The Witcher 2019

I did not read the books, and I did not play any of the games (although I heard at least one of the games is of great quality in storytelling) so I went into this show more or less a blank slate.

And boy it is bad.... The writing is just dreadful. I think the writers assumed prior knowledge to the world and characters, and lean on that assumption too heavily.
From the very beginning it is poorly written. Timelines are messy and unclear, exposition is done terribly, worldbuilding looked like an afterthought and taken from a first draft, the pacing is all over the place and inconsistent over time as well inconsistent for each subplot. Episode structure is even irratic. They presented us a continuous story, but several episodes focused more on little episodic adventures that did not impact the main storyline all that much. And for a show with only 8 episodes, that is deadly and lead to other stories being rushed or simply put on hold for the next season (I assume.)

Toward the middle of the show, it started to get a bit better and I thought it could be promising after a bit rocky start, but in the end they could not deliver and it turned into an utter and complete trainwreck (oh that last episode, I almost fell out of my chair several times from disbelieve.) Rushed plot resolutions, while other characters stories crawled to a complete standstill with close to no progression or character development, in somecases even for the whole season.

What the show does have going for it: Photography, sets and costume design are beautiful!

I really did not want to dislike this, but it looked like they actively tried to make me stop watching.

Note: This review is about season 1.

As a big fan of both the games and the novels, I was quite disappointed in this attempt at adapting the world of the Witcher.

This is a world that is vast and filled with ancient history, which makes it a huge endeavor to make people care for it on a TV show. In that specific regard, I regard the show as a huge failure. We're thrown into the world knowing very little, which leaves us with characters emoting about places and events we have no emotional connection to.

It doesn't help that the chronology is a total bloody mess. Why the creators decided it was a good idea to tell three different stories stretched across 50+ years without clearly informing the viewer, I'll never know. I could follow because I read the novels, but as an introduction for someone unfamiliar with the world, it's an awful decision.

Compare this to two massive fantasy adaptations that succeeded at making us care:

• Game of Thrones started small, showing us the people of Winterfell, then introducing the visiting Baratheons and Lannisters. It made us care about the world of Westeros by first showing us compelling characters, then slowly expanding the stakes to encompass the entire world.

• Lord of the Rings had the most epic world-building in arguably the whole genre's history, but again it started small. It made us care about a quaint Hobbit village long before it was time to venture into the greater world.

The Witcher does nothing of this. As a result, when we're shown the massive battle for Cithra in the first episode, it's hard to care even if you're familiar with the setting. It's all just noise and pointless gore.

This tragic misfire carries on throughout the rest of the show. Before we get to experience how awesome Yennefer is, we get to experience her as a misfit whose only apparent redeeming quality is her hunger for power. Geralt himself is interesting from the get-go, but he's all too serious to be sympathetic, at least until Jaskier shows up.

And so, we're left with characters emoting and chewing scenery. It's pretty scenery, sure: the VFX is nice, and the fight scenes are pretty great. But none of this feels lived-in and compelling the way Lord of the Rings was from its very first minutes. The dialogues tend to be arch and clichéd, and the whole affair lacks the subtle realism of Game of Thrones.

And so, as much as I love the characters of the Witcher, I'll continue to look to the novels and the games as the more definitive versions. This is a brave attempt, but as much as it aspires to be top-shelf fantasy TV, it's second-rate at best.

There's one moment where the TV series shone bright: the striga fight. This had all the markings of what made the Witcher stories great, and it was genuinely terrifying and exhilarating. This makes me think that the first season would have been much, much better if it didn't try to build the entire world across a century of conflict, and instead focused on the adventures of Geralt of Rivia as he hunts monsters. Ciri and Yennefer could have been introduced a bit later, and their backgrounds explored in season 2, when we would all be on board for the ride.

As much as it deviates from the novels, I'd recommend The Witcher 3 as the ultimate interpretation of that world. surpsassing even the novels.

I thought this would be one of those shows that got better if I had patience, but it really didn't by the end of season 1. Maybe I'll have to watch season 2, but I get the feeling this show just isn't for me. Maybe I would've enjoyed it more if I read the books or played the games, but I'm way less interested in that now considering how the show went.

The timelines weren't too confusing once I realized what was happening, but it seemed unnecessary as there didn't seem to be any payoff or reason to tell the story that way. Other shows doing the same thing were much more satisfying when things fell into place, and it usually delivered plot points in a meaningful way. I understand certain characters not aging, but the bard, queen, etc. must all have some kind of secret magical background yet to be revealed since they didn't age either. It's hardly the biggest flaw of the show, though.

I laughed at some scenes that were supposed to be serious, like Borch falling to his "death" and his voice as a dragon, some fights, etc. I don't understand the romance between Geralt and Yennefer. I thought maybe their relationship would develop in the earlier timeline and I'd find out why he thought she's amazing, but nothing like that happened.

There is pretty much no character development for anyone other than Yennefer, but even in her case some of it didn't seem believable or I must have missed something. Geralt was fine, especially with the "Hmm" and "Fuck" memes. The bard's relationship to Geralt was fun. The action sequences were alright. None of that is really enough to praise the show for though.

People comparing The Witcher to Game of Thrones must be comparing it to season 7. It's not bad enough to deserve comparisons with season 8, but it's certainly not as good as the first half of the show when it had an actual writer's content to work from.

I started The Witcher right after binge watching The Dragon Prince, an animated series with an age rating of 7+. You'd think it wouldn't make sense to compare them, but The Dragon Prince is better in pretty much every aspect except the number of tits. It has many similar elements like animosity between humans and elves, fantasy creatures like dragons, in-fighting among humans, "good" and "bad" magic, etc. The plot is interesting and has a direction with good use of foreshadowing, characters progress and develop through their experiences, have reasonable motives, and even the romance was more believable and powerful. The comedy was also much better, even though that's more subjective. I'm looking forward to season 4 of The Dragon Prince way more than season 2 of The Witcher.

So I've have to say I've thoroughly enjoyed this, even though I kept getting interrupted. So I may have enjoyed it more if left alone.

I also enjoyed the ps4 game although I hear this was based on the books, which I'm not going to read but I will definitely go back to the game and complete it finally.

But I must say I had a very hard time reminding myself that I was watching Geralt of Rivia "The White Wolf" and his love interest Yennefer, and not Michael Moorcock's Elric of Melniboné "The White Wolf" and his love interest Cymoril.
In which the latter was written 1st.

A complete rip? Maybe/maybe not, Influenced/inspired by Moorcock's creation? Most definitely.

Well the story lines may be a little different in places but the similarities in character looks as well as in many other aspects are uncanny.

I do have to say clearly it is very possible that two people could create two very similar ideas with very symmetrical visions. Even I myself have come up with ideas before that then one day I've seen someone make into a movie or show that felt like it were ripped straight from my head. But who knows, we probably never will.

Judge for yourself by reading the books, googling it or just wait for the supposed Elric series that's supposed to be coming out.
"Fingers crossed it gets a high budget and doesn't get put to shame by this one".

Oh yeah and if you're gonna play around with the whole time jumping thing please do give us the date or a better clue or something.
For example 1 min Geralt could have his renowned scar and the next min he doesn't have his scar, simple.
Definitely binge watch otherwise you might feel you missed an episode or think you forgot something.

And yes yes Elric is my namesake, thanx for that one Dad.......

Visuals/Cinematography: 8/7 ("elves" and humanoid creatures 1-4)
Dialog: 2-6 (uneven, and pathetic given they had the source material and author)
Characters: 1-6 (abomination)

An absolute abortion of the source material, and a travesty of the depth, nuance, and mystery (and romance!) of the characters of Yennefer and Geralt, which immediately bastardized the setup of Geralt and Ciri-- which was the most poignant thing I've read in my life -- and was the heart of the entire series, and something which can not be fixed.

Just read the books, or listen to the wonderful audiobooks' narration by Peter Kenney, if listening in English. The Polish audiobook performances are beyond amazing, and exceed anything I've heard in English, though I won't have the pleasure of understanding it.

===
And yes, Cavill is a great actor, but he still wasn't given a chance by Hissrich and the writers to show even a Glimmer of who the real character of Geralt is. I still personally didn't like him in the role, but that could have been overcome if the showrunners had had any respect for or understanding of the characters and how good writing and narrative work. They are, however, complete hacks and lying hypocrites for saying that they would do a straight adaptation instead of massively inferior spitball rework fanfic, which is what this actually is, put in the kindest of terms.

It's good. Not bad but not great either. It would have benefitted greatly by having 10 episodes. Season felt way too rushed.

Good:

Acting is really good all over. Henry Cavill really feels like he was born to play this part.

The swordfighting is absolutely beautiful and fantastically done. Especially Geralt. Although the bigger battles (not one on ones) are really not that great.

Music/soundtrack is really phenomenal. Got goosebumps at times.

Costume design was really well done. And cinematography was pretty good.

Bad:

The different timelines. Not only is it a bit confusing at times (although that can be forgiven with a decent payoff which IMO does not exist in this show) but it just kills any flow of the show whatsoever and the pacing was really bad at times. I think the show would be a lot better with 10 episodes and focusing the first two or three only Geralt and explaining the world we're in.

Worldbuilding. I feel like they expect only book readers to watch this show. They namedrop/show a lot of stuff but never bother explaining anything to non book readers. Of course a bit of mystery is always good but viewers need to understand this world, how it functions and what rules there are (in regard for magic for example).

Dialogue feels really clunky at times. Geralt is fine but everyone else just felt weird at times.

The CGI was okay but I kinda expected better.

I have hopes that Season 2 will be better with a more linear/cohesive story. Right now only the writing is holding this show back from becoming great. I can see a lot of potential for future seasons.

EDIT AFTER SEASON 2 (and after having read the books in between seasons)

It's a decent and entertaining show on it's own. It's just knowing the books, Henry Cavills absolute love for them and the budget behind the show it could be so much more than just decent.

As a show on it's own it's a solid 8/10. But as an adaption of incredible books? 2/10.

It was obvious there was and is and never will be a way to cater to all fans.
It is impossible if there are only two fans in the whole wide world which have only read the books. Or if there a many of them, all with different first contacts with Geralt and his story, and different backgrounds. A German fan has a different approach to many of the stories compared to for example an American one, because he had heard the fairy tales, which Sapkowski wove into his stories, reinterpreted. Just an example.
So obviously that was something Netflix had in mind and it seemed they cared about it. I would have preferred a different decision (sticking closer to the books), but I see why they did what they did and I think it's the right decision.
They also decided to sway in the minor and sometimes bigger details, sticking to the red line of each story and weaving a new telling around it. It reminds me a little of Neil Gaiman's "Norse Mythology", where he admits that his retelling is deviating from the source in some points, because he is re-telling the stories, not copying them. And that's a good thing. Yes, we might not see some moments of dialogues in Netflix's version, but imagine them as someone telling you Geralt's story as you sit around a camp fire. You don't care about every little detail, you want to hear the story of Geralt and Ciri and how they faced down their destiny. You want a good time and you'll have it.
Yes, some people may be hurt that they experienced a story that wasn't exactly what they expected. Maybe they are not sold on the cast, maybe they hate that there were more than one nude illusion girl in Stregobor's tower or that Geralt didn't cut someone in two in Blaviken. And that's okay. The Witcher fans are a passionate bunch coming from many different directions. Let's give this retelling of our favorite story a chance. It deserves one.

I haven't seen the full season yet, so I'll probably add something to this comment later on.

Season 3 update: I can't imagine this series without Henry Cavill as the titular character (no shade to Liam Hemsworth who is scheduled to pick up the mantle in season 4). Henry Cavill is not only to be applauded for his presence in the role or in fixing the mental imprint of the character in the minds and imaginations of the fans >sigh< but for his desire to remain faithful to the source material of the series. One can't help but wonder how adrift it will become once he leaves the field. I watched this season with bittersweet nostalgia thinking it may be the end of an era. This series will always be about the interplay of the characters and chemistry is hard to replicate. Otherwise my review remains unchanged from my initial impressions.

I’ve watched 2 seasons of THE WITCHER, now, and I find it a compelling series. You just have to wade through a lot of nudity, sexuality and become chummy with the f-bomb (all unnecessary for anything but the gratuitous building a young audience). I was a little annoyed by the anachronistic vocabulary and ideologies but the story arc, the relationships, the dogged ethic of Witcher and the moral dilemmas and redemptive arc of the main characters won me over. Definitely not for all audiences, but for me, I rate it an 8 (compelling) out of 10. [Fantasy Adventure]

I found the show enjoyable overall, but most certainly flawed. It adapts material from the first two books, taking a good amount of liberties in certain areas. Now, I was fine with them making changes, but felt some of them certainly were for the worse. To begin with, the timeline is completely messed up. They wanted to give the story a POV type of thing, following each of the 3 main characters separately, which had me confused for half of the show. There are jumps in time all the time. I genuinely believe that it would have been better if they had just had the story move chronologically.

The POV brings forth another issue, pacing. The most interesting parts to watch were certainly Geralt's, adapted straight from the book. They were adapted pretty well, though a bit rushed at times. It is understandable why they showed Yen and Ciri's stories, though I think that if they had their own separate episodes, the show would have fared better. It leaves a very disjointed feel to the whole story, moving between classic Geralt stories, the weird Yennefer ones and that of Ciri.

Speaking of Geralt, Henry Cavill is the perfect actor to play Geralt. Within a few episodes, he became my default version of the character. I experienced immense enjoyment just watching him be Geralt, there are a lot of subtleties he completely nails, while giving it his own flavour. My other favourite casting choice was Julian, Geralt's troubadour companion. The actor portrays his witty, cynical, comedic relief aspects lovingly well and he is a pretty darn good singer to boot.

The actress of Yennefer does a good job. They show her development from the start to the woman she becomes, which was interesting. There were some weird parts here. I will give it to this way of presenting the story, it makes the mage characters a lot more interesting from the start here.

Now, I have some more issues with Ciri. They missed what the execution in the books had, mainly the connection between Geralt and Ciri. They have the theme of destiny connecting them, but it feels more unsatisfying and contrived. They set up the hunt from her and her powers much earlier, I hope it doesn't lead to the show feeling repetitive later. I just wish they didn't feel so much like a plot device and more like a human being. She is a rowdy tomboy, they only hinted at this once.

Visually, the show looks good. Cinematography is fine, not outstanding, but fine. The CGI is mostly okay, but it has some horrible spots. Fight scenes are amazing, maybe overchoreographed at times, though that is nitpicky.

Loved the music for the show. I was surprised how good it was even. As a person that spent time with all 3 games, each one of which always had an outstanding soundtrack, I wondered how the show would live up to that. It did it excellently. The sound is different from that of the games, but feels very much like the Witcher. Particular fan of the theme of Yennefer and the Toss A Coin For Your Witcher.

All in all, The Witcher is a good show. The first 2 books are in a different format that the other books, being short story collections rather than novels. There was obviously an attempt to streamline the former into the latter to make it more serialised, yet I feel those 2 books make for great TV just the way they are. Episodic with hints of continuity. I have hope there will be improvements in the next season, so I am waiting eagerly.

Edit: As time has passed, I've grown to dislike the show somewhat more. As it is, it is enjoyable, though heavily flawed. It largely butchers the material from the first two books, even though it's arguably the best material to adapt for a TV series. I've changed my rating from a 7 to a 6 and edited out a few parts I don't agree with any more, but my thoughts are mostly the same, I've just realised I felt pressured to give it a higher score so I wouldn't be one of those "the books are better" people, but I think it is perfectly fair to criticise a show when it neither does anything particularly unique with its concept, nor does it do its source material justice.

I'm impressed. Not just at the show as a whole but also at Netflix. The production value is exceptionally good for Netflix. Most of their shows practically look the same, and in some cases, feel the same. This one doesn't. Hopefully, it'll stay that way, and to take it a step further, be even better in the second season. Judging from the general response, I'd imagine that will be the case, but one can still be hopeful. The main complaint I've been seeing from a fair amount of people is the way the narrative was handled: the three separate timelines, the subtle time-jumps between previous scenes and the next, as far as chronologically is concerned, that sort of thing. I understand it but think that people are taking it out of proportion and being too harsh on it, which ends up evolving into not just hating that aspect, as well as dulling the entire show as a whole for said people. Here's my advice: don't delve into the immersion too seriously and deeply. You'll end up making the show seem worse to you than it really is. That issue aside, everything else was very good. The characters...well, the main three, at least, were great and entertaining. The incidental music and soundtrack throughout the show were very immersive. The fight scenes were good, some (much) better than others but all were good. Overall, this was a very enthralling, enjoyable experience. You should really give it a shot. I predict 9 out of 10 people will be pleased that they did.

Binge Worthy!

I’ve read the other comments and there’s mixed reviews. I noted this show had come from a series of books, which I’ve not read and can’t comment on.

I’m dyslexic and therefore don’t get the pleasure of reading. However, I am well educated despite this and in a lead auditor; this has taught me written words no matter how well written are always open to interpretation. When people read, they are lost in their own endless imagination, and each person will have different interpretations. Which makes it difficult to turn books in to shows or films...some people will be unfortunately disappointed.

There’s additionally other variables too, changing books in to a show/film has to have changes to make it possible for limitations, audience, budget, longevity of production etc.

I’ve obviously watched some programs which are based on books, that were read to me as a child, so I do understand why people get disappointed at times.

But, take it as a separate entity, based on the books and don’t expect word for word etc.

For me with no previous knowledge of these books, I absolutely loved the first season. Totally hooked and as I said...binge worthy.

So many fantasy and sci-fi are quite awful, it’s not often they are pulled off well. Of course most were in ore of Games of Thrones, forgetting the disastrous last season which was so essential.

I personally thought this was fantastic! I didn’t love everything if I decided to nit pick; I didn’t like the comedy element they threw in with the Withers musical companion during many episodes. I didn’t hate it either, but it’s a serious show and the comedy element for me degraded it. I didn’t dislike the character or his acting, I simply feel it wasn’t necessary and it was too much. It should have been toned down.

The time sequence in the show was a tad confusing, especially at the beginning until I realised what was going on and then how it tied together. I suppose the show would have been slow without doing so, but it simply wasn’t clear if we were in the past or present at times.

The above are minor irritations and didn’t takeaway my enjoyment of the show.

I’m absolutely delighted to watch an adult fantasy show so well done...such a rarity.

I do hope this show continues, it’s one of my all time favourites to date. I’m jealous I don’t have the means to read and enjoy the books.

I watch mainly fantasy, sci-fi and horror, I love the escapism and I do watch some rubbish to be honest, but I like the storyline even if the budget is low, actors are poor etc. I try not to let these things effect what I choose to watch. But, The Witcher is definitely not in this category, it’s excellent!

A huge thumbs up from me :thumbsup::thumbsup::thumbsup::thumbsup::thumbsup:

This had so much potential!!! They got the budget for sure :type_4:but shit is messy af. I imagine this would have been different if HBO adapted it. What can I say they're JUST damn good at adapting/making adult shows :100:.

Rating:
Characters:3/5
plot:3.5/5
Character Progression:2/5
Storytelling:1/5
Overall:7.5/10

Storytelling;

Whoever is doing the fucking storylines/storytelling needs to be fucking fired. This could have been the next Game of Thrones easily if it had masterpiece storytelling. The Storylines are all over the place. I understand in S1 they're trying something unique and structuring the timeline like the fucking book. It held my attention but from there it went downhill real quick.
This atrocious storytelling is nuts :skull:. They give you the sense of a huge dreadful event coming and some characters just jumping in for the action aka Ciri. This is where the storytelling comes into play!!. This is what moves the villains and heroes as they interact with the plot.

In this, The Witcher fails terribly. The characters pop up and do something that you'd not give a fuck about. A villain comes, demands to have the girl and kills other people. That's IT:type_1_2:‍♂.

Character Progression;

OMG, this is the downer for me :100::expressionless:. In season 1, they at least did something resembling character progression/development and only 2 characters at that :rolling_eyes: Yen and Geralt. That's it. From there on out, nobody else gets characterization and this is what GOT excelled at. In GOT you would encounter fans divided when you ask “who their favourite character is?”. And that's :100::100: phenomenal characterization/progression/development/arc. In The Witcher, all you get is people yapping about Henry Cavill. And that should tell you something about the other characters :unamused:.

Finishing S3 and I'm done with it. I'll indulge myself with the books:wave:. Read The Last Wish and it's more promising than this shit show :100:.

"The Witcher" is a standalone TV show, and it doesn't matter if it is an accurate transposition of the original novels or the video games. Despite that, "mixed feelings" is the best way I could describe it.
The overall atmosphere and characters are fine, but it felt that the storytelling was a little messy. First of all, the lore from the books is never explained despite being far from obvious, leaving most casual viewers disoriented. Names and locations are also hard to remember, with the show doing literally nothing to help you remember the essential information. They just go on with everything assuming we all took the necessary history classes. I played the video games some years ago but still couldn't figure out a lot of the dynamics. The three main storylines are supposed to intertwine but are not temporally parallel. Ciri has to find Geralt, but the other characters just travel aimlessly waiting for the mandatory intersection. Fights are well choreographed but also mixed with cheap CGI at times. Much of the talking is sloppy, although the humor positively reminded me of "Hercules: The Legendary Journeys".

The second season showed off better production value, but ended up being even more slow-paced than the first. I am sure they could have told the same story in a couple of hours. While "vertical" self-contained episodes like the first one were quite fun, I couldn't care less about the overarching narrative. At times it was hard to follow the plot and grasp the characters' motivations because they would keep changing for random reasons. Or maybe I should say, the show fails at keeping you focused long enough to keep all characters and lore details in mind?

My review for The Witcher developed as the show went:
Episode 1 - A great introducion to the show with well balanced plot lines.
Episode 2 - A terrible follow up to the previous episode with uninteresting characters and plot lines outside of Geralt and Ciri. A little bit of a fall off in the writing, some segments felt cheap/cringe.
Episode 3 - A mixed experience. This episode shines with the Geralt segments and is far better than episode 2, however, a lot of miscasts in this episode and also where that feeling of miscast begins to develop more. Geralt and Ciri are excellent castings, Ciri in some ways less. So far, Yennefer and Triss are some of the worst castings I've seen in a show.
Episode 4 - Makes up for the last two episodes, actually a really good episode and experience. Here was where I realised there was a time gap and was a little confused. Had to google to figure it out, wish the show addressed this for people that tried to understand by watching. This misunderstanding probably leaves some to dislike this episode to hell and back, needs a firm grasp of the timeline.
Episode 5 - Things start to heat up with this episode, also one of the best so far I think. Really felt faithful Witcher vibes in this episode, Yennefer and Geralt's chemistry work as well as it does in any other Witcher adaptation, which is good. I like the direction the show is starting to go in, hope it can hold out like this for the last three episodes. Still, the casting of Yennefer still bugs me, but the casting choice is starting to grow on me a little, although in some bits I just don't see it, but it is what it is
Episode 6-8 - These episodes were so good, I watched all three in one sitting. 6 was unique in it's own way, I really liked the concept for this episode and the emotional impact coupled with the subtle messages. Seeing emotional Geralt was a treat, especially in this way. Also feel bad for my boy Jaskier at the end. Episodes 7 and 8 may as well be considered the same episodes since they flow so well into each other. I really loved them both and I think they're the peak of the show. Everything was amazing in these final two episodes, and that ending with Geralt and Ciri perfectly captured their relationship. I felt the same sense of emotion and care for Geralt and Ciri as I did the moment they were reunited in The Witcher 3. Can't wait to see Season 2 because of this, it's going to be fucking awesome.

I loved the Witcher 3, and I loved this show in addition. Might read the books, but one thing is certain, I'm hell bent on getting a white cat with yellow eyes with the purpose to call it Geralt.

The Witcher is own of those shows where you either dig it or you don't. I lean towards the latter.

It's not that I say it's an awful show. No, the production value for a TV show is actually well above average. Yet, I got nothing out of it. Having never played the games or read a book I dropped into a world I knew nothing about. The plot starts without any explanation or background, and while I try to figure out this world, new elements are added and I can't make sense of who is who ?
Then there is the different timelines which present a problem because people don't age accordingly. Which I could explain to myself by assuming a year in this world is different from a real one. It's a fantasy tale after all. But I also wonder if it was really nessessary to present the story like this instead of just linear.
As I mentioned production itself is very good. Henry Cavill carries this thing on his shoulders with a lot of help from Anya Chalotra.
I'm not a fanatsy fan in particular so maybe this just isn't something for me. This being only the first chapter in the tale, it is also entirely possible many things will make sense later on.
Right now, after finishing the first season, I am asking myself if I do want to know.