Netflix has been butchering The Witcher books since the first season so I want to go through all the things they've ruined. In this video I'll focus specifically on characters. #thewitcher #netflix #henrycavill
Here's a list of artists and cosplayers whose artworks and photos I've used: Artists NastyaSkaya: www.deviantart.com/nastyaskaya steamey: www.deviantart.com/steamey LadyOfMordorr: www.deviantart.com/ladyofmordorr Shinobi2u: www.deviantart.com/shinobi2u tio-trile: tio-trile.tumblr.com/ Ghostcup: ghostcupdraws.tumblr.com/ sybilmarlowe: sybilmarlowe.tumblr.com/ A Stas: www.artstation.com/a_stas Lorenzo Mastroianni: www.artstation.com/lorenzomastroianni Evgeniya Seminenko: www.artstation.com/heathwind Cosplayers Fealin-Meril: www.deviantart.com/fealin-meril Salvasfortress: www.deviantart.com/salvasfortress If there's anyone I forgot and you know them please let me know and I'll add them here. I want to give credit to everyone and I was trying to do it in the past but it's additional work and sometimes there's just no time for it when you want to upload consistently. I also usually don't expect my videos doing that well and giving artists much exposure but that's not an excuse. I often just download art from Google Images and it's hard to find a source for some of them even when I'm trying to so I apologize if I've missed someone.
The portrayal of kings and queens in Witcher's Netflix is also hilarious. In the books, Foltest is described as quite handsome, and, despite his incestuous relationship with his sister, he is presented as a righteous king, just like Vizimir, whose moniker is 'The Just'. But Netflix needs to constantly point out that rulers in general are incompetent representing them as morons or clowns, something Sapkowski already did in the books without having to compromise their intelligence or their honor.
@@TkanyWichrem I Don't think so. In the show Calanthe is a bigoted racist while in the books she was favorable to the elder races. Don't remember much about Meve in the show but I guess she is no much different that Foltest or Vizimir.
@@MrBelevolence I dont belive Netflix vision of racism is the same as in the books. Also I belive that their Calanthe represent what suppose to be strong female queen by their standards. While Calanthe is broken like every other character she is not pictured as incopetent caricature unlike male representations of power.
@@MrBelevolence Meve got only brief scene in season 2 where she is the one demanding death of Ciri I think, while in the books she was displeased with idea of killing her.
@@TkanyWichrem there is certainly some rashness and vulgarity in netflix Calanthe, and she lacks certain...subtlety and understanding of diplomacy and political smarts she had in book. Netflix show version of the queen is also defined by her fighting prowess which makes her character lose the feminine side.
One more: Ciri - Netflix, particularly in season 3, portrays Ciri as a girl that wants to be princess, that she wants to rule and unite everyone, in the books however, from the very first meeting between her and Geralt at Brokilon (Book: Sword of Destiny), it is quite obvious that she is not a girl that wants to be princess. She literally ran away from a meeting with some royal guy she was about to be married off to. All Ciri wants in the books at this point in time, is stay with Geralt, be free, and be herself, she never even for a second believes that she can unite everyone, because in the books the racial tensions are more complex than Netflix portrays them as, and in general, Ciri is able to have common sense, and is aware that she can't unite every single person. So Netflix's portrayal of Ciri being some Avatar princess that wants to rule so that she can unite people because she has elven blood, is absolutely idiotic, she wants nothing to do with politics, and it's not hard to understand why, she lost her mom, dad (kinda), grandmother and her entire place of birth (Cintra massacre) due to politics. Also, she doesn't have a hero complex, the only times where she wanted to be a hero, is when she found out Yennefer was being held captive by Vilgefortz and sensed that Geralt was in danger, the other time happened earlier, when she found out Bonhart was close to the Rats after she had left the group, ofcouse she was too late and saw some of them get slaughtered, by someone that was sent after her for guess what.. political reasons! Not saying that the rats were good people, they were utter trash, but for a while they gave Ciri the illusion of safety, which is what she was desperate for at that time. This is just my take tho, I'm not a youtuber or a blogger, just an annoyed fan xD
There is some additional nuance to Ciri though in that deep down she still had ambitions to be a princess. I remember when Nilfgaard tried to foil her by using an imposter princess and she had a moment of almost blind jealously that someone else was taking her righteous place. That is part of what made the books so great was they every character had layers of nuance and motivations which was completely lost on the show.
Yes, there was a brief moment of jealousy, when she heard a girl claiming to be Cirilla of Cintra was about to marry Emhyr. However, when Emhyr showed up at the end, she did not want to go with him, and seeing her reaction, Emhyr let her go, and later when the lodge has a plan to have Ciri married to some northern prince (forgot his name), it was quite obvious she was not going to go along with this plan. Not saying there was no jealousy, or doubts in her head about ruling a kingdom (or empire), but by the end, and also in Times of Contempt, Ciri was not at all thinking about it, after everything went wrong for her, all she was thinking about is finding Geralt and Yennefer, especially after visions/dreams of them being in danger.
Let's protest this together! Now there are strikes against Hollywood, why are we worse repeating the same thing? They ruthlessly trampled what we love, we can't leave it like this!
Well the lyrics of the song 'Toss a coin to your witcher' are somewhat.....horribly bad :) hahah, the melody is at least catching but the lyrics are far cry from an actual poetic song of a bard...especially with words such as "He thrust every elf Far back on the shelf" it's more like a parody song :) or this They came after me With masterful deceit Broke down my lute And they kicked in my teeth Hah it sounds more like a joke mockery song, also the whole thing with this is that Jaskier in book didn't want to write about the difficulties of elves so to not incite more hostilities towards them. Also they at netflix completely ditched the joke as at the end of the story bard searched for good title of the ballad of adventure with Silvan Torque and it fell into clevel play of words on the phrase 'where the devil says goodnight' :). There's also something that in the netflix show makes Jaskier seem more like the modern pop singer rather than quasi medieval bard and musician.
Stop ruining the song for me!! 😭 It's the one thing from the series I actually liked! I kinda thought of it as jaskier just romanticizing the scenario.
@@frostbittenskater995 well nothing wrong with enjoying it :) I simply expressed my honest opinion and a bit of an....artistic judgement :) hehe. The thing is it's actually sad that they have not used any of the verses of Jaskier/Dandelion book ballads, and there's not many of them but still: Around your house, now white from frost Sparkles ice on pond and marsh Your longing eyes grieve what is lost But naught can change this parting harsh. Spring will return, on the road the rain will fall Hearts will be warmed by the heat of the sun It must be thus, for fire still smolders in us all An eternal fire, hope for each one Or even him singing the Elaine Ettariel ballad, old elven song: "Yviss, m'evelien vente cáelm en tell Elaine Ettariel Aep cor me lode deith ess'viell Yn blath que me darienn Aen minne vain tegen a me yn toin av muireánn Que dis eveigh e aep llea... L'eassan Lamm feainne renn, ess'ell, Elaine Ettariel, Aep cor aen tedd teviel e gwen Yn blath que me darienn Ess yn e evellien a me Que shaent te cáelm a'vean minne me striscea..." "To adore you is all my life Fair Ettariel Let me keep, then, the treasure of memories And the magical flower; A pledge and sign of your love. Silvered by drops of dew as if by tears..."
For sure, Regis, the most subversive vampire character I've ever read about, will totally be your run of the mill stereotypical bloodsucker to make it "accessible."
Book Cahir is my favorite character in the entire franchise, just a kindhearted, misunderstood kid trying to prove himself. Then Netflix had to go and make him a total psychopath and ruin his character arc. Like come on, how could they do that to MY BOI. I dread to see what they do to Milva and Regis, my other 2 favorites.
he is a subversion of the black knight archtype, you expected him to be the evil knight sent by an evil king, but he is actually a noble knight following his duty. if they made him into a psychopath imagine what they have done to Eymr? he does not stand a chance...
Milva is my favourite character in the book and one of the best companions you can imagine on your journey. She also speaks with a distinct old Polish slang that's so difficult to translate but so adorable. No way they will not ruin it.😢
This show also is the epitome of the "complex and grey characters" every modern fantasy/history show seems to jump on without understanding how to do. Usually "complex and grey characters" means just that the good guys will curse a lot and act unnecessarily arrogant (or do things so fucked up that they can hardly be justified, like Yen wanting to kill a child for personal gains) without any smaller nuances to their characters. Yet at the same time to bad guys stay just bad and nothing else (like Nilfgaard in this show).
I have to agree with every point. To add some things: Yennefer - turning her "genetic defect" as a sorceress into informed choice she made. It destroys the weight behind tragedy of her fate. She was able to overcome all her issues but despite insane power, influence and wealth, still dreamed about peaceful life as a mother and was jelous of average people's lives, even ones from the absolute lowest levels of society. Calanthe - I hate how they changed her the most. Calanthe was able to be brutally honest, straight to the point and obnoxious. But it was honest choice. She acted based on emotions but wasn't impulsive. She was calculated and ruthless in executing her plans. They turned her into caricature (that's true for all of the characters, but she is the absolutely worst example). I don't get why. She is the perfect example of what writers should've wanted - classy woman leading a country, capable of fighting on equal terms with people more powerful than her both on the battlefield and in the political games. In the end she let her own plans go, to allow her descendant - young female, to follow her own path and ignore role that aristocracy planned for her Jaskier - He was a lighthearted clown in the books. But it wasn't all there was. He was able to talk himself out of (or into) a lot of situations. Jaskier engaged in political games on the highest levels because of his access to the aristocracy, natural charm and ability to manipulate people. He was, narcisistic, overly confident and couldn't notice when he was crossing the line but he wasn't dumb. And relationship between him and Geralt is great in the books. It is tale of mutual respect and understanding despite 2 drastically different perspectives and approaches to life. Not parody of Shrek and Donkey we were served by Netflix.
Yennefer is honestly my favourite character. To book readers it's obvious she isn't really cold, she's been hurt and tries to distance herself from peope she cares about so they can't hurt her. But she loves Geralt and Ciri too much. She litteraly endures months of torture fo them. She's no victim. It's like Netfilx took every character and made them into the opposit of what they are.
Also in the game after you break the djinns curse, she warms up alot because she thought she was in love due to the curse. that kiss between them on the broken ship overlooking the mountain is one of my favorite screenshots.
@@drointhewind480yeah, this quest is joke. Obviously Geralt didn’t wish love between them. It was probably a child. So breaking a curse has nothing to do with love. CDPR just failed there. I mean, they do adore Triss, so shitting on Yen is ok for them.
to do the opposite they would need to know the material. and given how much they did the opposite shows they did know the source material. guess that whistle blower was right, they actively despise what they're adapting. while D&D from GOT were grossly incompetent and GOT succeeded in spite of their changes because they didn't mean to destroy an adaptation, the creators of Netflix Witcher actively tried to shit on the the product from day one.
@@DamianLamier yeah they adore triss so much that she didnt had any additional dialogue in the witcher 3 untill later patches :D and it is yen who saves you after the battle with eredin and follows you to save ciri, even if you didnt romanced her and she isnt doing anything special + in the cdpr version a wish is not about "love" it is about them being forever bound
@@TAWYDAMIch yeah, and triss was in all 3 games. And even if you chose Shani in 1 Geralt, somehow stays with Triss in 2 game. Also probably every npc in game says to Geralt, that he better off with Triss, than with Yen. And entire quest with Yen in Kaer Morhen was cut off just because. But Triss without additional dialogues is horrible, sure. Bound or not, but after breaking the wish when Yenn confess that she’s still LOVES Geralt, he can says the opposite. Totally not about love.
@FolkWalkCZ thank You for very good content. It is really hard to rank, but IMO Netflix's writers displayed the butchering mastery in the character of Calanthe. And I am sure that this actress would be great in portraying the Lioness of Cintra as she is in the books, so this is only the screenwriters' fault. And Cahir is in 2nd place...
Let's protest this together! Now there are strikes against Hollywood, why are we worse repeating the same thing? They ruthlessly trampled what we love, we can't leave it like this!
I'm so bored of this bullshit to be honest. It's bashing over bashing for the bashing.There is so much changed in the games and no one cares. season 3 is more likely as the books then even witcher 2. but all the blaming while 9 of 10 people do not know the books at all...
@@immatoll4375 I care and I have no problem criticizing the games. There's actually a lot I don't like about them and I'll definitely do a video about it in the future. But even so they did a much better job at portraying the world of The Witcher and the changes they've made are definitely not as drastic as those in the Netflix show. Regarding you being tired of this bullshit that's exactly how I felt when the show came out and everybody loved it. You couldn't say one bad word about it without everybody piling up on you at the time. I remember that one youtuber who loved the books and dared criticizing the show was driven out of the fandom and she even got death threats. So yeah, I'm glad that people finally came to their senses and realized how bad this show is.
I think the character assassination that hurt me the most was Yennefer. And more than that, her relationship with Geralt. There’s a lot of nuance in their relationship in the books and even Witcher 3, and in this version at many points it feels like high school love drama.
I'm telling it since I read the books (early 2000s). the Wicher is a postmodern masterpiece playing with and mocking fantasy tropes and stereotypes. Netflix filmed a generic fantasy full of tropes and stereotypes without any playfulness. It´s misunderstanding and mistreating of the source material at a basic level. Far beyond repair. They don´t understand the genre, how should they understand the story?
Race swapping, sexuality changes (Jasker) story line changes such as character fates (Eskel), character personalities changes (Lambert AND Eskel), changing how FREAKING MAGIC WORKS....list goes on
Yen is such a hardass in the books, and here her voice is always about to break into some soap opera confession, like " I am SO Layered and SO fragile...."
The writers really saw complex, HUMAN characters and thought “hm… that’s too much. Let’s make them plain heroes”. It ends up being a disservice to the character of Yen the most, bc they wanted to put the spotlight on her character arc.
Always fun when Netflix or other studios hire people who actively dislike the source material - it's to the point where I'm fairly convinced it's intentional. It's probably part of the hiring process. "Have you ever read the Witcher?" - "Yep, I'm a huge fan of the series!" - (crumples up resume and tosses it in the bin).
It's interesting in a way. The Halo franchise did the same thing. Not just for the show but the games as well. Some of 343 Industries' upper management were criticised for saying they "hired people who hated Halo" when they took over from Bungie, the creators of the franchise. 343 was gloating about this and fans were like "hold up why?" Cut to ten years later and the Halo franchise has literally been destroyed. Halo Infinite can barely scrape above 2000 players on Steam and the company is terrified to release their player numbers on Xbox. This is despite Halo 3 being able to hold onto millions of players for years. Like I've seen this multiple times now and I just don't understand it. Why hire people who hate the franchise you're hiring them to work on? You are literally inviting someone to sabotage the IP you just bought the rights to. You are hiring someone who is personally invested in ruining your massive financial investment. Why? Why in the hell would you do this? The only answer I can think of is these sorts of things go over the heads of corporate execs and people like Lauren Schmitt Hissrich or 343 Industries operate with virtually no oversight.
The weird thing for me is, if you watch the interview Hissrich had with Sapkowski during the making of the first season, she comes across like she’s about to climb onto his lap and start riding him then and there. Like, what the hell changed? Sure, Sapkowski’s got a bit of rep for being a cranky bastard with a not terribly high opinion of different forms of media, especially video games, but the dude’s pushing 80 and came up in Soviet-era Poland. If anyone has a right to be a cranky asshole, it’s him. I don’t know, I guess the shine wore off or she got badgered by the talentless muppets infesting the writers room or something.
They also ruined Nivellen IMO. While in the books the rape was the facilitation of his story, in the Netflix show it's the pointe (the end) of the story while he sits on his knees. It's a perversion of his story to make him look worse than he did.
Yeah, I actually didn't mention it in this video because it's something I want to discuss in the future video where I'll talk about how Netflix butchered every short story they've touched. But you're absolutely right. I always cringe when I see someone say that s02e01 was a good adaptation and it went downhill from there. No, the show is butchering the source material from the beginning which includes the first episode of the second season.
Meanwhile I think, showrunner and writers, the whole team is trapped in a distructive sight of the world. Their series are so negative, they were not able to feel the origin spirit of the books. Thats why they ruined the witcher and cannot see it.
Let's protest this together! Now there are strikes against Hollywood, why are we worse repeating the same thing? They ruthlessly trampled what we love, we can't leave it like this!
Villifying Cahir was one of the things that made me give up give up on this show after Season 1. It just so perfectly encapsulated the attitude of the writers toward the story, nothing screamed "I know better!" louder than what they did to him.
Don't think there's any character that wasn't butchered, the hacks that write for this show most likely didn't read the books at all and just got bullet points from Tomek Bagiński or read the witcher 3 glossary. Vilgefortz is ruined beyond repair, he's a bumbling, screeching brat instead of this immensly powerful, skilled, composed and crazy intelligent mage. Same with Francesca, who's this nearly mystical queen sorceress with a lot of life experience, she wouldn't just go crazy like the moronic show version. Even Geralt who like Henry himself noticed, is a deeply philosophical dude got turned into a grunting monkey, fierce Yennefer is now a crying victim who looks like and acts like a spoiled teen while Ciri ended up both a victim and a "badass" at the same time. Absolute travesty.
In the books and games most factions and characters are very nuanced, they have strengths and flaws. You mentioned it with Sir Eyck, he's fundamentally a brave and honorable knight, but his world view often contradicts reality. One thing that netflix likes to do is remove this nuance and make everything black and white, they feel like caricatures instead real people, so in the show he's just a bigoted idiot. Another example is Nilfgaard. In the books they are an expansionist empire and noone likes those, but at the same time they have some positive traits, they are, among other things, more modern, prosperous and less bigoted than the northern kingdoms. In the netflix show they are just straight up an evil faction. Same thing with the Scoia'tael: In the canon they are both freedom fighters and terrorists. Their anger is justified, but does that mean they have the right to kill every human they see? Netflix answer seems to be yes, since they are victims of human cruelty and bigotry. You're meant to sympathise with them. It's one thing I really appreciate about the world of the witcher. Everything feels real, because of this nuance, because the real world is rarely black and white. In the books you can wonder about when someone is justified in their actions or behaviour and when they go too far. Obviously there are people, who are just straight up evil, but most characters have instances for both conclusions. And people come to diffrent conclusions for diffrent examples, which is why people still discuss things like whether they prefer Triss of Yennifer. You don't have that with the show. They just tell you who's right and who's wrong.
Such a great comment, thank you for that. I might actually base one of these videos on this. I wanted to do one on the world but that will be focused more on the aesthetic look and the scale. I didn't even thought about how they've ruined the factions even though it's something that bothers me from the first season especially because of Nilfgaard (since I'm a member of Nilfgaardian LARP group). I love the grey morality of the books and it's so true that they got rid of any nuance the source material had.
I think another big issue with the Elves is the way that they get lumped together and you don't get a true sense of their factionalism (probably because the writers themselves don't understand it.) Plus, I don't understand why they chose to put Filavandrel in rags. It's very explicit how proud, yet fallen, the Elven kingdoms are. He's not a hobo nor a hermit, he is still a proud and regal king and demonstrates that even though they don't have the Valley of the Flowers, they are still a beautiful, regal and proud people.
@@FolkWalkCZ Thanks for your kind word. I'll gladly watch this video. Feel free to use any arguments and examples I presented here. The lack of nuance in the show really upset me, since things like the nature and definition of evil, who or what's a monster, the lesser evil, the cost of neutrality are discussed in the book and even when they aren't openly talked about, you as the reader still think about them. I believe the more philosophical side and the grey areas of the witcher books and games are central to what made them successful. You still think about them even when not reading or playing and ever after finishing. The show lacks anything of the sort. It might not be an obious flaw like the casting or writing, but without it the show will never be great since it doesn't have a lasting impact on peoples mind and most will forget about it shortly after watching it.
Literally a side character appearing in a single short story and not even a central character to that one story is more nuanced than any Netflix characters. And it's all done through just a few lines of dialogue. It's called good writing.
I never played much if the games, but I remember a quest from Witcher 2? I think? About a troll who is drunk and extorting alcohol from people trying to cross. It turns out he used to toll people and use the money to maintain the bridge as a service, and now he's become an alcoholic because someone murdered his wife, and I thought it was a very clever take on the troll who lives under a bridge from the 3 Billy goats gruff story.
Let's protest this together! Now there are strikes against Hollywood, why are we worse repeating the same thing? They ruthlessly trampled what we love, we can't leave it like this!
Triss was also not portrayed right by Netflix. In the books, her arc is tragic. If Yennefer is a "strong" character, Triss is a "weak" one, and serves to contrast with Yennefer.
I think they rushed through the Yen storyline because they had to establish her as a sinned-against deep female character right away and not be open to the criticism of "sexy sorceress male-fantasy character. I also think that explains the BIPOC casting of all sorceress except the matronly de Vries; it gave them armor from the inevitable Twitterati criticism of the stereotype of the sexy bosomy Fantasy female. "There are so many actual strong female characters in the Witcher books..." Absolutely! Eyce was an easy way to make a male character a buffoon. Same with Dandelion. He is the narrator of the books--wise respected sage of his age Shakespeare crossed with Tom Jones. But Netflix never misses an opportunity to make a white straight male character a fool. He starts to get a little bad-ass in season 2 so....guess what? Now he's gay! They couldn't emasculate Geralt (esp with HC in the role) so they just wrote him out of the show. The books are mature, full of heavy subjects, moral ambiguity, strong women, (Ciri is even gay) but all that is too much for Netflix audiences. Everything has to be reduced to stock characters and set pieces. I'm so tired of media talking down to me.
Book Yenn was my favorite character in the books and I agree. Netflix showrunners completely ruin her. Your WTF reaction was what made me hate the Witcher show.
They are eager for powerful and interesting female characters and when they have one, ruined it immediately. And more then once! I was confused and pissed of.
Excellent video, and thoroughly agree with other comments saying Netflix can't do nuance. On Yarpin - he may not be a book or game-accurate Yarpin, but if you ever come to Scotland, you'll meet 10 guys EXACTLY like that in any place bigger than a crossroads 😅
Watching Season One encouraged me to read all the books. Watching this video makes me want to read them again just to repair those characters reputations in my head ! Good work here in putting it all together,
Jaskier/Dandelion of the witcher books....well what I hate the most is how they indeed made him into buffoon, and he has this weird Donkey and Shrek dynamic with Geralt, at least in first season, Geralt barely tolerates him there and is all the time annoyed at him...even though they are supposed to be great best friends (and this is one of the reasons I actually like the way their friendship is depicted in the controversial polish tv series from 2002 known also as the Hexer :) there Jaskier and Geralt's friendship is depicted in a great way, showing them having fun together enjoying each other company also in the polish series Jaskier shows the particular life experience and wisdom born of his sensibility as an artist, poet and someone who lives among the people and this also complements the version of Geralt that is more philosopher like he is in books :)) one can get impression that Geralt really just doesn't like him in first season!!! Jaskier in netflix version is also a bit exaggerated in his buffoonery, while he indeed had his moments in books and often fell into trouble, he also had wittiness to him and his antics showed him still having intellect and being more loveable rather than annoying. This caricature like depictions are basically stamp trait of netflix show!
@@FolkWalkCZ I cant remember the book but there is a really good passage with Yennifer and Jaskier after she rescues him from the brothel ambush. She basically says she always likes Jaskier because he was such a good friend to Geralt and she appreciated that.
Theres so much I want to say because this was a fantastic video. Netflix is primarily a social engineering company with entertainment being almost a zero on the priority list. One has to understand(and the creator of this video spelled it out well) that all casting and story decisions are done to influence the consumer, not entertain him. They rushed past a goldmine of good consistent stories because they had to get to Yennifers story asap. The cast couldnt represent the roots of the story...because Poland is too white. The show was never going to be good...because the writers werent hired for competency, but rather because they were hired to check a box and were perfectly willing to tow the social agenda line
Thank you for your excellent review. The problem is that neither Hollywood nor Netflix understand nuances which are far too subtle for them. I'm going to give the books a go instead.
Great video! I'm really looking forward to more of these, you exactly put into words my problems with the show and how it treats (or rather mistreats) the source material since the beginning. Also, the banter between Dandelion and Essi made me smile, I love Sapkowski's sense of humour.
Let's protest this together! Now there are strikes against Hollywood, why are we worse repeating the same thing? They ruthlessly trampled what we love, we can't leave it like this!
What about Geralt? Geralt is just as much an amateur philosopher in his own right in the books. He ponders and deliberates quite often on his choices, he also has a much more analytical mind as opposed to the show. Sure, he uses brute force when it’s necessary but never outright resorts to it, and even if he does he does it with finesse. Take his duel with Tailles for instance. He could just as easily kill Tailles or disarm the soldiers trying to block his escape but instead engages him in a duel where he uses his strength and experience to manoeuvre Tailles exactly as he likes and finally injures him with his own blade, creating a loophole in the conundrum they’d left him in. The Geralt in the show is just dominated by his physical aspect. He doesn’t have much doubts about his actions and their long reaching consequences. I think this is somewhat similar with what they did with Yennefer. In the books, especially earlier on, Yen’s past is barely mentioned and cursory to her character. Whereas in the show, that’s all her character is about.
Well said. I don't know why I forgot to mention Geralt but it did bother me in the first season that they've made him just grunt "Hmm." and "Fuck." and in the second season made him into this Jesus-like figure that can do no wrong and always know what is right. I would have to spend more time thinking about it to describe it better and in more detail but yeah, you're right. They definitely didn't portray Geralt right.
Thank you for mentioning Sir Eyck, he's one of my favorite minor characters in the books even though he only shows up once. He's a curious combination of commendable chivalry, going so far as to hilariously annoy Geralt because he refuses to take payment for hunting monsters, and harsh dogmatic bigotry. This mix of traits sets him apart from others and makes him an interesting, memorable character, and what does Netflix do? Turn him into a stereotypical laughingstock so they could insert a shitty diarrhea joke into their shitty series. I had had some reservations about the earlier episodes of the first season yet ended up enjoying them for the most part. After this particular episode, though, I realized that the showrunner and writers had absolutely no intention of faithfully adapting Sapkowski's books as they had promised. Shame on them.
In Netflix's depiction: - All royalty are incompetent and stupid, apparently only staying in power due to patriarchy... - Any kind of power in general in the hands of men is either evil, abusive, stupid, or funny. - Any power women have is admired, good and just. Girl bossing cannot be abused.
Actually really interesting observation. How did we get to a point where a strong women is portrayed as, what we all ackowledge, as a toxic and irritating man.
I really hope someone makes another faithful adaptation some years later because the story is really really good. It's such a waste that these brain dead monkeys ruined it to the point of it being unwatchable.
I've only read a few of the books but the character motivations and arcs in the show are mystifying. They change their motivations and perspectives on a dime and I was wondering if it was book accurate. I can't imagine why I wasted my time wondering!
The writers don’t have the talent to make anything like ‘Hearts of Stone’, ‘Blood and Wine’… but that doesn’t mean, that they are not foolish enough to try, and ruin it.
I agree with everything you said. The books are fantastic writing, all the writing was done, NetFlix has to do was bring the books to life on the big screen but instead they f*ck it all up. I don't think NF has brought one good story to life without effing it all up. NF has become a joke and what not to do teacher.
Great video you explained in a nice gentle manner and yeah its crazy how they destroyed these amazing characters being a big fan of books and games myself and even that card game Gwent, it's a miserable show
Seen season 3 yet? If not prepare yourself for an absolute treat, they made SO many changes to revert the old changes back to the original only to change it again to something that makes no sense and then walk in circles around it it's an absolute mess.
But yeah, as always Netflix ruined great material and made it bland and generic. I'm not even enraged by it anymore, I just feel apathetic. Although there were some scenes that still made me angry (like wtf is Mistle doing in Gors Velen when Rats are suppose to be in Geso which is Nilfgaardian province far away in the south?!). It's also obvious that there was no need to seperate the season into two halves and Netflix did it only because they want people to stay subscribed longer.
@@FolkWalkCZ Definitely going to checking for that video! And yeah I feel like they know a lot of people are going to ditch the show after Henry is out so they are milking the last bit out of it while they can, but good lord the changes this season made and the pointless decisions I would definitely like to see your take on the first episode and the writing decisions revolving Rience and Geralt and the massive change towards Ciri & Radovid. Hopefully in a few years we can see a reboot done right, the books are truly excellent and just needs to be adapted faithfully which is something I respected with CDPR they always just built upon that which was the books instead of changing everything towards their liking.
Sapkowski's books have been with me since my early teenage years, and not only The Witcher but also a great, incredible Hussite Trilogy. What Netflix has done to the source material is far beyond outrage, racism and cultural colonization. I'm glad they're terribe writers so at least sane people don't find their series attractive in any way.
Todays studios, despite their greed, apparently hate to make money. This was such a bloody eays win: A huge fanbase, an already updated look from the Witcher Games, a lead who loves the source material and a plethora of books to adapt in chronological order. But no, they managed to pi*s it away because the narcissists wanted to "give it their twist" while simultaniously streamlining it to tick all the theoretical cash boxes ending up with a loss.
Even though I have read the books and played the games many years ago and don't remember the story that well I still remember how I FELT when something big happened storywise. The complexity of characters, the uncertainty of which side should one root for - it was very core of Sapkowski's writing for me. This is what made the Witcher succesful. What Netflix writers have created is a straight up teenage drama.
I had real hope for this show. Writers and studios keep destroying good franchises. When I originally watched season 1 and 2 I hadn't read the books and thought it was pretty good. I recently have read a majority of the books and gone back to re watch the show from the beginning and they really did just ruin what could of been an amazing TV show. Sad really. Stupidity, laziness and ego and ignorance ruined another franchise.
The game version of Yen is simply impeccable while show Yen is trash. Honestly no shades of gray here... its factual. I won't even gonna dwell into the other fuckups... Yen hurts me the most.
One of the biggest shortcomings of the writers room is grasping nuance at least when it comes to The Witcher adaptation. Andrzej Sapkowski basically constructed a satirical approach to a fairy tale realm playing with tropes and the studio just can't seem to grasp that. Andrzej's point is he wants to challenge his readers perceptions and tropes of the genre. It's why Eyck embodies the ideals of the Shining Knight while also being a close minded bigoted. Now the challenge is as a reader can you endear to a person who has noble traits while also having a character flaw. The show writers seem to think "no bad" and that's it. It makes for a flat character and it seem like the show writers don't want to let the audience ponder the idea of "do noble traits also work with a character flaw". It's as though they are either scared of or don't understand complex characters. That or they don't want you to think. They want you to think how they do and just hate the bigot and that's that. It's a shame because the show writers could always have worked in an arc of Eyck forgoing his bigotry and showing that while someone could be raised with bigoted ideologies that they can grow and change. There are countless stories of former KKK, Neo-Nazis and even parents learning to move passed the bigoted theologies they were raised on and growing as people. Even going as far as accepting to actively being an activist on behalf of the folks they were once bigoted towards. All you need to do as a writer is be willing to take the task of pushing that boundary.
I think something which may seem small but to me speaks volumes is that Eskel was the one who threw the party at Kaer Morhen and acted like an angry manchild instead of Lambert. Now, don't get me wrong, neither Eskel nor Lambert are anything close to the show version of Eskel. But it's obvious from reading the books that Eskel is more level headed and polite, while Lambert enjoys annoying the hell out of everyone and is typically a quite bitter person. Going off of that, why not switch the names in the show if they were hellbent on the story they told? It would at least be slightly more consistent. Not good by any means, but slightly better. It's because they didn't even read it. Not really. There are many, many situations where it seems that whoever wrote a specific episode or scene never once read the books. At most another member of the writing team sent them a synopsis. You could literally figure out the differences between Eskel and Lambert by skimming through the earlier books for 5 minutes. And yet their traits are reversed in the show. The explanation, is that whoever wrote the dialogue for the other Witchers at Kaer Morhen genuinely had no idea who the characters were. It's not that they read the material and just didn't get it. *They didn't read it.* Because they don't care.
I don't see a single character they haven't represented in a sick way. Eyck who was a weird dreamer (like an 'adult' version of Don Quijote) and not a moron was one of real gems in that great short story which they based their s1ep6 on. Maybe his character was too complex for TV-audience and it was okay to make fun of him like that but at the same time they made fun of Yennefer who voluntarily chose to be escorted by such a despicable companion. It's always like this with that Netlix' writing, when they change one thing they ruin them all. And they changed a lot...
I'm glad you mentioned Ike. I thought he was one of the most interesting and nuanced characters in the books, precisely because he's the type of character you do not see represented in fiction very often. As a sidenote I thought that the Witcher Games really did Ike justice by adding his son Siegfried of Denesle which was also a very interesting character. Actually they also ruined the Reavers in the show in my opinion which are way more fun in the books. Can't wait to see how they are going to ruin Leo Bonhart and the Rats in the show.
Instant subsrcribe. Everything u said is so on point! I will spread your word my man, keep it up. What they’re doing to our books and games is a travesty 😢
A grown adult getting bullied kind of implies this has been happening for years though, maybe from child until now. And despite being an adult, getting treated like that, especially over a prolonged period changes the view you have of yourself for the worse. Especially if that is your whole environment. Other than that, great points. Dandelion fumbeling despite him being a bard thus a wordsmith is just so ludicrous.
great video and analysis. especially about the knight in the golden dragon hunt, i remember in the books thinking he was a bit of an ass but he was a fairly honourable knights and i got excited when he stepped up to answer Villentretenmerths challenge, and the show well, it was like ordering a pie but the filling is horseshit
Well, from what I've heard Sapkowski's inspiration for Yennefer was actually his wife or maybe ex-wife, I'm not sure because I've never really researched the claim so I don't know if it's true.
@@FolkWalkCZ I heard something like that, too. On the other hand, when talking about Yennefer once he, supposedly, said that while writing the character, he had the classic fantasy trope of romantic interest in mind, and then decided to change it up and make her this "onion to be peeled." When asked why, he said just" for the readers". So it's quite possible that the part about his wife was a joke.
IIRC a video of the author when asked about his opinion about the show was "it could have been better." So even he thinks it bad and he's just being polite in saying it.
Great video. Skipped through a lot, because I just finished the fourth book. But will definetly return. Also in the books Jaskier is a legit great bard, a rockstar. Nobles are begging him to come and perform at their parties. In the series he is a wannabe rockstar, that people want to "abort yourself".
Netflix's writers basically just threw the whole thing in the woodchipper. It's a travesty, even with Henry Cavil's best efforts. I was done after season one. Hell, I didn't even finish season one. I have the books, and no need to watch this tosh.
Love the Ben Shapiro Dandelion cracked me up ! 😂. Great analysis for all the characters. I'm so grossed out by netflix I can't bring myself to watch the rest of season three it's that bad. Would love to see more of your videos, bring em on!
Pozdravy z Polska! :-) Excellent explanation how Netflix f....ed in worst possible way source material. I can't undertand how could they ignore so many chracters of strong woman from books, just to make this crap i shi...tty message to modern audience about feminism... Mens can be only idiots from kings to farmers, is just sooooo annoying.... In books is so many comlicated characters with theit choices and way of thinking, and they just reduced this to story written by teeneger like some fanfic.... Good Job Folk Walk! Thank You! :-)
Its funny I really did start making a video about the show changes...but I just scrapped it because it became a spiderweb of confusion. You cant actually make 1 to 1 comparisons because the show just randomly plucked things out of context. Your approach is much better...the analysis of Yennifer was insightful. I had never thought about it that way but you nailed how they destroyed her character arc
To be honest I know nothing about the lore. The show sucks due to bad writing, bad realisation of characters, plot and character holes and inconsistencies throughout. I think it's more frustrating for non-fans than for fans of the source material because at least as a fan you have the thread of what it should be and that some of the character shifts are character corrections and make sense to you. They make none to me.
