Henry Cavill's back must be hurting from carrying the entire damned series. I think I read that he protested the decisions made involving Eskel but the showrunners got their way in the end. Will be very interesting to see what he thinks of the series after he's done with it and no longer under an obligation to not be critical of the series
to be frank, it feels more like the producers wanted to make their own fantasy series, but were too afraid of it failing that they attached it to the name of The Witcher to make it more palatable
@@thebatman5214 This is a fair statement. The Witcher 3 was incredible because it was their own story, but they heavily stayed true to the original source material in their adaptation especially with characters. I can say confidently that the show took far more liberties than say Witcher 2: Assassin of Kings did and did a much better job of explaining the world, but still keeping true to the characters portrayed in the books. Sorry for long winded answer.
@@doctorthee I do know a lot of times directors and producers don't follow the source material on purpose so they can tell a new story something that has been told over and over again. Is to kind of keep it fresh and catch the interests of new fans andpeople fans. They probably could have followed the source material a little bit better but but no fairness they have a lot to fit in the 45 minute to an hour long episodes Especially on a fixed budget.
@@suggy_123 I'd say the biggest thing the games did was making Ciri's powers more than a macguffin, and Triss a viable love interest. Other than that a somewhat more cheerful attitude relative to the books is the only big change.
What bugs me is that Ciri in Brokylon, Training in Kaer Morhen, Spending time with Yen, those are truly one of the only happy moments she has during the course of the plot because all of her life goes downhill after that. Those happy moments and relationships she made with other characters drive her and give her hope to move on and also are the reason why so many characters are trying to find her and rescue her. But in the show, all of it is broken, every time where there is time for her to settle down for a second and be a child something happens that throws her off of that and fills her with more rage and anxiety. Her relations with Yen are destroyed because she betrayed her and tried to use her like all others. Her witcher family is also resenting her as she killed their brothers and tried to kill them. And not even talking about her bond with Geralt which is non existent and really shallow and it feels like they do not have some heart worming father daughter moments and Geralt looks like a strict dad which does not show affection and cares about her safety to extreme. This drastically changes her character and motivations, from an active and cheerful girl in the books, she has been changed into a troubled and extremaly traumatized victim in the show.
Though I completely agree with most of your points I did get concerned daddy vibes from Geralt this season but I do agree that more and better bonding moments would put that relationship in clear view
@@jordanrijsdijk5496 They couldn't really do that without Geralt and Ciri having spent time together out and about when Ciri was like 6 years old. I'm made that point other places. I thought the first episode with the whole 'Mosters hurt humans'- 'humans hurt everyone' and 'he'll do this to you' was setting up something, it didn't with was a major character arc miss in their relationship IMHO. Why make Vareena kind of simpathetic with the whole dress and talking to Ciri and telling her not to run because she didn't want to hurt her and then Ciri being cool with Geralt killing her even though she doesn't even know Vareena wiped out the village at that point? Right after Geralt is 'you still trust me?' and Ciri is like 'of course'. So its kind of unnatural how they're so bounded so fast and how unquestioning trustful Ciri after everthing else that's happened to her.
I've defended the show as I have the unpopular opinion of liking it so far, but you have a point. The problem is that you can't show everything that happens in the books as this would make the series incredibly slow in my opinion. You see some results of the "off screen" bonding through banter between Ciri and the other witchers, but this is very easy to miss. They also fail at portraying the amount of time that passes accurately and it all seems to only take a few days.
That’s not how film and tv works. The actors opinions do NOT matter to the writers when it comes to story lines and episode plots. I’ve watched cast get into full arguments with writers while on set over terrible scripts to no avail and no changes.
honestly i think you vastly underestimate how much he tries.. i'm pretty sure he is doing as much as Mark Hamill did for star wars/Luke but in the end he is under contract and kinda has almost no power.
@@ackermanlol he has mentioned multiple times that he has tried to correct the director and writers and that he tries to get them to be as true to the source material as possible as he is a big fan of the witcher.. which is why he was so excited to play the role in the first place.. now ofc this isn't proof but i don't doubt it seeing what he does to himself to get ready for roles he is excited about. that man does ooze passion tbh.
Rience casually surprise attacking Ciri and Triss in Kaer Morhen was really strange. How did he know where to find it? Also, he took a big risk going there and was extremely lucky he got away with his life. I mean, we're talking about witcher HQ. The sequence made it look like every mage and his mother can just casually portal in and out of Kaern Morhen.
@@kgspvgsp7569 "the mountains" Kaer Morhen is sooooo far from Oxenfurt where the episode took place. He never specified anything and it's just a poor excuse for shitshow writing. This show is terribly rushed and makes zero sense. The books are being butchered completely.
“It would be a straight translation of the books… I think there's just so much material that I don't feel the need to start inventing my own to keep it going.” - Lauren Schmidt Hissrich Not only did they butcher the story and characters, but they openly keep lying to the fans.... What a disgrace!!!!
Well it depends if it was referring to season 1 or 2. 1 was much more adherent to the book. I think they encountered problems when they had to stop adapting the short stories and started adapting the main plot of the Ciri story. Much of this difficulty I think is due to the fact that many pivotal moments of the storyline in the book happen in the background and are introduced, sometimes quite vaguely, only in the recalling in the mind of different individuals. I think that they found it hard to translate it on screen, and have decided to use a massive amount invented storyline to connect the main dots.
@@giovannipanzeri6431 Eh... no. They started butchering the story from the season 1 and from the season 1 what was a common feature is removal of anything that made Witcher what it is. From moral ambiguity all the way down to saucy jokes. On top of it plethora of additions that are unnecessary and in direct conflict with spirit or plot of the original books (and logic I might add). Then season 1 was met with wide acclaim by fans of the games or casuals who never picked a book even once in their lives. That in turn inflated egos of talentless hacks inhabiting writing room of the show even further. So now they are just ignoring source material as some old boring garbage written by eastern European savage. Who would need that stupid story anyway in 2021? Edit: And btw it really makes me appreciate D&D. At least they were able to make a passable adaptation when they had source material.
lol yes when I heard that quote right after watching season 2 it was pretty confusing. She’s an idiot, and she’ll write herself into a corner by season 4. Generally what happens when these “writers” stop following their source material and the creators vision
Honestly agree with almost all of your takes, I don't hate the show, but to me it seems like a brand new story with just familiar names in it. I truly loved the books and games and hope they could turn it around in season 3 and potentially start adapting more to A time of Contempt rather than making their own story. In all honesty without Henry Cavill playing a great Geralt I would have almost no interest in this show without him.
100% agree Geralt kinda carries the show for me, it's not an adaptation, it's more of a fanfiction, but overall I like the show it and I absolutely love the Witcher.
I liked this video so i can rip into how laughable your comment is. Right now i am too drunk. Assuming your comment pops up tomorrow. As drunk as i am, my perception will not change. I did a screen shot so dont botber editing.
I honestly hope there is a payoff for all these changes in later seasons. Because I have the same opinion as you have with the show. I don't hate it but at the same time, these changes have no purpose other than maybe prepping the Blood Origins mini series, which seems like it is just breaking the source material to fit their own product. If they truly have a 7 season plan, they need to pull more from the books. From what I've seen so far, it doesn't seem like they will.
it's not a "new Witcher" with the same names, because that would imply that they kept the quality and feel of the old but only breathed new life into it. However what we have here is breathing decay into the series and franchise, not life
Yeah, as a complete newbie who never read the books or played the games, I was confused AF the entire season. I agree with most people who said the first episode was the best. After that, I couldn't make heads or tails of what was going on. It felt super rushed, and I didn't buy into any of the main relationships. Like when Ciri admitted she loved Geralt, and later when Yennefer revealed she loved Ciri. The show has shown us nothing to suggest that. I believe Geralt cares for Ciri, but there's nothing to suggest that has graduated to love. I feel like this show should be longer, because the character relationships feel very undercooked.
I am a game fan and have not read the books. I came in to the show with low expectations, expecting it to be a B-list Netflix show, witch it is, but it is ok every show ever produced can't be a Breaking Bad. so undercooked relationships, characters and plots ware expected. With that said i was pleasantly surprised and really loved the show, especially the second season. The plots and character arcs are supper fun and suspenseful. I like and relate to the whole desperate nihilism that Geralt, Yenifer and Vesimir feel over there lives and how they overcome it by finding a purpose in helping Ciri. And its just fun spending time with Geralt, Yenifer and Vesimir in that world, the characters are super likeable and close enough to the games.
@@andersbodin1551 As a game who hasn't read the books, you're still far more familiar than me with the story and characters, so it's probably easier for you to follow the plot. I loved S1, it was a lot of fun. Much less S2, but I respect that others loved it more. For me, S2 should have been much longer for the narrative ground that it was trying to cover. I'm still committed to the show because it provides good escapism. I just hope S3 is better.
Exactly..How did they build father/daughter relationship so soon? The show should have focused more on their time together and bonding, instead of making up new stories which don't even exist in the books. The same case with Yennefer. In the show, they met like 2 times and only exchanged bitter words and now all of a sudden they're so in love? Lame writing at its finest.
Again, the ciri problem coulve be avoided if they just used a 2 different actresses, 1 for kid ciri and as the series progress the young ciri (freya) took over at the right moment, like on vikings with bjorn
I be Honest the only reason I am watching the show is because of Henry Cavill.He is a great Geralt.The main reason the show dont suck even more is because Henry been trying so hard to convice the Show Director to stay true the books. and even some sneak influence from the games we got is thanks to him. If you ask me I think Henry should be the Show director, He will do a fantastic job since he is a big fan of the books and games.
@@diamovski I quite like it. I think season 2 episode 1 was a pretty good bloody baron-esque morality lesson to set up the grey morality of the Witcher. I do think that Jaskier was a bit cringe on his own but he works really well with Geralt. At least Burn Butcher Burn and Toss a Coin to you Witcher are sick bops to cut up kneckers to.
I'm only hoping here, but most every interview he did post S2 release he made a nod about 'staying true to the source material'. I hope he has some influence moving forward. S3 could be their saving grace.
Henry's geralt this time around is pretty boring too apart from the first episode. He became more like Batman than geralt in season 2 but without the wits or sarcasm. They ruined him and the story all at once
I am fairly sure Lauren has read the books, but she deliberately chooses to ignore them so she can make the show more woke and add her own touch (which no one asked for)
@@jdekkers3262 i tried to not think of "wokeism" while watching the show but i couldn't ignore it after a few episodes. Also the portrayal of "elves good humans bad" isn't so simple as they tell it :(
That bitch won't do it. She doesn't like Henry, she said it from jump. He's too pushy according to her. So educating her on the actual stories is a problem for her... She needs to go and hand it over to the writer and Andy Serkis... That would be epic
The time that they invest into showing her training might be the best thing in this season. Considering what else could be or actually is in it makes this just vanish for me. You can't balance so many mistakes against so little that is actually enjoyable as a fan
@Teabag Anyone they weren't as mean in the book. Im not a big fan of the show unfortunately. All the changes and random stuff added has me second guessing what I thought I knew... time to reread
@@atrum7315 is the book even that good, I mean I like it, it’s alright but take LOTR for example, you can take any character you want out and it’s still an amazing world the same with Warhammer and 40K, even the same with Star Wars but the Whicher series without Witchers.. I don’t know, it’s basically as lame as the wheel of time.. just boring and with Netflix putting in identity politics as well.. I don’t know I was just disappointed with it especially when you have shows like the Mandalorian and Game of Thrones to compete with
An overarching issue with many of these late 2010's and early 2020's fantasy shows is that they want to be so sweeping and large like LotR, but they can't be. The Witcher is one of those properties that would have done better as a smaller, self contained show like Legend of the Seeker, where there were funny moments and monster of the week moments to elongate the season and bring us closer to the characters. Instead, we are made to care about this lame "the monoliths are attracting monsters" that I fail to find compelling.
The first season definitely should have been as you described. It would have been a good introduction to Geralt and the Witcher universe to see him roam around the world killing monsters and interacting with people. The show would have eventually needed to become a larger story otherwise I think people would have become bored.
This is is a problem with all modern shoes they all want to be the next got or lotr nutrek is the same with every season having a end of the universe enemy.
I mean honestly Netflix’s Witcher could be on the same level or just as respected as LoTR if they stayed true (or at least followed the books more closely with some liberations) to the source material. When it came to LoTR and the Hobbit movies, Tolkien was very specific when he sold the rights to merchandising, filming, etc. J.R.R. Tolkien repeatedly expressed throughout his life the distrust he had with large corporations who would ask for the film rights of his novels, including Disney. GoT started off great but after season 4 it’s really not worth watching which I hope Witcher doesn’t follow in those footsteps- I mean Avatar the Last Airbender is a much more well rounded show vs GoT and it didn’t even have half the budget. If GoT got the correct contract and was able to be produced properly and stay on air longer, it would have been solid the whole way through instead of being and feeling so rushed. I’m not sure why HBO ruined its biggest money maker, but someone owes George R.R. Martin an apology cause it seems to be an overall consensus that the ending was foul even though half of the show wasn’t based on any of his books. The Percy Jackson series also could be grouped or on the level of LoTR+Hobbit but Fox completely disrespected Rick on that; let’s see if the Disney+ series do the books justice. Chronicles of Narnia is still up in the air and we’re waiting on that to continue. All of these stories could have the same feel of fantasy, but they’re never done right, or they start off great and everyone has good intentions but then it ends poorly. I truly think nothing has topped Tolkien’s work as whole because they had so much depth and love for language/history/culture- his novels and the movie adaptions based on them. Too bad Amazon is completely defying his wishes.
@@AdamIshak01 True. But when it comes to adaptation of Percy Jackson and Olympian Gods adaptation by Disney they also changed a lot they made Anabeth's skin to be pitch black. And I fear what more they will change.
@@karolinakuc4783 Yeah, my comment was made when they announced they were filming a Disney + series. This was before they showed promo for it and the actors chosen. I wonder if Rick is more involved in this or if this is going to be the same disrespect as the first time.
I was watching this show and playing the witcher 3 side by side (i just got the game for Christmas) and to say I was confused would be an understatement. I hadn't gotten to Kaer Morhen in the game by the time I finished the series. I got really excited when I met Dandelion and did all his quests first. I had no idea who Lambert or Eskel were. Eskel seemed like a jerk and I freaking hated him. Geralt stabbed him with a sword and I felt a little bad but a whole lot more victorious. Watching the later scenes and episodes I learned that I was supposed to feel bad for Eskel, but I really didn't care. Then I got to Kaer Morhen like, "Who's this scarred rugged looking guy??" And it was the *real* Eskel. :) I liked him more. I was worried for his life throughout the battle with the wild hunt because I though the show took his death from there but he was fine :)
The game happens outside of the book timeline. Significantly outside of it. The TV show and the game have very little in common. The issue is whether or not the TV show is an accurate adaptation of the novels, a well spirited and authentic feeling adaptation of the novels or whether or not it fails in both content and feel. It was never going to match the novels for content. I don't think it does a bad job of adapting the feel of the novels given the massive job they've got to world build and character build. They could really do with the guarantees of a TV season for every book - 8 seasons of TV. That would have given them the security they needed to have more confidence in giving up whole episodes to world building and character development.
I'm almost confused about why they changed so much. Like, the show is well made, the 3 core characters of Geralt, Ciri, & Dandelion are well acted, the fight scenes and CGI have improved massively in season 2, and yet they ignore the very popular plot of the best-selling books the show is supposed to be based on. The source material is right there, its popular, easy to adapt, and they have the budget. So why write such a radically new story/plot for the series?
Sadly it's been that way a long time. For whatever reason, when the source material is some popular book or series of short stories, the producers and directors feel the need to "toss their junk in" instead of being faithful to the source material. They did it with Dune, with Conan, with Jurassic Park, Starship Troopers, Eaters of the Dead, and so many others. It's almost like some kind of knee jerk reaction for these idiots in high places.
It is definitely not easy to adapt. A LOT of the books are people in their own heads interspersed with long scenes of political world building. Geralt also does almost no witchering after the short stories until Season of Storms. Don't get me wrong, Hissrich should never ever have touched the show and most of their decisions have been bad, but it is not an easy adaptation.
Exactly. With example to Voleth Meir - this could have been a Witcher contract with the Wild Hunt reveal still there - it didn't need to be the main plot line of the entire season spanning multiple character's arcs.
@@slyrooster1241 - 🙄 Cringe smh Seriously, is this literally all you can complain about these days?! I wasn't a fan of season 2 either... but a lot of times, this sh*t is just bad writing, and has absolutely nothing to do w/some "political agenda" ffs. You lot have honestly become insufferable, reaching for the "woke" complaint about literally everything - even when it doesn't apply. I miss the days when people just griped about the actual problem: like the bad writing, or the people in charge's hubris, or the incompetent showrunners not understanding the source material, etc. Calling everything you don't like "woke" is the only "agenda" everybody is constantly seeing around here. 👀😒 Just sayin.
"Female Gaunter" as you like to call her actually didn't remind me of Gaunter O'Dimm in the least. I kept thinking she was like a version of one of the Crones in TW3 or maybe even the Whispering Hillock until somebody pointed out that she was actually based on a witch from Slavic mythology called Baba Jaga. Apparently she even has the house with the chicken legs in the original story. For the rest I completely agree with your points. I'm listening to all the books right now and it kinda baffles me that there's all this good material in there that they didn't adapt or is only slightly referenced and in favour of what!?
Yeah, obvious Baba Yaga. I don't recall there being a character such as her in the books, but there was plenty of other stuff inspired by Slavic and Arthurian myths. There were events inspired by Polish and German history, but at this point I doubt they'll touch on them much if at all. They're doing their own story.
I mean they did almost the exact same thing in the failed hellboy reboot with regards to baba jaga... Its called attempted catering to a gullible audience. Overall the witcher show is just poor, if it werent for cavill as the lead and his influence on set and the aesthetics of the games especially the third instalment of the games then the show would have absolutely no legs to stand on at all, being true to the books was never really on the table to begin with, with regards to netflix. Thats like saying amazon is doing their lord of the rings series out of passion and love of the source material....and we all know thats utter bs and that show is almost doomed way before its even started.
I could listen to the story of Geralts river ride for days. The fact they are skipping over so much kinda hurts from all the cringe for the essence of an action show. The nuances from the book were just amazing.
I really had a hard time with this season.. a few changes where ok and expected.. but how far they strayed away from what is “the Witcher lore” changed relationships, who characters where, monsters, drama? One of the biggest is the changes to yenn and Ciri.. Yenn’s personality is way off, ruined the relationship her and Ciri had.. and then making them week, no magic? Possession? Making Ciri murder witchers? How do you recover from this…
I absolutely hated how Yennefer was portrayed this season especially with the losing her magic bit. But I think they can repair the relationship between herself and Ciri, b/c she already made strides on screen to do just that in the last episode, even with Geralt trusting her to teach Ciri still. I understand the fume though.
Yeah, that's the question I've been grappling with too. How do you recover from this? I can't even bring myself to hope for a season three that follows the source material better when I know how much it's already detracted from it. These showrunners are very talented people, they're making a solid fantasy show, but they're making a truly awful adaptation. And the worst part is that it's clearly possible to make great adaptations. Game of Thrones became worse and worse but the first four seasons are great. Six seasons into the Expanse and it's still an awesome adaptation. These two TV adaptations have had to change a lot, and I mean A LOT, but both shows are beloved by their fanbase and they're even loved BECAUSE of some of the changes that they made. I absolutely love what they did to Camina Drummer and Klaes Ashford in the Expanse. So, these are shows that have detracted from their source material, but are loved for it. So, I think another question we might ask ourselves is, why is it that some shows can do it when others fail? What makes Netflix Witcher a failure in terms of an adaptation, when Game of Thrones and the Expanse work? I'm not sure that I have an answer to that.
@@suggy_123 my big question is how do they repair Yen’s relationship with Ciri and Yen’s relationship with Aretuza at the same time? This needs to happen for it to make sense that Yen would take Ciri to Aretuza. And Yen, Ciri and Geralt (as does Cahir and Francesca for that matter) all need to be at the conclave for the major events of Time of Contempt to even take place. Right now I don’t see how it makes sense for them to go there in the show at all. I can only see them diverging further from the books from here sadly.
@@ducky36F Personally, I think Ciri training at Aretuza might have to be cut out due to the choices made by the showrunners in S2. They can't just follow the books in that regard. However, the Thanedd Ball is still setup nicely imo. The conclave is to include mages from both sides North/Nilf and I would think that Djikstra/Philippa will have a major influence on getting Geralt/Yen/Ciri there (not how it happened in books, but still can happen). Major book spoilers but with the heavy foreshadowing of Ciri's flashbacks or 'see the future' in the show - I'm willing that we see Ciri in her trance and revealing some major plots. She might be used as bait again to get all parties to Aretuza, but I'm not too upset about it.
Why do people keep calling her Gaunter O'Dimm, she couldnt be more different. Gaunter is scary, evil and has charisma. She is just weird, feeding on suffering for some reason, being locked away by the witchers for some reason, escaping when the time is right for some reason. If they removed her from the story, I feel like it would have been a better story.
I completely agree. She is nothing like Gaunter. Different personality, different motives, wayyy different power level (if she could stop time she wouldn’t hesitate to take advantage of the ability). And I believe Gaunter just had a much broader variety of powers.
Also the fact that there is so much going on already, there is no need for her. Imo it just makes everything more confusing than it has to be. Especially when you try to let all of this mess somehow make sense by comparing it to the books.
You pointing out the difference between a fanfic and adaption is on point. That's probably the best explanation for why the show is bugging me so much. Seeing characters that I really like after reading all the books and playing the games is frustrating. I don't mind someone's hair being different, or looking a bit different. But characters acting completely out of line is really annoying. Also removing the whole plot about Scoia'tael was really annoying. It's not just elves depressed because of racism and now baby dead. I just wonder how people will feel when they actually find out what elves are like when in power.
There’s one line in the first episode that bugged me: “You’re much more than that, Cirilla.” The entire impact is removed in the series, due to the lack of their relationship. There’s too much of this, which makes me think that this isn’t an adaptation, but a badly written fanfiction that butchers the characters, storylines and themes.
The Something More short story (and especially its ending) is so powerful, yet they completely butchered it. Shows me they are total amateurs who do not understand how to write a proper story.
Lazy bastards could've just used a Kaer Morhen timelapse showing Ciri and Geralt's relationship. But they fked that the second they made her waay older than she was in the books and games when she met Geralt.
You know what’s also cringe? Yennefer sacrificing her daughter for power. Book Yen would never, not to mention, the funny buildup of groaning Yen does about wanting a kid only to sacrifice her lovers kid lmao.
There was a lot of 'getting captured' then 'breaking free' that I genuinely lost track and scenes would start where I was like.. "wait when did he/get captured?"
Calling Voleith Meir “female Gaunter” is giving the writers way too much credit. It implies they’re intentionally referencing the character instead of writing fan fiction
to be fair, there were rumors that netflix would add a female Gaunter. I mean she grants wishes with a twist and there is also that knife in the eye thing with Fringilla, just like the spoon scene in W3 HoS
I think it was intentional tbh, all their interviews were about how they were going to refrence the games more. I think she was probably a combination of both the Crones and Gaunter.
I kept telling my friend while watching the show "This is NOT The Witcher, this is a fanfiction, but without fan." so I am very glad you agree. I am unsure if Henry's dedication to this thing will be enough to keep watching upcoming seasons, I sincerely doubt it.
It wont be, for example he protested what happened with eskel. Look how that ended. When the showrunners say jump, hes still an employee and still has to ask how high. Thus he can only do so much. What that means is NETFLIX has the reigns. Do you trust Netflix to make a good witcher show? Because I dont trust Netflix as a company to do anything but "woke" the series to death until noone watches it because it's annoying. Then cancel it and claim it was because of racists and not their garbage casting and writing. I've seen a few things going around the internet of folks claiming anyone who has an issue with fringilla being casted as a black woman when she in the source material is a porcelain white yennefer lookalike is racist, because god forbid they have to acknowledge theyve absolutely butchered the source material from day one. Nah it couldnt be their fault the show is failing, must be those dastardly racists everyone keeps telling me about that I never see anywhere.
@@keltongillanders5736 I absolutely agree, he is the only one who is trying to do justice to it, as much as he can - but in the end he is "just" an actor, unfortunately he has no actual power over it. Exactly!!!!! Spoiler ahead - And it's not like they casted a black woman to play the role of a sorceress who is actually related to Emhyr and Ciri... :) well could be, as she is related to Anna Henrietta who IS Emhyr's relative. It's just obvious that writer was not interested in source material, they saw the overall shell of it, said "oh this COULD be new hit show!" and then went and butchered it for money which they will start losing rapidly, not just cuz they did what they did with the story but because overall? The writing sucks, there is no logic in the show, and it became boring already in the second season. Sad, really.
I actually just finished reading the last wish and wow! It is infinitely better than the show. Everything is so well explained and every story takes their time setting everything up. For example “A Question Of Price” in the book just had me gasping for air multiple times. It was a pretty good episode in the show as well but nothing compared to the book. I seriously recommend try reading the books.
I'm firmly in the "hate the show" camp. The showrunner seriously butchered it and shes been on social media trying to explain away her reasoning behind it all. Seriously if something like this show needed explaining by the showrunner in numerous tweets and insta posts, you know the writing and direction was shit
@@apex403 A certain political movement has its tendrils in a variety of cultural outputs and the response to criticism is always the same: You're a bigot. Lauren Schmidt Hissrich writes fanfiction from a feminist's perspective and all stories and characters must adhere to THE MESSAGE.
Honestly considering Henry has gone on record to say he wants season 3 to be a lot closer to the books and stray a lot less, I’m hoping it improves in terms of its relation to the source material but I guess we’ll just have to see
Is this on youtube somewhere? I'd like to see it to grand myself some hope. I consider S2 to be very average. I'd say it's bad, but that would not be entirely true. It just has so much more potential...
@@jdekkers3262 He's been on record about changing lines written by the showrunner that he didn't like and giving a passage from the books to fit the scene instead of the lines he was given.. also apparently Roach's death scene was supposed to be a joke but Henry insisted on treating him with respect.
I completely agree with you that this is not the witcher. Although didn’t Ciri decide to stop using magic after her experiences with fire? Anyways they put like 10% meat and 90% shit in the sausage which they try to sell as the witcher. They filled the story with plot holes… in their own universe. Like why would a witcher bring hookers to Kaer Morhen when it’s supposed to be secret because it was already raided? Makes no sense. The best thing is with Ciri having her powers, which she clearly can control to some degree at the end of the series, they can’t even adapt the next books because everything after thanedd makes no sense anymore with ciri being able to teleport. It’s ok as a generic fantasy series but nothing more. Sad that it got to this point, but mad props to Henry for being able to actually portray geralt in this Netflix world.
She does but it happens later, right before she takes up with the Rats. That isn't from her channeling fire though, but using to to see events which is more dangerous, and far less reliable than summoning it.
@@colpul2103 exactly. Its a contious thing hat she wont use magic anymore and not something forced upon her, like it was in the series with yen. I bet they are going to write it pretty much the same with Ciri so that they can adapt the books. But thats just lazy writing and with that they are mixing the powers of the elder blood with regular magic. Well see.
I was very annoyed about Eskel, he was one of my favorites, also lambert and triss seemed way off. Any character that isn’t considered “main” seems to be changed to push the plot in some way and a lot of the writing just doesn’t make sense.
They butcher the relationship between Ciri and yen from the books, and that has angered me more than any other parts of the show. The books show such a depth to Yen's character and how Ciri is encouraging her to change herself. Ciri essentially forces yen's character arc to begin, and getting to follow Yen as she starts to pursue the dream that she hoped Chaos would allow her to do is incredible. I feel part of the problem is in fact the actors and the changes to age in the show. Anya is simply not old enough, and Freya is too old now. The time gap between season 1 and season 2 allowed Freya to age just a little too much, in the books Ciri is still quite young, barely a teenager, whereas Freya is a 20 year old at this point. It does make the adaptation of this particular story line difficult.
My wife had to stop watching season two with me because I couldn't stop laughing at some of the ridiculous ways they changed the character motivations and the story. The way they changed Yennefer character's motivation was down right laughable; what she is going to essentially kill Ciri to get her powers back, simply ridiculous. If they had changed the story as much as they did but essentially kept the same character motivations than I wouldn't like it still but I'd be okay with it. I listen to the show runner talk about the show and it just drives me nuts, because she totally wrote her own story and ripped off some character names and pretends she is following the books. Geralt is consistently the only one that is portrayed correctly and that is only because Henry Cavil is a fan and injects as much as he can of the books into his character.
If Yenn lost her ability as a source because she used fire magic how does helping the Undying Mother get it back? IDK, 'reasons' I guess. And why when the Undying Mother possessed Ciri didn't she just portal back to the realm with the ancient Elves and Wild Hunt? That's where she was taking her because she's a part of the Wild Hunt and they want Ciri for their prophecy, right? Or is the ancient Elves and their prophecy not a thing in this version? Not clear, was anything said about Ciri now needing the monoliths to cross realms? Even if in the show's universe she needed the monoliths why not go to the one right next to her or port to a different one instead of all the way to Kaer Morhen where there's an army of Witchers that will try and stop her? And why try and kill the Witchers in their sleep instead of just going down and opening the monolith while they slept?
@@colpul2103 friend yennefer doesn't use any fire magic in books and she use thunder magic . Triss is the mage who use fire magic in books . The 90 % story of Witcher season 2 is not based on books . The people who opened their eyes because of eskel death . If the show runner didn't kill eskel . Game fans will support the show . Game fans not complain about the show because they think that show is based on books . From season 1 itself the show not following books
@@navaneethjoshy6783 Yenn does sumon fire balls in the show, I believe. That's how she burned Riences' face right, throwing a fireball though the portal. But Ya, like I said in another place the first season was like 60-70% stuff adapted but season 2 is like 10-15% stuff from the book.
@@navaneethjoshy6783 I'm a game fan and know the show isn't following the books since early season 1 because I'm not an idiot and know what's canonical. The games especially three make it clear a lot of the events of what happened in the books...Like how Geralt and Ciri met for instance. Also we can look up the lore that is canonical to the games themselves...The games aren't canon to the books but it ain't the other way around the books are canon to the games. Fuck they killed Mousesack who's Ermion the Head Druid in the Witcher 3 Wild Hunt they were killing game (and book) characters very early on! Also it's clear to see that the way they portrayed Cahir was wrong given he's eventually an ally of Geralt...Who'd never befriend a Mass Murdering Cultist so they fucked him up. Fuck they fucked up the whole of Nilfgaard minus the Emperor but give them time. Also it's easy to know Book or Game fan which type of magic each sorceress prefers to use and what their titles are...Merigold was the 14th of the Hill not Yen. Fire Magic isn't a forbidden "evil" art in the Books and Games it's just a Rare and Destructive Art mastered by few.
Only reason I’m still watching is because Henry Cavill as Geralt is cool af. And I like the way Dandelion is played too. As for the other characters, I couldn’t care less
The thing is what do people expect from Netflix adaptations I don't mind the show but when Netflix makes an adaptation of a franchise it never lasts they will probably drop it after the third season especially when they realise that the spin-off doesn't interest anyone they seem to shoot themselves in the foot continuously because they via so far from the source material
@@Wraithunter I really don't think that is the problem here. A lot of the changes were due to the TV show format, even if it's on a streaming platform it seems to me they want to keep the classic TV show tension arc. I think it went a little like this: oh we probably need a monster of the season to have an epic finale! Also what are we going to do with our main cast if they aren't in the book as much? Hmm maybe we can solve both these production problems if we do a little baba yaga story... - and then it spiraled from there. I do think the showrunner has read the books thoroughly (same for the other writers I guess), she just doesn't treat it as a holy book that she has to adapt exactly like it's written. That alone would be fine with me to be honest. It's the priorities of creating an interesting TV show format VS. Staying true to the characters. Eskel was killed because they didn't invest the time to establish a relationship between Geralt and an OC character because they couldn't fit it into the overarching season drama. So they just went and killed off a character that already has meaning in the intertext of the books and games to show the upcoming danger to the witchers in action. Yennefer and Vesemir especially were used to illustrate early on in action rather than dialogue what the show will later be about: everyone wanting to use ciri for their own gain. I can sort of excuse Eskel but that choice especially (crushing the trust Ciri builds with her family of choice before that trust is even really built) is a little hard to forgive. I actually believe that if Netflix gave them a little more episodes per season, this could be a great adaptation attached to a cool fanfic. But the way that it is, they have to figure out how to most efficiently convey the themes of the book in the language of television and make decisions about what to keep and what to toss from the source material's plot and in which order to tell it so it fits the viewing expectations of the format. And in a productions this expensive, meeting mainstream expectations in terms of storytelling and suspense will always come first.
@@jamesnave1249 thanks for being respectful. I'm actually pretty pissed too but I try to look at the business side of it too. I don't work in television but in video production and oftentimes creative people don't make creative decisions but merely use their creativity to make financial decisions work. The Hobbit is a great example for how this can ruin an adaptation completely.
@@Nirax3 you're most welcome 🙂 Yeah I'd definitely agree, The Hobbit really is a perfect example! Another thing that makes me so sad. I feel like many of the decisions in the Witcher span beyond just the TV format, though I see your point, for me it just feels like laziness and just falling back on tv tropes to aid in their storytelling (which is perhaps what your talking about) but that is due to them having to support these other changes they've already made, eg trying to make Yen a much more central character than she was in the books and so having to fill her story arc with generic tv chase scene through a city that could ha e been from an episode of Adventure of Hercules (not that I'm dissing Hercules, I loved that show as a kid 😏 )
They somehow managed to combine all the downsides of adaptation and innovation without nailing almost anything... I mean, it invents lore without explaining what already exists, wich confuses people that hasn't read the books, and then just completely dismisses the story from the books, wich confuses people who has read the books... all while just butchering the source material, so no one likes the story. It seems like they are actively trying to ruin it, wich is kinda insane. They could just have made it a spin off with original characters, maybe something like a prequel with an ancestor of Ciri, or even something new entirely that just wouldn't break the lore. I would be completely fine with it. I just get mad when you take the setting, characters and story from the author and just changes everything for no reason and with absolutely no respect to the source material. Why call it an adaptation, then??????
I defended the first season quite strongly, despite some misgivings, but they've pretty much lost me now. I don't understand why they would take the license and source material and then completely butcher it into something that's barely recognisable. What was the point? :/ It also seems very difficult to follow without knowledge of the games or books. Nothing about the world, the geography or factions is ever explained. I had to explain so much to people about who was who and what was where. Baffling writing choices. I'll still watch season 3. It might be salvagable with a completely new writing team. (less f-bombs every other word and more fidelity to the characters and plot from the books, pleeeeeaase.)
for me i wont watch season 3 unless there are some serious changes to the directors and regisseur. the black washing is also a big problem GoT had at least distinct locations where those natives should life and youve expect to be.
Well, GoT was quite a cash cow for them so they want more of that fantasy stuff. Just happen to use the name "Witcher" because it got famous from the games.
Very true I never played a game, or read any of the books and I had no idea what all the political problems were I didn’t understand who was a against who. Hell, I didn’t even know if cintra was eleven, or human rule, same with nilfgaard. I really only watch this because I think Geralt is a cool dude
Yea, I know, it's truly amazing how they have managed to write a story that simultaneously completely ignores the source material while at the same time being completely incomprehensible without a good understanding of that very source material.
agreed. I was excited the first season because the setup was there and it mostly followed what would happen in the books as well while stringing short stories into an understandable story line. And then I watched season 2... with each new episode I became less and less excited until by the last episode I was reduced to browsing on my phone and barely even listening to what was going on in the show. Knowing the source material was more of a curse than an aid when watching season 2.
I don’t hate the show and I thought season 2 did some things very well. The part I get confused by is that the Witcher books have such great source material from Geralt and Ciri’s relationship, to trials and tribulations to multiple characters, the monsters and how to fight them that I fail to understand why they need to make up their own shit when it’s not consistent and it doesn’t work. There’s already a explained magic system and awesome monsters, why is there a need to change it?
To make it more appealing to general audiences in a TV show format which, because of its aesthetic conventions, needs more than a good plot to make it a guaranteed success from a production pov. Unfortunately.
As Henry Cavill said in regards to adapting the books: "if it aint broke, dont change it". I do understand that it is natuaral that changes need to be made, as TV is different medium, but damn most of the changes feel unnecessary and badly implemented. They removed so many great scenes from the books that it hard to see the characters as the characters from the books.
I’m so happy I came across your video. I read the books, loved the books and couldn’t get past episode 4 this season. I have no idea what the show runners are doing here. It’s horrible!
A 100 years old studious Yen shows her literacy by constantly cussing with repeating the words "shite, fxck and firefxcker" in the series. Bravo, the Netflix writers.
@@pykamirulol Because Yennefer is witty and intelligent, and the writing does nothing to show that. And it's just a minor case of how horribly written the dialogue is, which the show desperately needs. I believe that's what he is really referencing.
@@ChuffedLemon No kidding, but repeatedly using the term "Fire-fucker" when she never says that in the books, in a sad attempt to make casual fans laugh isn't witty at all
@@michaelrendler3703 Well, I’m a fan of the books and the series, and I found it both amusing and relatable. Though I understand some of the criticisms from book fans toward the show, I wish people would stop assuming that the show is only trying to appease “casual fans” or that only those fans enjoy the show. As much as I love the books, I think the onslaught of nit-picky criticism is just unwarranted. Adaptations always fail someone, and it’s just not that serious.
I listened to the books on audible over the summer, and loved the stories. While I'm sad many of the shorter stories, such as in the seasons of storms book, won't be covered, I was excited for my friends to experience all the main story beats that made the books so good. These main story changes are genuinely terrible for me and the one friend who played the hell out of the Wither 3. I get constraining the stories to the proper length for the pace of a show, and they do succeed in a tolerable way when they adapt the actual story, but what they cut out and change in this season completely ruins the a lot of what was great in the book. I'm not good with remembering what happened in the specific books, but missing out of story details like Ciri actually training, having Triss care about Ciri's more feminine needs at Kaer Moren, the "dear friend" letter from Geralt to Yennifer, and Ciri and Yennifers bonding at Mother Nennica's are some of the most memorable stories within the book and make the characters as loved as they are. These changes not only hurt the impact of the main story, but the overall characters and our views on them as all but Geralt, Ciri, Dandelion, and somewhat Triss seem to just be abhorrent versions of themselves that detract from what makes them good characters in the story. This season was a major disappointment for me.
Yes ,bravo sir. They killed everything that made Witcher what it is . You think they will show Ciri interest in boys and yen teaching her about them ? i think not. We know what they won't skip and just spin it in "right " direction.
i think Season 1 was good in that. It has differences but not to much. You cant do everything like in the books. Some will be boring to watch or is just not doable.
We just didn't pay attention but the whole Ciri breaking some monolith and not having the same interaction with Cahir as in the books, so she could have a very different journey to reach Geralt, as well as that (doppler?) assassin were already signs that they wanted to tell a very different story.
As a non book reader I found season 2 be better than season 1. Both are OK, but not great. The main problem is that Geralt is just a fairly boring character, (particularly in season 1), he has no real arc, he expresses hardly any emotions and his motivations are never really made clear. He's far more interesting when he's with Ciri to be fair, which is why I preferred the second season.
@@davidjones272 Thats fairly just how he is. He is just a simple Witcher, doing his Witcher things and living in a political World with no good and bad and he is living between it, try to not choose a side but just living his own moral and life.
@@davidjones272 Well he's a Witcher; part of being a Witcher is not showing emotion. I'm assuming you haven't played the Witcher 3 and if so I recommend giving it a go before season 3 comes out. Playing the game before watching the show made me not only appreciate The Witcher as a whole but also made me very intrigued to learn more about everything. Plus, it's one of the best games ever made.
I agree with everything you said. I've almost finished all the books, and when I saw the first episode of the second season I thought "hm, not bad". And then I kept getting more and more confused by all the changes. I understand why people can like this series, but I'm unable to because the changes just makes me angry, especially the ones that change how certain characters behave. I get that you have to change and switch up some things in order to adapt a book into a TV series, but so many of their changes don't make any sense. Even if you don't know the books, so many things in this season were out of place (like when Ciri teleports to the other side of the river in episode 7, I guess their horses teleported with them? All the witcher are this bad at fighting monsters and spotting danger? ...). I do agree that Eskel's death is pretty confusing, because to people who don't know the books or the games he's just a random witcher so there is no emotional attachment, but to the others he's one of the main witchers. So his death feels like a cheap "provocation" to those people, I really can't wrap my head around why they did it. I don't know if I'll watch the next seasons to be honest, that one just pissed me off..
you are so right with your critics! i also finished the books yet and I felt, that perhaps only 20% is worked out in Season 2. I miss the evolution of the relationship between yennefer and ciri, how she teaches her magic and how it became a mother.daughter rel ship. Instead of it, they let yennefer 'treat and betray' ciri and geralt, Never happened at all. But it's the base of the story, that the 3 maincharacters became a family against every circumstances. It seems, as if the writers had no idea what to bring on screen. Henry Cavill must been pissed off what they did with the original,so sad....
my problem with the show is not that it's different from the books, it's just that it's worse than what we have in the books. what's the point in changing the story only to make it worse? the games are very different from the books and yet they are amazing (in my opinion anyway), the changes work pretty well there. the netflix show on the other hand is very mediocre and the changes only make it confusing and dumb.
Honestly the only similarity between Gaunter and Baba Whatever is the fact that they make deals of some sort. Gaunter was one of the best antagonists that I've seen in entertainment. Baba Whatever feels like mediocre Zena the warrior princess antagonist that didnt even leave the slightest impression to me.
Well said, mate... Just like I recently said to a good friend of mine, I think I would have liked the Netflix version if the showrunner and the cast were honest from the beginning by saying that the series is only LOOSELY based on the books, and they would take a lot of creative freedom with it. Instead, they marketed it as something that closely follows the book under the approval of Sapkowski himself, and Cavill is painted as a huge Witcher nerd that sometimes correct people on the set to make sure the show stays faithful to the book. That has created some sort of unmet expectation in me.
Yeah that's the worst part, especially coming from the showrunner who has actual power to make so. I actually believe Henry Cavill is truly a fan and tries to make it more faithful where he can but he's only one man, and yeah they gladly use that to their advantage in marketing
I am on the same page here. I wanted a show that actually follows closely the books or the games. Either would be totally fine for me. To me, this is just another show (sadly) in the current "nature of the entertainment industry" where they tie a show or movie to an existing universe, and then do whatever they want with it for their message, diversity and female empowerment movement. And it simply just sucks. Get good writers to balance it out. Explain changes in a meaningful way. Then maybe we can talk about it. But as it is? This is just plain bad writing. Destroying lore, characters for no good reason. I watch Arcane 10 times before rewatching Season 1 or 2 of this show anytime. Because they in the end at least created something interesting with awesome characters on BOTH genders. Great story arcs, emotions. I was invested more in characters from this show than to a Yennefer in this show, that I actually should love already since I know the character.
@@ICantSnipe88 I enjoyed it alot. Even my GF loved it and she has no clue about the lore of LoL You don't need to know anything. Maybe look if you enjoy the artstyle (I think it is very good) - everything else I thought was great. Good characters with arcs, great action scenes as well as more slow character moments... propably the best show in my opinion in 2021
@@ICantSnipe88 Its a very good show, defiantly worth a watch. My buddy that doesn't like animated shows loved it and thought it was amazing. Great characters and a story that leaves you excited for the next season to come out.
the reason dandelion is called jaskier is because the original name for him in Polish (original language of the books) was jaskier, which means buttercup in english. the name buttercup was deemed too femenine in english for a male character, so they changed it to dandelion. but his original name in polish was actually jaskier.
No, his name was Julian viscount of Lettenhove, Jaskier is his nickname, if they didn't decide to translate "White Wolf" into Polish in the show, there's no reason for them to do so for Dandelion.
I really understand that it is an ''adaptation'', so it doesn't have to be the same as the books, it makes sense to change certain points so that it is possible to fit into a series. But the whole hype for this show was that we as viewers and fans should expect something close to the book, not the games, they even emphasized that after season one was over and people saw the character changes. I was disappointed that so many characters lost their essence in this second season, the shallow and poorly constructed relationships, Vesemir, Eskel and Lambert looked like unknown witchers, the wolf school itself felt more like a brothel, even Ciri's personality changed, she being one of the characters that should have more development. Geralt and Yennefer looked like a couple of teenagers.
@@ItsMeStrider His theory is that one season of 14 hours is not long enough for one book and 3 years are to little to make show so that why they have to ruing it. And when people say "They can't copy everything 1:1 " you know they know. I didn't read one review or comment my comment on Metacritic was "This is not Witcher " and than i see great number of people with same conclusions and critic . It is very obvious what this is and again and again from same stuff . Take the old good ,grounded stuff and make it new shiny nonsense and people who know is sh..t.. , will defend it cause they want to like it. how can somebody who seen , read, watch something in life like shows like this. People convince themselfs hard aftr first season but it was clear from seeral episodes ... And it won't get back on track, track don't exists.
They could've just taken short pics from the story here and there not the whole thing and hit us with the new crap that is not from the games or the books is unforgivable. S1 was on the right track with geralt going on different mini adventures with dandelion was terrific so they should've continued that into s2. Killing off eskel really did piss me off since it happened for no reason.
Alternative title for this video: Pretty much nothing of this happens in the books. I wouldn't be mad at this series, if the writers said at the start that it'll be inspired by the books. But Lauren Hissrich said, it'll be book accurate, and the books has so much material she doesn't feel she needs to invent new elements for the series. Which was basically a lie. Sure I read some comments like "I read the books, already know the story, I want to see something different" - To which I'd say a book adaptation is about bringing THAT story to the screen, and not change it up completely. Some changes are necessary, always, but not at this scale. The other thing is, what if I want to introduce this fantasy world to someone who I know would never pick up a book? Finally there's a series portraying this world, and then it turns out it's practically nothing like the source? PS: I think this series is best for people who started watching it on their own will, and know nothing about Witcher.
Episode 2 was so jarring that it pulled me completely out of it, still watched the rest in hopes that that particular episode was just an one off thing in how they tried to adapt the story..
Kinda sad because I thought episode 1 was really good. Geralt was enthusiastic in his own way and the plot wasn't too ambitious like the other episodes' but the showrunners really sucked later on but I guess it's time we accept Netflix adaptations always suck
The showrunner is just a hack, I could tell from the very first interview with her. At least the GoT showrunners had the excuse of running out of book material.
Witcher 1, the special edition had short story missions. Witcher season 2 reminds me of those; however, what happened in Kaer Moren during season 2 was unforgivable.
The showrunner has the luxury the book story was finished years ago, so she could even plan ahead and define how many seasons and what to cover from the books on each of them. However, there were rumors season 2 was heavily rewritten at some point (probably due to the Vesemir anime and Blood Origin spin-offs). What I don't understand is that she claims she loves Blood of Elves and read it 20 times and even mentioned on multiple occasions (even recently) that the show would be a direct adaptation of the books. Rather than admitting the series is going to be an original story the showrunner continues to create excuses for each diversion from the books the series takes. As Netflix continues to claim books are going to be adapted and even with Henry Cavill publicaly pointing out he would like to see more book plots in the series, MAYBE season 3 will revisit Blood of Elves plot and cover most of it (even if it is out of order, as it happened with A Grain of Truth). MAYBE all those changes made on season 2 served to align the main series with the spin-offs, bring more actions scenes to the show and also give more screen time to Yennefer, since she barely appears on that book. Given that, I'm optimistic season 3 could be much better than this one.
I was thinking about this. Time of Contempt has very little plot to adapt, they already used attack on Cintra in first season so only thing left is a bit of big politics (false flag attack on Nilfgaard that Emhyr sees through) and big finale with Thanedd coup. You could bring back show on its track if you use this gap to go back to Yen/Ciri training while Geralt on his own tries to figure out who is behind fire mage. Maybe add some additional unused stories like that about water city. This is me being optimistic but realistically they will probably continue to write their own stupid juvenile broken stuff.
@@frozen1762 I agree, let's wait to see how Blood Origin goes, but I'm pretty sure all that big diversion from books around Voleth Meir character and her link with Wild Hunt is going to show up in the spin-off, since Eredin is confirmed at least. Was it necessary to change that and create the mutagen/leshy/Eskel death/Vesemir wanting to create more witchers plots just to tie the main series with the spin-offs? Totally not, but it seems to be what they decided to do. Until the showrunner does not admit books are going to be put aside I guess there is hope. Truth is that every season they lie and invent more excuses to diverge from books people will get even more mad. Rotten tomatoes audience ratings for season 2 should be a big warn for them.
to people saying you aren’t disappointed by season 2 ask yourselves this would you watch without henry as geralt? if your answer is no as is mine alongside many others I presume then you don’t love the plot you just love how good of a geralt he is and im going to be honest the second season has lost the essence of the witcher series and is quite disappointing
Yes, I would watch it. Season 2 is - by far - the best and most well produced live fantasy show at the moment. Obviously, a big part of that is Henry Cavill, but even without him the production value is pretty high. Compare it to e.g. the Wheel of Time is weird to think that these seasons cost roughly the same and are produced at the same time.
The Secret to Writing The Witcher: 1) Make the sorcerers 10x more important in the narrative and introduce 80% of the antagonists and main plot through them, subconsciously making Yen seem more responsible for the plot and it feel like Geralt is entering her storylines instead of the other way around. 2) Assassinate the characterizations of the Witchers. When you can't do that, just plain ol' assassinate them. (Make sure to have the correct number of Witchers in the prequel, but then more in the show, just to show how little you care about the continuity.) 3) Ignore all canon Witcher subplots and replace them with your own Elven civil rights movement subplot. Because what sword and sorcery fantasy adventure isn't improved by a Racism is Bad Aesop? 4) Reduce the Witcher's focus even more by making Ciri's place in their lives more about being the mother of Witchers because of her Elven blood than on becoming a Witcher herself. With all these steps of diminishing the importance of the Witchers and idolizing the sorcerers and Elves accomplished, sit back and enjoy insulting the source material so much, Henry Cavill breaks his promise and walks away from the franchise 40% of the way through.
You know, I've been hesitating to start season 2 all this time, been looking at other things on Netflix. Old movies and the like. And now I get why. But this is really sad. It's always sad when these people don't even bother actually adapting the source material, and just make up their own garbage and slapping a popular name on it.
I absolutely hate the "you just hate it, because it isn't like the books" excuse, people always use when defending the show. We aren't complaining because they changed stuff from the books, we're complaining because the changes they made didn't improve the story, it just made it WORSE. For fucks sake, the video games are completely made up but almost everyone loves them, hell some fans even love them more than the books.
Been waiting to see this I was very confused by vesimir trying to give Ciro the mutagen I remember in the books that was NEVER even a thought of an option
@@adamp6320 didn’t they start giving her the herbs in smaller doses though And they stopped when truss came and that’s why she was asking are there no herbs for me today
@@knightwolf1866 herbs is one thing, the trial of grasses potion that kills 80% of those who take it and mutates boys into Witchers is another thing entirely! That's like saying a sip of beer is like injecting heroin into your vein. Entirely different!
Agreed that it changes far too much and overall is not "The Witcher" in a true sense this season at least "felt" more like The Witcher. I found that the female characters especially were portrayed dramatically differently from season one, to the extent of them just retconning via exposition Fringilla's character in episode 1. This season was more recognizable like a blurry photo coming slightly I to focus, and at least Geralt actually got to fight some monsters this time.
there's a big difference between an adaptation of a story and the complete rewriting of it. The latter is what we call a fanfic, which is exactly what this show is. It's definitely not The Witcher that we know and love, except Henry Cavill's amazing portrayal of Geralt. Im only watching the show because of him.
Another series where the source material has been rewritten to suit the writers. It isn't our Witcher at all. I admire Henry for saying enough is enough and walking away.
I first got introduced to the witcher through the first season when it came out and even though it was not amazing I liked and wanted more so i played through the witcher 3 twice (which was one of the best experiences I’ve ever had), the second time playing the main dlcs and much more thoroughly then the first time. I then tried witcher 1 but could not get through the prologue so I skipped it and went to Assassins of Kings and had a blast and then I went to W3 for a third time (not once have I used NG+) trying to see more combinations, quests and story beets which ended up taking 110+ hours which was a lot for me and I have still missed a lot. I still wanted more so I read the books which was soooo amazing I could not stop reading. I then realized that the show had not been that good but I still don’t think the first season is bad by any means I just think it has a lot of wasted potential. I made up my mind after having read the books that I had to play witcher 1 which I’m still slowly pushing through and my plan is to play 2&3 after that again. When the second season dropped I was a bit hesitant to watching it as I am a huge fan now and did not want the show to ruin my love for it but I ended up seeing episodes 1&2. The first is okay. The story should’ve already been told in the first season but that is not a huge deal. But in the end the episode was kinda uninteresting as the book story was WAY better but I guess the episode was okay. The second is disaster and a humiliation to all the actors, fans, workers not to forget Sapkowski from the writers and the material it is based on is spit on. I can’t remember a single thing that happens in the books except Geralt and Ciri arriving at Kaer Morhen. It is a hole new plot that is not enjoyable one bit. And listening to this review I was shocked at what was going to happen in the next six episodes. And as this season is just going so far from the source material the writers will have a hard time in a next season to make an actual Witcher show when they already have built a foundation that is a disgrace to the source material.
The female casting of the sorceresses alone is enough to sink this show and shit on the IP. That and shehorning in diversity characters absolutely everywhere they just don't belong.
It went over the line for me when Nenneke opened a portal for Geralt because the plot needed a portal for Geralt. She is not a magic user in that way, really at all, though you could make arguments limited to the potions/healing she does. The race-swap did not help.
This is even worse than fanfiction. It doesnt even attempt to use established lore, characters. They just stole the IP and decided to use the fan base as a starting point to gain traction/popularity.
As a witcher adaptation...it's awful. As a completely new story that has nothing to do with the books or games, it's not bad. Who am I kidding I hated it. I hated everything about it. They ruined everything that makes the witcher what it is. The worst part was turning Gunter O'dim, my favorite villain, into some old weird witch.
Except, its not Gaunter O'Dimm. it is a new character that riffs off of Baba Yaga, Deathless Koschei and other wish giving folklore figures. Much in the same way Sapkowski does in the books. Much like how Gaunter is a made uo character for the game universe.
@@adrianwebster6923 Except that they mostly just bait people in with game refferances, do whatshername being a rip on O'Dimm is waaay more likely than the creators being inspired by folklore and creating something.
Regarding Ciri's training in the book there are scenes and sequences showing some portions of her traiing, as well as her lessons of Elder Speech with Triss, in the book Ciri is seen first hand training wiht Geralt, learning monster lore from Vesemir (but also theory on specific moves in combat and fencing techniques to use against specific monsters), physical training like running overseen by Eskel, training on the course with Lambert and extensive fencing training sessions with Coen, so there is quite a bit of that in the book as well.
is noone gonna talk about the scale of this witcher world , looks like everyone travelling here is using commercial airlines to reach anywhere . from soden hill to kaer morhen it would take weeks of travelling on a horse .but they make it look like it took just a day.
I started with the games, but I watched and enjoyed both seasons of the show before I started reading the books. So far I've finished The Last Wish and I'm now reading Sword of Destiny. Honestly...my opinion of this adaptation is declining drastically with every new chapter I read through. Yes, expecting a page by page, word for word recreation of the source material in television form is foolish, but is it too much to expect something that's reasonably close to the source material? All I was really looking for was an adaptation about as close to the Witcher books as the Harry Potter films were to the Harry Potter books. I don't think that's unreasonable and yet as I read more of the Witcher books, I find that Netflix's version falls short of even that bar. It's not that the show isn't a 1:1 recreation of the books. It's that the show is honestly not even close to the books a lot of the time and at this point it just feels like a completely different story that is set in a similar world. This would be fine if the show was advertised as such, but it's not. It was advertised as a proper TV adaptation of the events from the books. The thing is, you really have to read the books yourself to see exactly how different the show and books are. I assumed people were overreacting back when season 1 was airing and told myself the show couldn't possibly have been that off base. Now though, I completely get where people are coming from. It's not just a little different with some changes here and there for the sake of adapting the story to a new medium. No, the changes can actually be pretty darn drastic and a lot of them don't even feel like they have a meaningful purpose, especially in season 2.
Is a semi accurate recreation of the source material foolish? The Lord of the Rings films managed to fit a similar amount of dense and lore heavy fantasy story into 12 hrs without butchering it whereas The Witcher series is longer in runtime and has failed to tell less than half the story and has already diverted so far off the path that coming back seems impossible
@@DjDolHaus86 Exactly. A semi accurate adaptation was really all anyone was realistically expecting and Netflix Witcher has fallen well short of even that goal, despite having every opportunity to succeed.
@@cjhorton123 well ..unfortunately it is what it is It's been 2 seasons already and despite Henry's protest The showrunner always get what they want anyway. . .and that's going to continue probably as long as she stays
I was disappointed with season 2 but not because of my experience with The Witcher... But because the first season had so much more adventure... Every episode felt like a new monster or a new quest was acquired. Season 2 focused more on the bigger picture... the bigger story... It felt like the season was more telling us about character development ... rather than showing us and developing the character on screen... I still liked it tho. Gonna give it another watch here soon but I loved the formula in the first season.
I mean, that's exactly how the book was. The last was was a compilation of short stories that sapkowski had already written for a fantasy magazine serial. The later books are when he started following an actual plot line rather than make it short stories. Not defending the show, I hate how they butchered it, but the way you described it is the only actual faithful part of the adaptation
Yeah a lot of the Monsters were added to this season to make it feel more adventurous and heroic. In the book, I believe Geralt fights one monster, which is an important moment, but the rest of the time is developing characters and fighting other people/elves
@@RampageAG I'm still super confused about the whole "deathless mother" thing. Yet another plot entirely made up for the show that had nothing to do with the books that probably would have done better without
Geralt was like going from Kaer Morhen to Cintra and then back to Kaer Morhen in one fuckin day. But what do you mean eithvthat they changed the location of Velen and Novigrad
If they made Blood of Elves in to a hard translation of the books, it would be an awful season of television. It's literally just people standing around talking in every chapter.
Fanfiction implies it's made by fans. The fans are Henry and probably some production staff who don't get a say, then the rest are just there for a paycheck. Netflix will always go for agenda over adaptation. I don't mind different, I do mind worse. I just wish the writers were as talented as everyone else who worked on the show. Replace them and they could probably get on track.
I didn't read the books and only played Witcher 3. And you can believe me when I say that I was so confused when characters died that are in the game. I didn't think that they would change so much so I was like "Did I actually meet Mousesack? Was that another person I am confusing him with?" And then luckily a friend who read the books told me that the show is doing its own thing and she also didn't know what's going on anymore...
The biggest mistake they made was casting Henry Cavill. They spent all of their money on an A-list actor who looks like he should be a swimsuit model, not a monster slayer.
Great video. Actually very diplomatic and completely fair. I say this as someone who is enjoying the series, but completely agree that it is way far afield of either the books or games. I admit to having something of a soft spot for the show. It was kind of my entry point to this world. Within a few days of the first season dropping, I had bought the first book and started it (I’ve now read them, and some more than once) I bought and started Witcher 3 (a couple hundred hours in, two full playthroughs including the dlcs) and searched out channels like yours for lore and game play. The series is not a perfect adaptation, clearly not trying to be, but it introduced me to the world and characters. I also do think Henry Cavill does a really, really good job as Geralt. So, while imperfect and in many ways an adaptation in name only… I do still like it. But totally get why it wouldn’t work for many who really wanted something more faithful to the source material. The show definitely isn’t.
If we look at the game (I haven't read the books), when Vesemir is introduced, he's like a dad figure. He teaches, he plans, etc.. So you build up a "bond". A threat comes in the form of the Hunt. There are multiple fights, in one of the later fights Vesemir get injured/dies. So this is why his death had some weight to it, even if the books might be different, the storytelling here was solid. In this series, you don't get to bond to Eskel, he has no arc, nothing. No background, gets killed by some random tree-thingy-curse we know nothing about. In the game Geralt gets revenge by killing imlerith stating he was taught by Vesemir. Here...I can't even remember what happened because (I'm an alcolist) it was way to forgettable. Just rewatched the Leshen just got of by a random other thing that just appeared out of nowhere......Now I member. Had zero weight to it.
Honestly if the show Vesimir died I would have thought.. oh well, one more asshole witcher gone. They made him into a bit of a power hungry and selfish idiot in the show. When the game Vesimir died, I literally cried.
I just want to watch Geralt. I'd love to see an adaptation of the witcher more in line with The mandalorian. Just Geralt traversing the continent with Ciri. They could've made the entire season about Geralt leading Ciri to Kaer Morhen
First two books are like that. Geralt travels a lot, kill monsters and stuff. My favourite short story is Eternal Fire from second book, there is no fighting whatsoever and story is lighthearted and fun to read.
I struggle the find the logic in this. Netflix is like: Hey, lets adapt this great story that is very popular, but of course lets completely change it up by novice writers that have 0 acomplishment to their name, that will surely work better.
If they were going to deviate so much and add lots of unrelated storylines, why did they not create an entirely original story instead of taking bits and pieces of the witcher books and games only to put themselves in a very deep hole they might not dig out of ? This is just lazy and cliche writing to me. By the way, I didn't read the books or play the games, so I can imagine the frustration and dissapointment that the fans of the books and the games might have. If they go like this, this is definitely going to be worse than GOT. At least, the first 3 or 4 seasons of GOT were mostly closer to the events depicted in the books.
I’ve played Witcher 2 and 3. Read all the books. The second they got the races wrong, the lore was dead, then the story is wrong. This is not the witcher
I agree with you in some ways. I'm fan of the games. Don't fan of the books and the show either, but i like some good elements in it! Thx for the lore videos!
I truly wouldn’t have a problem with them replacing a majority of the scenes with new ones that make the universe feel different. Some of the most fun I have watching adaptations is seeing different interpretations of ideas and plot points in the books or games; the problem here is that whenever they replace something in the book that has a real and important impact on the rest of the story, they do it with scenes and characters that mean almost nothing to what’s to come in the future. The earlier books are really just a setup to the massive events that happen later in the story, and because the Witcher is mainly character driven- when you erase those smaller events, the bigger ones lose their impact.
