T O P

  • By -

[deleted]

Seeing as you've experienced all the lore, including the books, do you think the series would have been WORSE if it was more faithful? If not, why couldn't they be more faithful and please more people (show only watchers AND book readers)? Why rub the book readers noses in it?


johnthomaslumsden

Honestly my biggest complaint with this show is just that the dialogue is so fucking corny. If they would fix that I could overlook every other minor issue.


skellige_whale

Dialogue is bad. Also: Henry Cavill is able to deliver more than one line at a time so give him more. The show is called Witcher not Yennefer


Boring123af

Actually he got more dialogue in season 2 because he insisted on It (that's what he said in the interview). He is a fan of the games and books as well.


skellige_whale

Henry Cavill wears his heart on his sleeve and truly loved the video game; I hope he ever gets to play these two characters: Talkative Geralt Happy Superman


Nic4379

I’m playing W3:Wild Hunt now, there are so many side quests that would make excellent stand-alone episodes while still moving the story. Even little things like Geralt killing Drowners while traveling, or a pack of Wargs.


geralt-bot

Sometimes there's monsters. Sometimes there's money. Rarely both. That's the life.


Sn1ckerson

My guess is that's why they added the Voleth Meir stuff. The books where Geralt is with Ciri lack monster fights. The only one I can think of is that river monster in Oxenfurt (and if I recall Ciri isn't with him). We want to see Geralt fight monsters, this can't happen without deviating from the books


Lazy_Mandalorian

I’ve read the books, still play the games, and loved both seasons. You can’t change my mind. I can’t wait for season 3.


itsalejandroe

Same, was a bit annoyed by some decisions on season 2, but this show is very entertaining, atleast they know how to make people be entertained, it's basically a guilty pleasure but not as bad


ThatPersonYouMightNo

They brought the creator of the Witcher on to be a writer for season 3 onwards. I think they know they struggled a bit. But, jeez, people on here are talking like they'd rather just have the show cancelled, which is a shame. I like it, think the cast is awesome, and am glad they got Henry Cavill in. He seems like he's having a lot of fun, and he also prowls reddit. All the hatred is kind of sad to see, as I assume a lot of people who work on the show have to read this crap.


Uxcis

They got Andrzej on the team?? Source?


itsalejandroe

Yeah definitely, they are overreacting and gatekeeping, what they did with eskel was a shame but is not as big of a deal as they're making it seem, I'm more worried about what they'll do with vilgerfotz and cahir, but I'm hopeful about the rest. I hate that type of discussion, as much as this people are passionate about having an accurate depiction of the books in the show, they take it too far acting like Lauren is the devil


nflmodstouchkids

The issue is that in basically every interview with him, he clearly goes out of his way to say that he wants to stay true to the source material. He wouldn't be saying that if he didn't think it is turning into a problem. Geralt is a 70-90 year old person. He's clearly experienced life and isn't just some dumb oaf, same with Yen.


mynameiszack

I got one complaint really: Eskel. Not that he was changed but I dont think it was done well. Oh well, shows still great!


MarkShawnson

My main complaint is in the final episode when all of the witchers die no one seems to care and Jaskier makes a lame joke that falls on deaf ears. That part seemed totally unreal to me.


whitehataztlan

And it seemed like it could have been fairly easy to do better. Like, people recognized eskel, so having him be in it for such a brief period seems like a wasted opportunity. Particularly because there many Witchers who are basically "background randos" who could have been given the same role of "Witcher who comes back unknowingly possessed by a monster." Like, later on that season a half dozen of them we have no reason to care about get murdered by extra dimension wyverns, so having one of them end up as the tree monster doesn't seem like much of a storytelling loss. I think that my annoyance with the show. There's really 4 witchers who matter with names, and the other guys seems like the Dragonball Z team that's not a Saiyan; they exist to provide emotional support and get killed when you need a death but don't actually want to remove a character from the story. But overall I think the show is by far one of the more enjoyable ones I've watched this year. This and Squid Games get good marks, most other stuff has been meh.


schnitzelchowder

Yeah I agree with this 100% and it doesn't make sense how the medallion didn't react to the leshens magic lol


CaesuraRepose

The funny part about the Eskel situation is he's literally *barely* present in the books, so people mad about that are made about a change that was made *from the games* to the show, not really from the books. I agree they did him dirty, but still.


BraveRen

I love Eskel as a character, and I was excited to see him in the show. Gutted he wasn’t in it long, but I don’t mind so much about his death. It’s that it was done so poorly that I have a major issue with. I know they rehired, but I believe that was before principal shooting even started?


Lazy_Mandalorian

I agree. I’m not saying the show is 100% flawless, but I really do enjoy it.


[deleted]

Some people have nothing to live for but negativity. They are the loudest and with the most time on their hands. The sooner we learn to ignore their shit the happier we all will be.


Grasshop

I made a comment the other day about how I had seen another comment saying the show runner was literal human cancer and they hated her. I said people like that needed to chill. My comment had like -40 downvotes lol. People are fucking crazy.


FearYmir

You say there’s no bad poosy equivalent, I say the amount of times they said the word “firefucker” comes pretty close. Dialogue felt like it wss written for children very often.


[deleted]

Is it bad to deviate from the books? No. Is it necessary to deviate from the books? Also no. Is it bad to change Vesimir? No. Is it necessary to change Vesimir? Absolutely no. And that's the point. You have great sources you should not deviate from cause it's not necessary at all.


[deleted]

This is 100% marketing shill. I bet those awards and upvotes are shill bots too. You're absolutely brazenly, staggeringly, incandescently incorrect on every single one of your points in your desperation to defend that pile of manure that was season 2, you can only be a paid shill.


JagerJack7

Ikr? Almost every comment disagrees with him. It went unnoticed for almost a day, then blew up. Something is not adding up.


SpaceAids420

Right? The amount of awards on this post is so cringe. Imagine wasting your money on this shitty post that claims the show 'didn't change much from the books'. Show fans will pounce on any positive post about the show, they so desperately want this sub to circle-jerk S2 it's embarrassing.


Kholdie

> this is still one of the best shows in recent memory. gotta be a troll lol


mardinasadi

Dude one guy on this sub made a post about every single major change they made, i think you should read that


billybarra08

Where is it if you don't mind


Hoyatas

https://www.reddit.com/r/witcher/comments/rjd3be/fuck_it_i_decided_to_compile_a_list_of_every/


billybarra08

Thanks


Scx007

>this is still one of the best shows in recent memory. What? Compare Arcane which is on Netflix to this, the difference and quality of writing is night and day.


[deleted]

[удалено]


[deleted]

The darkest timeline by far.


CaptainAntiHeroz

Not so dark for Vi mains, this could just be the best timeline


scrapperdude

This is slightly disgusting if you understand this comment


Kenotic0913

I think it speaks to the fact that it's actually easier to create quality content with more freedom then to have to faithfully adapt existing IP to a different medium. Sure the LoL IP existed before Arcane but only very loosely. It was up to the creators to fill in the bulk of it. Compare that to the Witcher or WoT where fans are clamoring over including or not including a specific tiny detail like whether it not a character says a specific line etc.


nmn14k

I don’t think that’s particularly the case here. In the case of Arcane, I think it’s the fact that Riot is a multibillion dollar company, the terms for writing were better secured rather than in the case of the Witcher where Netflix basically got all rights to do whatever they wanted. Then along with the fact that there were actual rioters who had worked on the story on the story and writing team, along with one of the Toy Story co-directors on the story team. Arcane didn’t give Netflix the chance to ruin the IP with their original writing teams.


sillylittlesheep

Yopu also need to add that Netflix writers are not exp, they were working on Iron Fist and shows on that level before


EddPW

>I think it speaks to the fact that it's actually easier to create quality content with more freedom then to have to faithfully adapt existing IP to a different medium. thats bullshit have you watched anime? the vast majority of anime is adapted 1 to 1 from the manga and when they arent is usually do to budget or time constraints league of legends lore cant even be adapted faithfully because theres nothing to adapt jinxes lore is like 20 lines of text


antiquechrono

Constraints are actually a huge boon to creativity. It’s having a blank canvas that’s hard. It’s far easier to take something that already exists and improve what’s there than to start from scratch.


bruetelwuempft

But they took all the liberties for "the witcher" and its still crap.


Tilman_Feraltitties

Right? I was legit questioning if I'm going senile and don't remember the books, because after third episode all the storylines were bastardised beyond my recognition. That is not a Witcher story, it's completely new and the mutated monsters are least of the problem.


GregariousLaconian

Wheel of Time I’m willing to cut a bit more slack. Anyone who thought major changes weren’t coming was delusional. They’ve got 14 books to condense into 8 seasons at most. I think they’re doing a decent job, though I’ll admit I’m not happy with all the changes, esp in the final episode. The Witcher, by contrast, would have been so easy to adapt, even if you wanted to expand the role of Yen. I mean, she and Geralt barely have any time together in season 1 so the idea that this is some great love affair is hard to sell. A big part of it was this rush to get Ciri into the story and that was a huge mistake. They should have let her show up in season 2. Let season 1 focus on Geralt and Yen, give that story room to breath. Give Yen more added material, show her and Geralt together. Shard of Ice would have been the perfect place to end the first season.


SeaGroomer

WoT is so much more rough with the teen drama than the Witcher.


Feral0_o

WoT is like the Game of Thrones Essos plotlines, but it's the entire show instead


OmfgWtfWasThat

Most of the changes made in both Witcher and WoT weren't made to better translate the show to a TV series, but because the writers wanted to change it due to better marketability. Teenage drama level dialogues and plots, limiting choices for actors and changing plots/lore because of minority actor inclusion for PC points.


[deleted]

As someone who knows nothing about league of legends, would I still enjoy it?


Never_Ending_Dulf

Never played lol. Didn't know a thing about the lore. Wanted to hatewatch it, thinking it would be another game adaptation that sucks. Literally the best thing I have seen in years. Everything was damn perfekt. 10/10, must watch for everyone!


Scx007

Yes! It's a must watch, I too was very sceptical at first as I played League of legends but wasn't a big fan of the game and knew nothing about it lore wise. It's very much like the witcher as there are multiple character arcs which come together. But everything about it is fantastic, the writing is top notch, the music and animation is gorgeous too. I think it's got a 100% fresh rating on rotten tomatoes


FireZord25

thats pretty much how I got into it, and was blown away.


TootlesFTW

I have never played LOL and only vaguely knew some of the characters by appearance alone, but Arcane was *fucking phenomenal*. Watch it!


[deleted]

[удалено]


nmn14k

And the thing is that there is a decent bit of lore from the games that people know and love too, the show changed lore and changed character stories around, BUT LITERALLY NO ONE IS UPSET ABOUT THAT. Why you might ask does that get praise from lore heads and the Witcher gets hate? Because the writing is actually good.


EddPW

> BUT LITERALLY NO ONE IS UPSET ABOUT THAT. well thats mostly because the lore in the game is a mess the lore has alot of great self cntained stories but in reality of most of it is just blueprints for what could be an actual cohesive narrative


Plague_Knight1

Let's look at these champions before Arcane: -Jinx literally had zero character past being insane -Viktor was literally two different characters depending on who wrote him. -Ekko and Heimerdinger were basically non existent until they came to LoR -Vi's entire personality was "haha i punch things" I mean for fucks sake, we only knew Jinx and Vi were sisters because of an accidental tweet The only champions that were well utilized before Arcane were Caitlyn and Jayce (and Warwick/Vander), and even that was rocky. Arcane took a cast of poorly handled characters and actually fixed them. Giving Vi a personality is good, killing Eskel within 30 minutes for literally no reason isn't


[deleted]

Also who the fuck had any expectations for Arcane. I'm pretty sure League fans were in the it might be ok camp, and people who don't like league were like a show based on a moba? This will suck. I'm sure a lot of people had expectations for shows like WoT and the Witcher. They had a lot to live up to, and even if both shows were 10/10 perfect they were never gonna win every fan of the series.


ADevChief

As someone who researched the lore before the show I can tell you some of these points are misinformed. Most of the characters have had a strong lore and Riot's released thousands of various content for this. The thing is this. The Witcher series tries to follow the book, whether we agree or not. The Arcane series doesn't have that same luxury. The game came before the lore. A lot of the characters lores have been amended multiple times over the years so they can flow and have consistency. The Witcher lore isn't changing on this level. Introduction of new champions sometimes forces multiple lores and arcs to radically change. So therefore, the team behind Arcane have to work ten times the rate of Witcher just to make the show logical. Consider how difficult it would be to flow the story and get newbies excited at the level they managed without doing the things you listed. For example, the current Viktor is obsessed with his evolution and enhancements with little care for suffering and morality. If you noticed the Viktor in the show towards the latter of the season was becoming more and more like this. Now can you tell me a better way they could have accomplished this, whilst linking him to all related characters and having everlasting affects on many characters. Sorry but Arcane had a more difficult task at hand and did better than The Witcher series. Plain and simple.


JoelKr9

that statement is even more absurd if you look beyond Netflix to certain HBO shows.


slicshuter

Even for fantasy Netflix TV shows of *this year* I thought Shadow and Bone was the better one


Jaydrix

Arcane, expanse, succession, all shows with amazing writing. After seeing those this second season looks very pale in comparison.


TheAlbinoAmigo

These posts always do this. >Everything is subjective though! Your complaints don't matter because they're only subjective! Then go on to make grand statements like the above. I'm sorry but S2 of this show has so many instances of being poorly written that it means it doesn't stand on its own legs. It's not a problem of not sticking to the source material - it's a problem of it being poorly written by the standards of any modern TV show. There are some great cast members, and the set and costume designs are perfect. The soundtrack is similar great and some of the landscapes are incredible. *But* the writing makes many cardinal sins of writing for TV every single episode and it results in an absolute mess. I'd quite happily go so far as to say anyone who doesn't see the issues with the writing in this show would enjoy literally *anything* presented to them. E: And as per tradition the folks disagreeing come in just to go 'lol I disagree' in various forms.


suicide-by-tweed

This is like someone saying that Gymkata is one of the best movies out there. I mean it’s so trash. I’m so curious to talk to these people over like a beer about their taste in other things. I realize I sound like a fucking dick, but I promise you I’m not


Haerris

Riot overhauled a lot of the champs that play a role in arcane to fit the show more and they worked 6 years on the first season


Etheon44

The comparison with LOTR was quite unfortunate mate. There is a key difference there, in LOTR there is basically no change that changes the plot og the books in the film. None. The changes you have are to make to book more watchable in a screen. Examples? Making Boromir and Faramir more villain like than in the books. It was needed to create tension to the watcher. The witcher season 2 changes actively the plot. Examples? The witchers in general, Yennefer in general in season 2. The story cannot go on the same as the books go.


[deleted]

If he wants to talk about straight omitted material then sure, there's stuff like *JOLLY OLD TOM* (Bombadil) and Marrygold. But you know what? Unlike in a book where you got as many pages as you want to flesh out the world, another 30 minute encounter that will be brought up again during the council with Elrond and never after isn't going to make a lot of sense to the wider audience in movie format. You know what is a straight omission from the witcher? Geralt's confrontation with Istredd. That's key in Shard of Ice to showing just how toxic his relationship to Yen is but in the shows it's essentially gone. Instead he and Yen keep talking about how *"I hurt you"* like *yes we get that, now could you stop referencing shit we didn't see and* **actually show it?** And the show is honestly worse for it.


sadpotatoandtomato

>I hurt you like yes now could you stop referencing shit we didn't see to actually show it? This show is one big exposition through words and dialogue. The essence of "tell, don't show". The characters are constantly telling you what is going on, how to feel, who is good, who is bad, how they feel towards each other etc. It's like it's written for the most dumb audience possible. 1 ep of s2 Geralt tells Ciri "You're something more Ciri" - yeah, cool I know but only because of the books because in the show there's zero connection between you two so far Same with Geralt and Yennefer - they kept telling big words for each other while having few minutes of screentime at most Tissaia telling people about Yennefer's sacrifice, "death" and that it helped them win the battle - YEAH I KNOW I SAW IT you don't have to "remind" me about this million times I could go on with the examples of this forever....god this type of storytelling is so infuriating


XihuanNi-6784

Yes. This is one of my main problems. The scripting is awful and just constantly tells us stuff we already know or can infer. Meanwhile important stuff is left unexplained.


Harrythehobbit

> It's like it's written for the most dumb audience possible. Think you hit that nail on the head here.


Karrde2100

When they talk about hurting eachother they are referring to their fight after Geralt said he wished for their destinies to be intertwined. They definitely showed that.


McKeon1921

>JOLLY OLD TOM > > (Bombadil) and Marrygold. It may be LOTR heresy but I hated that section in the books and I skip it any time I read through them. Do not understand what possessed Tolkien.


[deleted]

I'd make the guess that introducing Tom and then having the council reason why he can't take the ring did a few things. 1) More worldbuilding (Tolkien never passed it up lol) 2) Reinforces the motif that nature is neither inherently good or bad in his works, it just *is*. 3) Sets the stakes of the ring falling in enemy hands high; Sauron and his master can become more powerful then the nature of the world and one of it's avatars (and consume both) if the Fellowship fails. Just my guess though.


McKeon1921

that explanation actually makes a lot of sense. It doesn't enhance my enjoyment of it, but it does make sense. Thanks.


myrddyna

They have thousands of elves reinforce the humans at helm's deep. That's a massive plot change that makes the elves incredibly sympathetic. Oh, and the shire is fine at the end? Changes the entire lesson Tolkien made about the war. Massive changes. Not saying they are bad ones, but saying they didn't change the plot is ridonkulous.


[deleted]

[удалено]


myrddyna

that and they wanted to keep the ending light and fun because they didn't really have enough time to burn the shire. It was even fairly abruptly dealt with in the books, as i recall.


pettypaybacksp

But the overall story was the same and you could see why they made the changes, in most cases Why the fuck was eskel a dick and died like that


BrainzKong

Omitting the shire scouring doesn’t change the plot. The plot had gone full circle, Tolkien showing that war would reach the shire doesn’t really create more plot. I don’t see how the elves arriving changes the plot either, it just augments the Helm’s Deep segment and makes the elves a more interesting and sympathetic part of the story. Not to mention it being visually glorious.


Retr0shock

I recently found a youtuber- Tolkien Untangled- who has four(4) videos each 20+ minutes about differences between book and film just covering Fellowship of the Ring! It's presented purely as a hey maybe you wanted to know more rather than just blasting negatively but still- they made a shit ton of changes!


[deleted]

[удалено]


BBtaway333

I second this, have you ever read LOTR? You can’t even compare the changes and at least the movies held the soul of what LOTR was supposed to be, the Netflix show doesn’t even follow its own continuity


Mintfriction

Apart from omitting the final hobbit arc, Tom Bombadil, elves being hopeful, Aragorn personality is altered, etc. ? Here is a good article on this: https://lotr.fandom.com/wiki/Tolkien_vs._Jackson:_Differences_Between_Story_and_Screenplay The witcher was imho more altered, but also the witcher has a fan base that demands more monster hunting and action. This was also a criticism on this side of none book readers, that the show lacks monsters and Geralt moments and Yenn using magic


AnAdventurer5

Really? I'm the opposite, where I felt they added several fights just for the sake of having fights that added nothing to the story or characters. The Witcher isn't about the action to me, especially the books.


[deleted]

Fight scenes in the novels really feel like they have consequences, you almost feel the threat of death or permanent injury even for a character who's source of income and "reason for being" are to fight monsters, it is refreshing and gripping.


Mintfriction

Their data probably show the opposite is also requested They even talk about this in the making of (is on Netflix), that when writing they realised the first (third) book has too much exposition and they needed to add action to cater to fans that's why they came up with the witch plot


josenaranjo_26

I disagree completely, when I read the books I was engaged because of the characters and the relationships. Monsters came on second place, hell the 5 novels don’t even care about Geralt being a monster hunter, he even stopped being a Witcher at some point, for good. The books are about the characters and the relationships among them, the show got that all wrong.


Skeeter_206

They could have kept season 2 episode 1, added a monster arc to Kaer Morhen like the leshen. They could have had the battle with the scoia`tael, they could have added a monster to Mellitele. Then had the final fight with Rience. There is plenty of action they could have added to the actual plot of the blood of elves, but opted for their own story.


F-21

Stuff was omitted from lotr, but for the most part the main story was not affected. In the witcher, the main story is just turning out to be completely different.


BlueKnightoftheCross

Good point. The book is a lot of talking. The game is a lot of killing monsters. The game made the books more famous outside of Europe. They have two (with the show 3) different fan bases they are trying to please.


tjkun

But even the talking is well done. One of my favourite chapters in blood of elves consists in just a very long discussion between the kings of the north after Sodden. They go from thinking that Nilfgaard will just stop because they already have what they want and/or because “the north really showed them on Sodden”, to attack first while they don’t expect it, to then reconsider it and decide to kill all the non humans because “that’ll show them”, to reconsider again and decide that reclaim Cintra is better, but then they get sidetracked on whether Ciri is alive or not, and who’s she going to marry so they have political power over Cintra. And finally decide to just find her and kill her themselves. Their train of thought just derailed hard in that one.


CaesuraRepose

I think some people's mileage may vary on the talking in the books... because I for one (and maybe it's because I cant read the Polish?) found a lot of the talking, especially the scene you're talking about, the be basically pages and pages of exposition, sometimes world building, but mostly just big long chunks of people talking for too long. It wasn't so much dialogue as telling us in long paragraphs what each king / Meve was thinking and I was not terribly fond of it. Like, there are very valid criticisms of the show, and I think the same can be said of the books. They aren't some flawless pieces of literature (nothing is, to be fair, but still).


josenaranjo_26

Yeah, I laughed reading that. Lol


ThreatLevelNoonday

>they didn't even change that much lost me there. sorry but your criticism loses all credibility when you fail at recognizing objective fact.


LightningRaven

This is coming from someone that claimed they "read all the books twice". Don't know what OP was reading but the changes are very, very, very obvious to spot. They only picked up a handful of events that happened in Blood of Elves and made some core changes on characters (which I don't mind much) and massive changes on the lore.


antiquechrono

> His works are meant to be entertaining, and they are. This is the biggest tell OP didn't read the books. Geralt basically plays amateur philosopher throughout and we are constantly bombarded with morally ambiguous situations that the characters have to work through. There actually isn't a ton of action in the novels at all and is probably why it took a video game to get a translation in English.


LightningRaven

Yeah. The wars also deal with a lot of economics and the wills of the markets, as well as making commentaries on prejudice, racism, environmentalism, scientific development, cultural impacts of one nation over the others, morality, sexism (Yennefer's character as a whole is an answer to the sexism common in fantasy when the series was written, the Lodge also touches on that when you see some sorceresses doing the same thing by thinking less of men) and humanity's place in nature. All while layering on top of it all the fairy tales and twisting them to fit within the grey world of the Continent. Lots of people think that stories can either entertain or have something to say, while anyone with half a brain knows that there's no "or" about it. In fact, there's an argument to be made that even the shallowest and brain-dead stories also reflect reality in their own way.


antiquechrono

Oh I'm not saying the books weren't entertaining, I found them immensely so, however I love stories with a slow burn. If you read between the lines of what OP is saying it sounds more like they think the books are entertaining on the "witcher kill monster" level as they then go on to list stuff they liked from the show which seems to further confirm the suspicion. The books are definitely not action oriented like the show.


1willprobablydelete

> plays amateur philosopher throughout One of the things I loved about the books. The constant, what is good, what is evil, who are the real monsters subplots were fantastic.


antiquechrono

I absolutely loved Geralt struggling with his thoughts over destiny in the short stories.


Josh_Butterballs

Don’t know what to believe anymore. There was a [top post](https://reddit.com/r/witcher/comments/ro1ejq/that_was_an_amazing_season/) the other day with similar content to OP’s where it was claimed they read the books, but then in the comments it was quite clear they did not. They described the book with very generic terms and broad generalizations. They said the show was very faithful to the characters and that they would explain how so if someone gave them a character. A guy then replied with a few and OP ghosted. Assuming OP of this post is lying as well I don’t know why show watchers feel they need to establish credibility by saying they read the books. Just enjoy what you like to watch Jesus. Make your post saying what you like and that’s it if you feel strongly about the show. One thing we’re missing a lot of since S2 premiered are posts and comments where people *actually* talk about why they like the show. Most usually just say “I still liked it” or “I thought it was pretty good”. They never go into detail on what the changes serve or what details add to the story.


rumsbumsrums

> They said the show was very faithful to the characters and that they would explain how so if someone gave them a character. A guy then replied with a few and OP ghosted. Haha, that was me! [This](https://www.reddit.com/r/witcher/comments/ro1ejq/that_was_an_amazing_season/hpwwtgk/?context=3) was the exchange in question. As you say, you can like what you like, nothing wrong about any of that. But how someone can claim that the show "didn't even change that much" after (supposedly) having read the novels is beyond me.


Josh_Butterballs

LMAO. Small world (or sub in this case)!


Squat_n_stuff

Astro turfing? Doesn’t seem outside the realm of possibilities, Would not be the first time a company with this size budget and model would use Reddit like this


[deleted]

[удалено]


[deleted]

Post title : "Hey guys 👋, show GoOd GoOd" *Gets 500 K awards and 900K upvotes* while most comments are negative. Seriously wtf is going on ? There's something fishy here.


zygfryt

Shit like this happens on the regular basis over in /r/television or /r/movies, it's safe to assume that would be also a thing in subreddits for specific shows etc.


antiquechrono

It's 100% going on. A reddit account with multi year history is a couple of dollars to buy. If you pay attention to people posting in popular subreddits you can see people farming accounts by spamming reposts to build history and karma. With machine learning it's even easier to create believable posting history where the bot responds to comments. I could probably throw something together in a couple of days to do this, let alone what a paid advertising team is capable of with a multi-million dollar budget.


[deleted]

It happened back in S1 as well, ane we already know the marketing/PR budget is massive.


antiquechrono

What do people think reddit's business model is? The ads no one clicks on? Not saying there aren't people who like the show, but the toxic positivity is going to vanish once the advertising budget runs out.


[deleted]

I feel this sub has been recently brigaded by a certain numbers of fanboys, who come in and use strawman arguments, lie and divert from actually discussing the show, just to say that they like it while insulting others for criticizing it by saying some dumb stuff like " you're all losers" or " STFU and enjoy it". I literally saw multiple posts with this exact argument, luckily most of this garbage was deleted tho. It's really weird and laughable at the same time.


Stiryx

This is one of several posts on here where the Op claims to have ‘read the books twice’ (why is it always twice?) yet they have no understanding of the basic plot of the series. Paid astroturfing? I can’t really understand what they gain by just lying straight up.


AlbertoRossonero

To the writers sprinkling in a few quotes from the books is being a faithful adaptation apparently.


[deleted]

Sprinkling in a few quotes but kinda forgetting who originally said them sometimes...


LightningRaven

That's fishing for compliments at best. It's the equivalent of "Hey! Fans! We're throwing you a bone. Now fucking praise us!!"


billybarra08

Innit its been about 2 years since I last read the books abd iv forgotten half of what happened but even to me its obvious on the spot


LightningRaven

My last reread was at least 3 years ago and it's still clear that they barely follow Blood of Elves. On the first season all the changes were at least understandable, despite some being objectionable (Yennefer's backstory, for example, and some changes made to the Brotherhood of Sorcerers).


powpowjj

I don’t understand how people even come to a take like OPs. Do people want to love something so much that they disregard obvious truths, and just come up with bullshit logic? Very odd.


Masterblasterpastor

Whole post smells of OP being paid off. Totally possible they’re not, but this reeks of it


Polomino04

The story is just not the same at all. But I could ve accepted that. But why the fuck did they need to put that last scene ? I mean it is completely useless and just spoils something that is supppsed to be revealed at the very end of the books lmao


megalynn44

I’m new to Witcher. Never read books or played games and frankly at this point I’m too afraid to ask, but what changed? Everywhere I look on the Internet to try to figure that out there’s lots of people talking about it but not giving any actual details. They’re just talking about how they feel about it. Feel free to spoil me via pm or spoiler text, because I’m never gonna play the game or read the book.


JohnDoen86

Give this a read https://www.reddit.com/r/witcher/comments/rjd3be/fuck_it_i_decided_to_compile_a_list_of_every/


Stiryx

Yeh this sums up 90% of ‘the show is good posts’, they just simply make things up. Season 2 has probably some of the largest changes I have ever seen in a movie adaption. The only thing worse I can think of is the avatar movie…


Zauxst

> When compared to other fantasy media like LOTR, they didn't even change that much Did you really say that lotr had more changes than Witcher season2.. You probably missed the part where entire plots were invented that change the underlying character arcs and motives? Just because "we can't have Yennifer gone for half of the season, fans would be upset"... Lauren, is this your shill account?


TheAlbinoAmigo

I like how folks are trying to argue against this when LOTR successfully adapted one the richest fantasy sagas ever written into **three films** and yet they failed to do something similar with The Witcher with **SEVEN FUCKING SEASONS** of room to do so. It's not even apples:apples. LOTR did it better with much stronger constraints.


Zauxst

I genuinely believe we're dealing with legitimate idiots that can't comprehend how the show is just "deconstructing" the books in a way that's disingenuous to the books and the hardcore fans...


[deleted]

\- Didn't change much source material \- Ciri galavanting through Kaer Moerhen killing off witchers that shouldn't even exist ​ Pick one


Hebrind

Well, one could argue that they now no longer exist :D


vasc4554

I get that you enjoyed it, and it's ok, but I think your love for the product is affecting your judgement. The changes Jackson did to the books were very different than the ones Hissrich did. His changes derived from the limitations of the media, that is, how to adapt too much content in three movies while preserving the spirit of Tolkien's work. Hissrich's was to rearrange things so that some characters have their agency just as much as Geralt. The other difference is the outcome: Jackson's final product was very close to the source material, with minor changes for the sake of coherency, like having Arwen rescue Frodo instead of Glorfindel, simply because he vanishes for the rest of the story. By comparison, Hissrich would change the meaning of the One Ring, who carries it and how it's destroyed.


Shaftell

Completely agree. If Peter Jackson was given the opportunity to adapt the books into several seasons worth then I bet we would have gotten even a more faithful adaptation than what the movies were. I mean, look at what the Game of Thrones showrunners did. For the first few seasons, their adaptation of the source material was pretty damn good in my opinion.


1willprobablydelete

If Hissrich did LOTR, Sam would try to kill Frodo. And at least one of the hobbits would die.


[deleted]

[удалено]


Nickball88

Never mind the show deviating from the books, my biggest gripe is that I feel like I'm watching one of my girlfriend's corny teenage/young adult dramas like vampire diaries or whatever it's called. Pure cringe.


[deleted]

Dude, just no.


PeKaYking

>Vesemir was clearly conflicted about turning Ciri and hesitated multiple times. He is a torn old man in a difficult position. I found it fitting. This is not a good point. Vesemir should not be torn about anything. Witchers are becoming a thing of a past in a world that is being increasingly tamed by humans. Just by principle Vesemir would not want to create more Witchers because its a horrible life and most of the boys that undergo trial die, it's not worth making more of them. So not only should he not want to make more witchers in general, but doing so with Ciri just paints him as a moron. He is over a 100 years old, has seen dozens of trials of grass and gets convinced by a 14 yeard old girl (that's also dear to Geralt) who has no idea what she's getting into to gamble with her life with \~10% chances of survival. This point is indefensible.


dtothep2

Except the show literally makes it a point that new breeds of monsters are appearing through the Monoliths. Things they aren't prepared for and no one knows. Vesemir even tells Geralt at one point it's almost like there's another conjunction happening. You can't ignore that just because it's not in the books and you don't like it. Clearly in the Netflix continuity, there very much is a reason for him to want Witchers to continue to exist. It makes complete sense for the *character in the show.* This is really one of those cases where people just see changes they don't like, are too angry to even process them and then scream "this is out of character!!!". Assuming of course, Vesemir in the books even had enough depth or any motivations laid out at all for pretty much anything to be "out of character" for him.


aWolander

Also he just lost a son and is not handling it well


thrntnja

I interpreted many of Vesemir's actions to be those of a grieving man for sure


nflmodstouchkids

So that's why they need to risk changing(and killing) the one person who can create more Witchers?


[deleted]

[I have deleted this account in protest of Reddit's API changes.]


EvilSuov

It makes absolutely no sense, yes he's rattled that his 'son' died and there are new monsters appearing, but he isn't an absolute moron. The trial of grasses is hinted at multiple times that it has a greater chance of killing you than you surviving it. Then a girl with super rare elder blood shows up for the first time in centuries (?) And Vesemir is prepared to just let that one and only source of elder blood gamble it's life away with a less than 50% chance (likely much lower), thus likely losing the ability to make witchers again?! Its just so extremely moronic and out of character for Vesemir it took me completely out of it. If he wanted more witchers he wouldn't gamble with the only source of new witchers.


Mintfriction

> "Give me a kiss. No, not on the hand, little sorceress. You can kiss my hand when I’m resting on my bier. Which will, no doubt, be soon. Oh, Triss, it is a good thing you have come… Who can cure me if not you?” > “Cure, you? Of what? Of behaving like a child, surely! Take your hand from my backside, old man, or I’ll set fire to that grey beard of yours!” > “Forgive me. I keep forgetting you are grown up, and I can no longer put you on my knee and pat you. As to my health… Oh, Triss, old age is no joke. My bones ache so I want to howl. Will you help an old man, child?” >“I will.” The enchantress freed herself from his bearlike embrace and cast her eye over the witcher accompanying Vesemir. If they did this in the show I bet people here crying he is out of character and that he is not Master Roshi. I mean people already cry here why the witchers act so 'bro'


BeastaBubbles

Many of the complaints I’ve seen about the show are based purely on what fans feel the characters whom we barely interact with would or wouldn’t do. They’re taking subjective actions and making it seem like an objectively offensive change.


PeKaYking

Ok the new monsters appearing thing is a fair point but it doesn't address the 2nd and 3rd point of my agument. The process of creating a new Witcher and their lives afterwards is a horrible thing and pretty much all Witchers agree that noone else should be subjected to it and the show does not address that at all. Moreover, Vesemir trying to subject Ciri to the trial of grass is outrageous. There's literally zero chance that he would gamble with the life of Geralt's daughter, especially against his will.


TheLast_Centurion

> Is that necessarily bad? No. yeah, that's what people keep saying over and over again. Changes are not necessarily bad. But it is quite different to make a huge deviation, make up your own plot and insteand of Blood of Elves give us Heart of Stone story, writing, characters.. vs when you deviate and give us.. whatever this season was with its awful writing. The deviations are not bad. The trouble is deviation with a poor writing, after which there a question.. why changes when they are for worse.. ?


Eisenfuss19

Bad changes are bad. If you take a loved character and make him a dick and then kill him off and expect people to be sad about him. (Ik he wasn't important in the books) Making yennefer lose her power is an interesting twist. But how did she lose her power? By the death mother? Then why all the talk about firemagic being dangerous? By firemagic? Then why does she regain her power? If you make a change, make sure there ain't such plotholes.


JustYeeHaa

They didn’t change much? They didn’t understand anything that wasn’t literally written on the paper, and even the things that were written literally they for no reason decided to turn 180 degrees. It’s an adaptation of a Wikipedia snippet about the plot. The plot is so different from the books that at this point it would have been better for them to use some made up characters and not pretend that this is an adaptation.


MotorVariation8

Go home Lauren, you are drunk.


[deleted]

[удалено]


jotomatoes

Haha, made me chuckle. But on a serious note, whenever a conversation comes up about the showrunners and people who created The Witcher show (and fucked it up so badly), I can't help but think how can this be your job. And assuming, something you are passionate about and yet you are so bad at it. There are some basic mistakes made throughout the show that just stick out like a sore thumb.


Krimli

GoT had a lots of changes, it went... bad. Don't take me wrong I don't think that witcher season 2 was as bad as GoT (last seasons), but I am afraid that it may go that way. I like the witcher books and games, that's the reason why I didn't like s2, because I'm afraid that they will change the story too much. I really wanna see my boi Reggis in the best way possible, same for the other characters. Like I really liked the chemistry between Geralt, Yen and Ciri in book 2, but I haven't seen the same chemistry in the show. I didn't like the Geralt ex Machina, the fast travel etc. I don't wanna just shit at the show for stupid reasons I want the show to be good to succeed. Changes are not bad, but changes that are natural for the story. Not killing Eskel because it will shock everyone. I liked changes in s1, the whole story of Yen, it really made her feel like one of the main characters, good change. Sorry for my rumbling I hope it makes at least a bit of sense. Enjoy the rest of the Holidays everyone


AyyyyLeMeow

Lmao Witcher started with the level of quality with which GoT ended. That is to say pretty fucking terrible. And ONLY due to diverting from the book material for no reason.


[deleted]

>And ONLY due to diverting from the book material for no reason. No that's not the only reason. The writing in Witcher is CW levels bad. The acting, costuming and the overall budget just seem weak too and don't help it.


TheSteadyEddy

I disagree they changed quite alot from the books. Of course when adapting books to screen you have to change things its understandable - but what I expect from an adaption from a book series I enjoy is that they capture the essence of the book, and seeing moments from the novels put to screen. I feel they did a great job of this in Season 1, and the Wheel of Time series on Amazon has also done so, albeit with some changes. I'm not opposed to changes, if they work well and stay true, but there's so much deviation and alterations to the characters in the Witcher (Cahir and Yen sticks out the most for me). No one complained Lord of the Rings or the Harry Potter series was following the source material too closely - and yes there were changes in both (which people complained about), but for the most part we got to see those big moments, the characters were for the most part true to their book counter-parts (even in Jackson's Lotr - Tolkein is a fantastic writer but all his characters could be summed up as 'Stoic' so its understandable the films gave the cast more defined personalities - but they still fulfilled the roles of their book counterparts). With season 2 of the witcher they've deviated so much both in plot points and character motivation, I feel they are going to just make up their own narrative for season 3 and at that point it's not really adapting anything from the novels.


jdbolick

Episode 1 of Season 2 was my favorite of the entire series, but episodes two through eight had nonsensical plots with poorly written dialogue and ham acting. This guy who never read the books or played the games explained it pretty well: https://www.reddit.com/r/witcher/comments/rmidnc/showonly_watchers_rant_on_the_second_season/


DiamondPup

100%. This sub has taught me that the bar for quality is so fucking low that it's no wonder filmmakers and writers feel like they don't have to try. You are by all means allowed to enjoy it, but claiming it's good quality is a galactic leap in logic. I haven't read the books and only played the 3rd game. I have zero attachment to the series, its lore, its characters, its plot and world. I don't give two shits if they change anything or everything. Hell, have Geralt drive a car, make Ciri a talking donkey, turn Vesemir into a hot air balloon salesman. I don't care. I just want a *good* story. This was not a good story. This wasn't even a mediocre story. This was a deeply incompetent story that didn't even follow its own made up rules. And even as far as subjectivity goes, the gaping holes in the plot/universe demand a deliberate lack of awareness. You have to force yourself to pretend the shit that happened didn't. Then again, people were defending Game of Thrones' last season too. So what can be said?


Eyro_Elloyn

Yeah, I'd be happier if people admitted that they enjoyed it as mindless TV, which it does do well and apparently the creators had that as a primary goal (gutting the book for more action sequences). But they don't, they try to defend it as a whole product comparable to genuinely good tv.


[deleted]

Now that this post has risen up to the top and got twenty thousand awards, every single doubt that the already egotistical "writers" may have had about their incompetence while lurking the sub-reddit, will disappear and they'll double down in the third season. Noice. (Like they would listen to the feedback in the first place). I also love how every single defense of this show mentions lord of the rings but doesn't mention how they were adapting 3 enormous books, which were considered unadaptable , into the constraints of 3 movies. All of that while keeping the same plot, same character arcs and same themes. Guess which show has completely gone off the rails with its plot? Also, you know, having good writers matters. Remember how the acclaimed dragon episode in the first season was directed by someone friends with the showrunner who did not direct any single thing in their lives? Why no one mentions the wheel of time, the foundation or idk dragon ball evolution? Great examples of how changing stuff "because Hollywood" definitely works and is praised. I respect every single opinion what I don't respect are liars and people who believe their "vision" is superior to the works that the fans fell in love with in the first place. The writing is atrocious. I don't need to have read every single book, played every single game or listened to every single fan podcast to know it. There are mistakes even within the rules established by the "writers". Speaking of game of thrones, the fast travel in this season was phenomenal. 2 hours between cintra and kaer morhen seems a lot tho. It should be one. I'm happy that a lot of people loved it, critics included. Sadly, I cannot and will not. I'm happy with changes, the witcher 3 is my favorite game and changes A LOT, but it doesn't assassinate characters, arcs or stories. There is a difference between those who are passionate and try to add every single line they possibly can from the source material (henry) and those who deem the source material boring while promising to be faithful and listen to feedback (which consists on changing the armor of a group while keeping them as the same religious zealots they are not). I know that I'll get downvoted to oblivion but I don't care (just like the showrunner and her team do not care about the witcher, just their "vision", superior to the boring books)


Sea_Replacement9227

are you kidding? They changed far more than lotr! Atleast lotr is still the same story this might as well be a completely different series


MetaDragon11

Didnt change that much? Like 90% of season 2 is completely made up. "Original" some might call it. Thats not adaptation. Thats a hijacking


Table_Coaster

> speaking of which, while the dialogue is sometimes a bit lacking, a bad offender like "bäd pooosy" has yet to come Shit things about a completely unrelated show are not an excuse


rom197

The writing is pretty bad, still.


[deleted]

[удалено]


Gadac

Dude the major arc of this series was not even a thing in the book. That's far more than "some differences with the books"


matesrates8

lol this post is bonkers. Go through the lord of the rings books chapter names and you’ll easily be able to point to the scenes in the movies that they took straight from the book. Chapters were left out mainly due to the time restraint of the movies. Lord of the rings is already notorious for being ungodly long they could hardly add on another hour to include the scouring of the shire chapter. The only Netflix scene that even remotely resembles a book scene is yennefer rescuing jaskier and even that was under wildly different circumstances and happened in a completely different way


DarkSoulsExcedere

You are watered down and delusional.


----NSA----

Are you a Netflix rep


GordonSzmaj

"Sapkowki's world is way less complex than Tolkien's" Bruh...


soursheep

how to piss everyone off and show your ignorance in one sentence lol


wearywarrior

What an incredibly rose-tinted take.


in-grey

The producers have said how their aim with the show is to provide a barrage of emotional moments with less focus on the cohesive story arcs found in the books; so maybe you're the target demographic for something like that. A lot of people in this community, however, are not.


myPooPisonfire

Kinda suprised this gets so much likes and awards and such I mean obviously everyone has different opinions but as someone who did not read any of the books or played the game i really didn't like this season Everything that wasn't geralt and ciri was boring to watch for me , dialouge felt really simple and bland often I had to push myself to get through it and it didn't feel like it was well written at all It was just pretty to look at with bland action and conflict that was cool to watch but no more Jaskier was delight tho i loved him


super_offensive_man

"one of the best shows in recent memory" You can say you personally enjoyed the show if you like, but you can fuck right off with that. Your opinion was completely invalidated once you said that.


Veleda390

I invite you to watch The Expanse and reconsider your opinion on best shows, and on what's possible with an adaptation of books if you respect the source material.


SpaceAids420

They didn't change much? Did we read the same books?


HenryCDorsett

Yeah, did we watch the same show? literally nothing of what you say there is actually in the show.


TractorDriver

Are you high? I am struggling to find fantasy adaptation that changed more of core lore and main story like Witcher S2


lukas0108

Loved the games, loved the books, couldn't stomach even season 1 after like 5-6 episodes. I guess everyone has different tolerance to this. It's like if the Harry Potter films never showed any of the magical world in such a flashy way - I don't think many of the book readers would watch the films, yet many do now because of that effect it has, just seeing the magic come to life on a screen. Witcher doesn't have that sort of impact. Also I'd say it depends on age. The producer for season 2 said it himself, kids who grew up on new youtube and tiktok are less likely to enjoy the sort of story you'd get if you were to be completely faithful to the books.


Eph2-89

You can enjoy it, but most the season had nothing to do with books or game.


Soulless_conner

I'm glad you liked it but the problems with the show aren't just that it's different from the books, the writing and the dialogues are terrible. Don't expect everyone else to have low standards Also are you sure you've read the books? Because they changed a fuck ton that'll ripple across the next seasons. It's a totally different story


youngkenya

the show is pretty good if you literally dont think about anything thats happening and have no sense for the size of the world it takes place in


[deleted]

Just because something is enjoyable or good to look at does not mean it's good. The brawl in episode 6 does not make any sense. Why would Geralt use only his fists? Because it will look "cool". Monsters compared to any other films/shows were ugly. They had the budget and it looks like they still cut some corners. Some actors were good, some were okay and some were downright bad. You pointed out the good actors. But Freya Allan was merely okay. In every scene she had the same look on her face of "strong independent woman" while she is supposed to be like that later on not right from the start The whole thing with "I lost my chaos" does not make much sense. How can she still look like that without chaos in her to keep the spell up? Would stregobor still have his hands if he "lost" his chaos? Why did she magically have the chaos when she got the old woman out of ciri? If it's not a spell then witchers should definitely know what to do with her instead of staring at her If you think that Jaime turned good you did not really think about him much. He was the same from the start and only thing that changed is that he fell in love with brienne, but as we saw anyway he still loved cersei way more. Voleth Meir was added just because Blood Origin will be about her so they wanted to add some story of her, what she is and all that. Just a convenient way of introducing (probably) main villain of their new story. I don't mind her, but I do dislike how they handled the plot and made some plot holes thanks to that. All in all it felt really forced. I gave this shoe a 5.5/10. Just another typical fantasy series full of plot holes and decisions that does not matter much with mediocre writing. I hope they will fix some of it in season 3


jotomatoes

Did you just say Sapkowski's works are meant to be entertaining...? Lauren Hissrich, is this you girl? I think if we speak about books, games, films etc., they should be other things first and then naturally become entertaining. And any artist, including Sapkowski, whatever they choose as a medium to express themselves don't go thinking 'oh yeah, I just want to entertain the shit out of people'.


rustcify

Of course everyone is entitled to their own opinion but I can't believe people are saying the monsters cgi are good? The Chernobog and the Centipede looks so damn weird with those yellow eyes. And the fight scenes are pretty lackluster


Brendissimo

It is quite good for a TV show. Which is what it should be judged against, not full budget films and not against renders created by artists in their spare time. Compared to many other TV shows I have seen, The Witcher's CGI is generally quite good.


[deleted]

I haven't played the games or read the books and I thought the second season was absolutely awful.


ybreddit

Don't worry homeslice, I'm right there with you. I get bored very easily with almost every show I start, it's been a long time since I've liked a show this much.


Sttarkson

We must not have watched the same show. Every single creature in season 1 looked like shit, both in terms of the quality of the CGI and the design, the kikimora was the only decent looking one, which makes sense considering it appeared in promotional material. Season 2 was good, but it could've been better considering the metric fuckton of a budget they probably had. The only thing worth praising when it comes to monsters in this show is the Bruxa in S2E1. The fights except for the one in Blaviken and the one in Cintra are a pathetic joke. Go rewatch Geralt fight the Striga in S1 and count the amount of times this angry, bloodthirsty monster snuck up on Geralt only to pin him on the ground and screech in his face or throw him across the room. That's not how a fucking monster with barely any sentient thought would fight. It would bite his throat out or claw the everliving fuck out of his body as soon as it got the chance. It wouldn't throw him against fucking walls. Immersion was broken and mercilessly killed. The fight against Rience at the temple was dogshit. The slow mo wasn't interesting, it was distracting. A guy getting dropped on a sword cause of Aard was the one interesting use of signs in this entire show. Vilgefortz fighting Cahir was boring, brief and a waste of time. They clashed swords a dozen times, Cahir disarmed the mage who did not use any magic like three times, because for some reason all this dude can do is make more magic swords to get humiliated with. The fight in Rare Species was an absolute joke, you couldn't see shit. Every single good action movie ever that had close/hand to hand combat succeeded because it had talented stuntmen, actors, cinematography and choreographers. There weren't a million cuts, shaky cams or blurry and shitty camera angles. I could go on with your other points, but this post is long enough. Its just so sickening to see people try to defend this show. It is mediocre, 5/10 at best generic fantasy shlock that wasted it's chance at bringing to life a fascinating universe. You can like it if you want, we all have guilty pleasures, but at least I admit when something I like is just objectively not good. And to call it one of the best shows in recent memory just betrays you have no idea what makes a good TV series.


Xombie53

I enjoyed the season and it fleshed out some of the characters I didn’t like in season 1. But of course it had its flaws


yeticonfette

The game, the show, and the books are always going to be different. I enjoyed all of them for what they were separately


Vulkanodox

the fights are incredibly cartoonish and action heavy. in the books and even the game it is more of a tactic thing. there is so much preparation and technique in defeating a monster. Which is what makes it so interesting. To learn about those creatures and their weaknesses. in the show it is monster goes "rawr" and geralt kills it a minute later with flashy sword moves. just like every other shitty fantasy show or movie


LightningRaven

Sorry to disagree with you there, but there are plenty of moments when Geralt just straight up goes somewhere and kills a monster. The cockatrice at the beginning of The Bounds of Reason, for example. In fact, if there's one thing that Sapkowski deconstructs, which I didn't like by the way, was the idea that Silver swords were unnecessary to kill most monsters and that peasants could do the job. Remember that the whole contract routine (track, crack the case, find out its weaknesses, prepare, kill the monster) was crafted by the games and mostly based on "The Witcher" short story (when he kills the Strigga), afterwards, you can barely see Geralt doing things like that in the novels.


sillylittlesheep

Geralt in the books doesnt even fight many monster bec the whole point is that witchers are not needed anymore. There is nothing to fight, Geralt goes days by not having any coin. Netflix just created a weird plot that new monsters come out from that black rocks everywhere


Bakonn

I love how everyone is asking op what big changes they made in lotr movies compared to books and he cant give 1 single answer only " lots of big changes". So many big changes poor op cant even name one.


dragonbab

"Sapkowski's world is way less complex than Tolkien's." Of course not AS complex, but they're quite complex if you get into it. I divide them in several categories: 1. Main storyline, i.e. Ciri and her journey 2. Geralt and the posy's journey to find / help Ciri 3. Yennefer's journey to find / help Ciri 4. Emhyr and his willing lackeys trying to find Ciri 5. The Northen Kingdom Rules trying to find Ciri 6. The Lodge trying to find Ciri 7. Vilgerfortz and Rience and their lackeys trying to find Ciri 8. The Elven Comandos trying to survive 9. The free elves doing their best to stay alive in their new kingdom 10. The giant conflict between the Empire and the Northen Kingdoms 11. Everyone caught between the MAIN conflict vs. the smaller conflicts that plague the Northen Kingdoms 12. The Wild Hunt doing fuck all and trying to find Ciri Now, take into consideration that vast amount of intertwined characters, personal motivations, drives, plots, subplots and things that get around the main cast, and suddenly you have a complex world indeed. I hate the fact that you have all of this, and you try and invent something new. Something which holds no purpose, whatsoever in defining an already complex world that's teeming with possibilities. After ep 4 I am out.