[Sets up a shop to sell pitchforks, torches, lighters, and fuel]

Cyanotetyphas wrote on Nov 20, 2022, 16:16:
Was the show really changing that much from the source material that a fan would be put off? I thought people were generally pleased with this one

Yeah the second season differed quite a bit from the books, it was still enjoyable though. I say this as a fan of the books and the games. Unfortunately we have no idea what went on behind the scenes, but if Cavil had to keep headbutting with the writers to keep true to the character and the world and the stories, then it's no wonder that he left. It's a real shame too. Without him on board I won't be watching.

I don't see veering from the source material as a huge deal-breaker (at least considerably less problematic than what was done in the LOTR show), but damn... losing Caville is a huge blow. If the show still is watchable to me following his exit I'll be more than a little surprised.

I hope Cavill is the next Bond

Sucks real bad. I remember being thoroughly confused watching the first Witcher season but fell in love with it once I knew wtf was going on (never read the books).

I thought season 2 was mostly about Yennefer and Geralt's storylines seemed to be on the fence throughout. Despite that, I did enjoy the season overall. It felt "Witcher"ish even if they veered off actual source material.

My understanding is Henry did bump heads with the writers and direction they're taking the series due to his love for the books and games. Oddly, neither of which they're using to put the show together. Someone mentioned it down below. They have an abundance of material that they could use. Heck, they could turn a side question in Witcher 3 into an entire episode if they wanted to. Just nuts to think that they have to go and make up their own stuff with all that is available.

Oh well, to end this rant, I'll probably be done with the show at season 3 unless reviews say season 4 is otherworldly. To see the show start with Henry as Geralt (whose the main character at the end of the day) and end up changing into someone entirely different mid way through sucks bad.

The books have plenty of good source content that could be used for the stories. The series should’ve been “based on” instead of turning into “inspired by”

Slashman wrote on Nov 20, 2022, 17:38:
Just like in Game of Thrones...you can tell when the writers go offscript because the story is often times a lot of shite when they do.

The same was true of The Walking Dead - most of the worst aspects of that show were usually the result of the writers making up their own crap.

That whole plotline was just pointless. Why kill Eskel? The explanation was that it gave motivation to Geralt to protect Ciri...but I'd say he was already pretty damn motivated and Eskel was an unknown so why would would the audience feel for him when you presented him as an asshole. This was baffling to me.

I get that you cannot always follow the source material word for word...but these trips into odd-land didn't make the season feel better for me. Just like in Game of Thrones...you can tell when the writers go offscript because the story is often times a lot of shite when they do.

The thing is that oddly enough the Witcher in particular has the openings to fill in blanks with monster hunting....which was often the best part of the games. Figuring out what was going on and contrasting the evilness of creatures with the evil nature of humans, and showing that you cannot always tell who is more monstrous. And that monsters at least have an excuse as to why they are evil but humans don't. Exploring that would have filled in the time wonderfully without excursions into nonsense land and breaking the narrative from the books.

Cyanotetyphas wrote on Nov 20, 2022, 16:16:
Was the show really changing that much from the source material that a fan would be put off? I thought people were generally pleased with this one

The second season sharply veered off course from the source material. The whole Voleth Meir plotline was made up by the show writers and not Sapowski.

Was the show really changing that much from the source material that a fan would be put off? I thought people were generally pleased with this one

hard to know how to feel about this. I love Cavill, and he's great in the role, seems we're just wondering why we left. Maybe Season 3 is a shitshow and he wanted out. Maybe he's a primadonna and had unreasonable expectations.

All I know is recasting the lead character 4 seasons-in completely destroys the world-building for me. Why not just end the series and reboot it in a few years?