Fun Stuff > ENJOY

Netflix' The Witcher

(1/4) > >>

dutchrvl:
So, I read that The Witcher on Netflix is immensely popular globally, and after watching the first 2 episodes, I am thoroughly confused as to why it is....

My impressions: mediocre production, fairly poor CGI, clunky dialogue, and way too many unknown/unfamiliar terms/words they're introducing making it confusing. Cavill is okay as the lead, although the deeper voice he uses seems to restrict what he can do acting-wise (he's not helped by his dialogue to be fair). Also, but this may just be me, the look and way of talking of characters regularly feels too 'modern' to me.

The overall feel of monster-of-the-week episodes with an overarching plot is fine, and the show doesn't take itself too seriously so that helps as well.

Maybe the show gets better in later episodes?

LeeC:
I like it. I really liked episode 3 (Striga!) and 4 (where they reveal the timeline). I have 3 more to go to finish and its just fun. My wife and I have not read the books or played the games but we're really enjoying the story, characters, and humor. Its a bit like a mystery as you figure out how these 3 stories relate and converge with each other.

TheEvilDog:
That's the thing, from what I understand, if you've read the books or played the games, you won't like the series. Its a mess, its chaotic.
But if you're coming with only a hint of the material, its decent enough.

oddtail:
I like the series. The dialogue is not nearly as good as in the short stories/books, and some things are left out in a way that I find absolutely infuriating.

But when I approach it as its own thing and don't lean on my memory of the source material too much, I find Witcher to be a rather good, if not spectacular, series. And I was a pretty big fan of the books/stories, and I loved the video game series (especially Witcher 3)

(I do recommend the books and especially the short stories to anyone who watches the show and likes it. It's much wittier and funnier in my opinion, and has snappy dialogue. Keep in mind that the books are two decades old by now, short stories are even older, and they're all a product of their time. Plus, I have no idea how good the translation into English is)

EDIT: spoilers for the first episode (and more importantly, the short story it's based on) below to illustrate a point:

-----
(click to show/hide)In the short story the first episode is based on, Renfri is very clearly a dark take on Snow White - complete with a version of the seven dwarfs (I don't think her crew are dwarves, but there's seven of them IIRC). There are multiple allusions to just about every part of the fairy tale. It's not exactly subtle, either. In fact, almost all short stories involving Geralt are dark or humorous retellings of classic fairy tales, and it's a big part of the appeal.

If I didn't know that, I don't think I would ever have guessed Renfri is supposed to be Snow White. I am not sure why the series almost completely ignores this, as it's a defining aspect of the franchise before the novels were published. Maybe it's the fact that there have been dark takes on Snow White (and other fairy tales) since the short story was published, and people unfamiliar with Witcher would think the episode is a rip-off of those, despite being based on material from decades prior? No idea.
EDIT 2: this is very subjective, but while I was sceptical of the casting of Cavill, I think he pretty much nails Geralt as a character (better than the video game version's actor, either in the Polish version or the English dub). He is the perfect emotionally stunted asshole that book Geralt is, IMO.

Blue Kitty:
The best thing I've heard about it is that it's similar to the old Hercules and Xena shows, and that makes me want to watch it all the more

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page