lost the first time around. I even had to turn subtitles on to try and keep up with everything. At some point (when Geralt went to Cintra the first time), I figured out the timelines weren't the same and from then on, I got more & more interested & excited about it. By the end, I was one of those that enjoyed it but wasn't raving about it.
After a few days of hearing about how great it was, I decided to watch it a second time. Now, knowing bits & pieces and having some understanding of just what the fuck was happening, I enjoyed it much more. There were, however, still holes in the show, and you did an incredible job of pointing out just about every gripe I had with it. Well done, sir.
I felt like at school when I had to eat my lunch because I had to eat really fast people would try and ask for food. The was no time to enjoy the taste. I’m forgiving of bad special effects for tv but yea the entire season felt rushed in story and preproduction and post. No time for a cool sword fight next. No time to get the dragon right next. No time to know who the Witcher is next. I read the books and played the games and this was hard for me to follow knowing what’s going on.
On a light note, your intro just woke up my sleeping dog 😂
Well said. I always appreciate your thoughts!
Best review I've seen so far. I would give the series more than 6.5 but that's because the issues you mention (rightly) about VFX and the fighting and battles don't really bother me. I agree that Anya Chalotra is amazing - Yennefer is my favourite Witcher character but she's an incredibly complex personality and challenging for an actress. Anya Chalotra got her absolutely spot on, though. I think the short stories are quite difficult to adapt into a coherent whole, and the need to introduce all three main characters as well made it even harder. Given that, I think the series did as good a job as you could expect, and following series will be easier as the time lines have now converged.
I maintain that adding little tags in the corner that showed what year it was would have fixed all the confusion about timelines.
2:14 “…as this BA-“ - ad break.
For me the strongpoints were the casting/ acting of Yennefer and Geralt. I agree, though, that the series felt low-budget and rushed in many areas eg. support cast, CGI, low number of episodes ( to clarify I think the series should have been maybe 12 episodes to flesh out the characters / short stories / lore a bit more - this would have helped with the pacing and timeline jumps ).
I agree on the pacing, especially on the ciri time-line. But the way they handled the time lines for me was really good. I hate being spoon-fed information n I loved the little details in dialogue they helped us piece together the show.. That's not to say I wasn't confused n im smarter. I totally was but I believed tht was the essence of it. The biggest prblm I had with the show was the ciri time-line where he relationships as u said weren't fully taken in n I felt like it was all rushed.
I agree with all of the points you have brought up! I haven't read the books and I was very confused - even though I watched a lot of videos about the world of The Witcher before watching the show. And without my research, I would have been completely lost.
If it was up to me, this would've been an animated series, like Netflix's Castlevania and the chronology would stick to the chronology of the books.
Oooh yeah, that could've been awesome!
Actually if it was up to me I would do a cgi kind of animation like the witcher 3. To make them look like our characters from the games and books. And make it follow better to the books
I had a lot of fun with this show, but it was really nice to hear your thoughts on it because whenever I didn't understand things, I thought I had missing something. It wasn't me, it was the show! At least in part. Now I'm reading the books though, and I'm sure that will also clear up plenty with all the places and politics.
The pacing was what ruined it for me, took all depth the stories by eliminating a lot of the details that gave them the charm that it had and rushed them making the stories so pulpy and over the top and not meaningful at all, yet a lot of the new material was redundant or unintersting and meandered for too long. I suffered through my most anticipated adaptation when I loved the og material, that's all I need to say
Great review, wonderful video, thank you.
Rushing the story was the biggest issue for The Witcher. Like you, I rate it around a 6 but I think Ciri should not have appeared at all in the first season. The first season should've focused completely on Geralt and Yennefer's story. Basically build up her not being able to have kids, and put a lot more work into Geralt's avoidance and contempt for fate. Get us attached to these characters, then for season 2 you can do a slow burn up to Geralt finding Ciri. The emotional payoff from the books was completely absent from the show because you didn't really care about them meeting.
I just think that due to the fast pacing much of the dialogues felt very unnatural or rushed, in contrast to the Witcher books which thrive of authentic dialogue. Also they fucked up the magic system really hard.
The music of the series is amazing, the visuals are inconsistent but sometimes great, sometimes awful, as are the costumes. Yennefer goes through a character arc like every 2 episodes, which is far too much. Ciris story was quite weak as she only gets pushed around and doesn't actively do anything. Her magic powers worked as deus ex machina way too often, which is just stupid. Also "The Edge of the World" storyline was cut out far too much, it was like 4 scenes in the show, lost all its essence. "Brokilon Forest" storyline was completely useless, in contrast to the books where Geralt and Ciri could properly bond before meeting again.
Also, and this is unforgiveable, they butchered one of the best moments in the book series (spoiler for those who didn't read the books, you've been warned!) when Geralt tells Ciri she is something more to him than just destiny. It was such an emotional moment, and in the show their meeting just felt "meh, whatever".
I don't need to mention that the show didn't get the concept of "destiny" of the books at all.
Still an alright show, especially the fight scenes, the music and the acting, but it barely reached its potential. Also the fact that after the "The Lesser Evil" many people said it's "alright" and didn't say "damn, this is a masterpiece" speaks for itself.
Yes I'm that annoying book reader that compares everything to the books, fight me. Also I don't have anything against changes, for example I like that they gave Yennefer her own storyline. It's alright as long as the changes are done with a reason that make it work better for an adaptation, but most are just changes to the worse.
It's funny because as someone that hasn't read the books or played the games, I had all the same criticisms as you. So I don't think it's just an adaptation problem. It's just a bad writing problem in general. Watching the show felt like watching a recap of a show I'd never seen.
This. This. This! 100% agree!
Amen to that. Truth has been spoken
I like your videos but i always wonder with you talking about the witcher why no mention of moorcock or elric?
thank you, yes I definitely agree with your comments on Yennefer and her story
I still cant get over the fact that like a DECADE has supposed to have passed AT LEAST by the time the narrative is done. Or was it 2? It makes not a lick of sense. NO one ages. I intend to read the books but I havent yet, so when it got to the reveal that some storylines were kinda flashbacks/way before others, I was like, okay, makes sense, but the amount of time was staggering. You got me wondering what secret powers Jaskier has to stay looking so young. Magic potion/amulet? Anti-wrinkle charm? Is he half-elf too? It breaks immersion and just pisses me off that we're supposed to 'get it' with next to no clues.
I really liked the show, but I totally agree with you on slowing it down and providing more background. I'm a fan of fantasy and so I was used to the jumps in the timeline. My biggest issue, however, was the world building and backstory. I haven't read the books and I have only cursory experience with the games, so coming out of the show I had a lot questions regarding motivations and background. Ie. The mage council said that Cintra didn't have a court mage, yet I wondered about Mousesack. Was he not a part of the council? I later found out online that he was a Druid, not a mage, but that distinction should have been made clear in the show. Also, I'm still not clear on why exactly the mages were so threatened by Nilfgaard. They say their "way of life" will change, but what that means isn't spelled out, aside from the religious undertones from the Nilfgaard mages. I don't think that the show needs huge exposition passages, but all you need is some dialog here and there to answer these sorts of questions. After the show I was interested and I looked some stuff up online, but I don't think that should be a requirement for things like that. Otherwise, though, the show was great. It got me interested, it just needs a bit more polish and some more world building.
I was confused by the timeline, but appreciate it the second time around.
CAAAAAAAAAAAvill Daniel, CAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAvill!
not caVILL? lolol pronouncing names wrong accidentally is his thing i think.
Having not read the books or played the game I found it made more sense with the timeline the 2nd time I saw it just because it clicked when I heard mentions of events... it was moments of ah this happens before that. It probably would have been nicer to have a more blunt timeline markers.It did make me more curious about the books but I can see where people might hate that kind of thing because not everyone wants to go snag a book or a game.
I think I totally agree with you about the passion of the actors, and how this is really a show better suited for fantasy nerds and someone who really fully focuses on a show from beginning to end. I love fantasy and I don't normally fully focus on shows. But I did for the witcher and part of the enjoyment was slowly realizing that they weren't part of the same time line and feeling satisfaction when pieces of the story started slotting together. It was a little frustrating. And on a rewatch I definitely think it could have been made a little more clear who where and what everyone was doing. Even in a rewatch I'm still hazy about some details. However honestly this is where I disagree. I very rarely see good fantasy shows that actually draw me in and that aren't ya. I'd give it a solid 7.5 maybe higher cause it made me so invested I looked into the origins and I'm currently on a quest to find the books second hand. (My favorite type of quest) anyway thank you for your content I'm super excited to see the second season. And really really excited to read the books.
It was like they were trying to do what West World season one did with the time line. But because of the fantasy genre and maybe some lack of background knowledge it wasn't conveyed in the way I would have hoped.
I love Cavill all I know is the first part of the books and the 3rd game and he seems to nail Geralt.
Definitely agree with just about everything you said! Have not read the books yet. Took me a lot of thought to grasp the timeline. Ciri seemed like a filler. No idea what is going on with the magic and the elves, why is stuff forbidden?.why are they so mad? What are the diffaerent factions?. Still enjoyed it overall!
Great analysis, I came into it never having read the books or played the games and the timeline was very confusing. We had to look up the episode synopsis after each one to figure out to whom and when all this stuff happened. I didn't notice the cgi (except for the Satyr OH MY GOD HE WAS SO UGLY) so much but I had a huge issue with the costumes and the lack of cohesion and world-building there was in the costumes. Maybe I'm spoiled by GoT and WoT, but I wanted to be able to look at a character and tell where they are from and what their status is. I LOVE fantasy constumes, so it was very frustrating! As for the fight scenes, I think some of that constant cutting was to cover up not just the bad choreography, but maybe an actress who wasn't particularly good at fight scenes.
I wasn't confused. I have not read the books, played some of the games. But I very quickly realized that events were jumping around and I thought it was fun and a mystery to be suss out. So I was paying super close attention, way more that I usually do for a show.
Really glad you made this one. Makes your opinions make way more sense. Great stuff dude. And I simply believe if this had been a typical Netflix 13 episode season, they could've handled the politics, more Witcher Contracts and simply opened the world up for new fans.
Perfect timing Daniel - just finished the show as well and was wondering what your thoughts were 😁😄
As someone who hasn't read the books nor played the games, I think the biggest issue I had was really the sense of setting that was missing. One thing I admired most about GoT was how set design and costumes made it VERY clear where we were at every moment, and I think The Witcher would have become much easier to understand just by giving visual cues like that. I personally enjoyed that the timelines were starting at different points in the story and we weren't explicitly told that - as soon as I realised it I was really excited about it - but giving hints through set design and costumes and also (de-)ageing the characters properly would have helped a lot to build a more immersive world, imo.
I came to appreciate the time line skips. Initially I didn't piece it all together, but on re-watch it really lined up.
Hoping this becomes something that rewards a re-watch after future seasons.
I think a blue ray release should add in a time stamp for the time line jumps that uses the massacre of cintra as a reference point. Like in the first episode have it say something like Jan 14, 1300; twenty years before the massacre of cintra. Then when it changes to ciri's story have it flash Apr 01, 1320, one day before the massacre of cintra.
I did play the witcher 3 but never read the books. It took me till episode 4 to really get a clear picture of the timeline in my head. I was kinda prepared for it though because I watched an interview with Lauren Hissrich where she talked about how the timeline jumps around. I remember she said "I think viewers are smart and they are going to be able to figure out the timeline." paraphrased of course. While I think a small date stamp for scenes would be good, mostly it's nice to have a show and show runner that respects the watchers intelligence.
yeah the way the timeline was set out actually really really confused me XD. Had to rewatch it to figure it out
I think this just comes down to the same thing that can divide people at Books, and it’s whether you’re a plot driven or character. I’m a character focused reader and I loved the Whitcher I thought all of the moments we got between the characters and the performance between corral and everything it was just so captivating for me that I, Club never picked up the witch or Books or have never really been interested in them, had to go out and buy a copy of the last wish because I wanted to get to know more about the characters. I didn’t necessarily care that I didn’t know where the kingdoms were or things like that because I trust them because I’ve digested so much fantasy that I would be able to understand it as more seasons come out. I had never been interested in the Witcher before tuning into the show because something about it just put a bad taste in my mouth I heard things about the author that I didn’t like, but I think they really knocked it out of the park in setting up characters that people are going to engage with and care about and want to come back and see you again. But if you are the kind of person that doesn’t care about characters as much you’re more plot focused I can see why the shell might not have worked as well
The good: when it followed the books.
The bad: when it did not follow the books.
I have both read the books and played the game. Now I'm on episode 4 of the show and I have to watch it in parts because some things just make me angry at how much they do not make any sense in relation to the source. Of course the adaptation is going to be different, but I would like to hear your opinion on why you think they made some changes (since you said you see them and understand them it would be nice to see your perspective on that).
The changes that bug me:
1. Magic system and magic users - I don't understand the whole using of flowers. It didn't make sense for me to add that element to the magic as well as suddenly having Aretuza getting power from students turned into eels (I was completely disappointed in that bit...). The books do a pretty good job of explaining the magic and taking it from different sources and this portrayal of Aretuza made it look a little bit Hogwarts-ish. Mousesack suddenly being able to defend the castle which would be a feat that would require immense power in this world.
2. Changes in the characters:
Calanthe - from being a strong and proud queen who despises the stupidity of patriarchy and senseless war (but will fight alongside her soldiers) to this crazy bloodthirsty woman in the fourth episode and this crybaby in the first one. I really like how she was shown in the books and in the adaptation the character was butchered for me.
Eist - a warrior from the isles of Skellige a sailor's nation who looks like an at home dad and acts like a pervert
Foltest being a bumbling idiot rather than a king with a face that was perfect for coins ;)
Tissaia de Vries being kind of a ruthless person.
That's about it for those few episodes.
Another thing that bothered me was the overall feel of the world which for me should be more gritty at times but I recognize this as a very personal opinion. On the other hand Dol Blathana did not really look like the magnificent valley of flowers.
Next, the dialogues - I believe that the best dialogues were those that were almost copied from the books. In other scenes they just weren't that good. They weren't bad neither, but just... Average and borderline boring. The less they diverted from the source the more into it I got. Once again - I don't expect it to be exactly the same but we saw what amazing job can be done on the basis of the books when we look at the games. A completely new story that feels very in tune with the books.
The dialogues created by the showrunnes felt a little bit flat compared to the ones taken from the books.
Another thing is black characters in the show. First of all I don't care about it for the reason that duuuhhhh it's medieval Europe because it is not and this is just a fantasy world. However I find this weird that in a world where humans are generally bad and selfish and opress other races like elves and dwarves suddenly they don't see the skin colour at all. We know that the 'i don't see skin colour I see human' argument is bs so I would like to at least hear an explanation of why it is not bs in this world the show created.
One last minor criticism for me is the character of Jaskier and his song 'toss a coin for the witcher'. Ok... I like the song. I think it's both catchy and good. It just sounds too modern. I mean... It doesn't feel like something from this world. Even though I like it, I can't get over this feeling. The character itself is also not bad. He's funny and the actor is good, but I have the same criticism for him as for the song. He just feels a little bit out of place.
All in all I have to say that I also see a lot of good things there. Music in general, acting, camerawork (in most cases ;) ) are all fine.
All in all as a fantasy series I would give it 5/10 but as an adaptation of the books it's 2/10 for me. I just feel like it dumbed down a lot of the themes and characters from the books and is not a great piece of writing.
Agreed. Sadly it's another example of an adaption in which the people adapting it have way less writing and storytelling talent than the original author.
The only time i really noticed bad vfx was the first episode in the very begining that monster looked horrible but i didnt notice the vfx as much towards the end that might be cause i wasnt paying much attention but idk.
Daniel, one thing, Henry’s last name is pronounced Ca-vel like Tra-vel. Henry Cavill has said so himself. Other than that, love your reviews and insights as always. You’re one of my favorite booktubers, it also helps that you’re easy on the eyes.
I’m going to read books I read A song of ice and fire I loved in depth lore and worldbuilding liked show but sometimes I felt I was missing something hope to play the games and read books.
It would be far easier to follow if they changed the costumes between periods.
I was only two short stories into the first book when I watched the show. As for the games, I started the first one years ago, and just couldn't get into it... twice. I started to suspect the timeline separation between the stories in Episode 2, and as soon as it was confirmed in Episode 3 for Yen with the two kids being alive at the party I just assumed the same was going on for CIri's story as well. (I blame Lost and Westworld.) So I didn't have problems with that.
But I did have issues with remembering the different kingdoms and trying to figure out their locations. However, I was having the same problem with the book too.
They really needed a battle-map scene where everyone stood over a too-large map of the entire continent, and the camera just pointed down as characters showed where was what. At least something. Unfortunately I had to go with the "Well... if that name is important enough, I'll probably hear it again over and over in time." method, and geographically I was hosed until that interactive map came out a few days ago.
That said, graphics limitation aside, I really loved the show. I don't disagree with anything you said, but for me (due to differing priorities), I'd more put it at 7.5.
I'm not sure if this is because I haven't read the books yet but I felt like the ending was a pretty bad cliffhanger, I had a dosen questions after I finished the 8th episode.
To the point of the characters just standing about during the battle I agree is just stupid, if that actually happened IRL you would be dead in a second. As far as the start/stop thing goes it didn't really bother me all that much.
I really like the show but I had an issue with the pacing of the first 3 episodes... found it a bit slow...
Really liked Henri Cavill too 😉😉
I was used to fantasy stories but found your channel to get explanation on the Witcher series. Loved the visuals but the story was confusing.
I feel like the Witcher show has more positives than negatives.
I like the way the story was told, that being said I wasn't a newcomer to the Witcher, the timeline thing is a problem I feel if someone watches the show passively,( on their phone or talking with someone while watching).
The biggest problems are Nilfgaardian armour which is essentially a scrotum, good thing the helmets don't resemble genitals.
Not sold on Triss, she didn't have much to do and her impact is nowhere near as important in the books as in the games but hopefully the actress can still save it.
Christian Potato I don’t know, the helmet do like dick tips to me :/
Yeah, I didn’t like Triss at all. Nothing bad, just boring and forgettable. I read the books and played the games, and both version made me remember her, even if it were in different ways. If anything, I’ll remember Netflix Triss for how forgettable she is
First comment woo! Love you Daniel you make my mornings. You should read King's Dark Tidings my guy. I think you'd love the perspective on relationships.