Jump to content

The Witcher on Netflix 2: Man of steel and silver


3CityApache

Recommended Posts

On 10/10/2018 at 11:10 AM, All Souls Bass said:

The actress they cast for Yennefer looks really young, barely older than the actress they cast for Ciri. That said, we've also got a young Geralt with Cavill, and Chalotra could work great if she can nail a world-wise Yennefer in tone and manner.

Yeah...she looks about fifteen. Maybe she's in her early twenties for reals, but she looks super young. I've never seen her in anything, maybe pictures don't reflect reality? I don't know. I'm overall losing enthusiasm for this project purely due to the casting. I was super excited--this is one of my favorite series. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, mormont said:

I see a lot of people saying this, and I do wonder if they've looked at more than that one picture? Chalotra is young, yes, but that picture rather emphasises her youthful appearance. Look at this picture for a contrast.

Do we need to do the 'I'm not racist, I just want accuracy to the books!!!!!' dance? Even for a minor character? I think the fact that you're taking this tone tells us pretty much the whole story. 

For as "SJW-ish" as this was supposed to be, the cast is SUPER white. I guess they're going close to the books, but I think diversity would be interesting. A black actor plays Geralt, for example. I mean just go for it. These choices they've done are uninspiring. But I guess the only one I actually know is Superman.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

People can sugar coat their complaints as being about "true to the source" all they like. But race only matters to someone when their politics are offended. 

People say they want a faithful adaptation of the books. Like any TV show or movie has really done that in the history of TV and movies. Or if it has ever happened, its the tiny exception to the rule of making significant departures and taking creative liberties. So dying in a ditch because of the race of a supporting character is about politics, not about the work.

Sometimes race is intrinsically essential to character, in which case the race of the actor is important. Other times, race is not an important part of the who the character is, in which case no one should care what race the actor is.

If Fringilla's race is a vital part of her character, then argue why she must be (presumably) white in order to be or do what it is that requires her to have pink skin. If it's just she's white in the book / my head, then that means nothing.

Should Indian film companies be prohibited from making Shakespeare or Jane Austin adaptations unless they cast all ethnically European actors?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Exactly. I hear self-proclaimed purists of the faithfulness to the books try to argue, that there is a minor scene in The Lady of the Lake, when Fringilla doesn't flush when she should, only because of the special ointment she invented. Seriously? That's so important?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Simon Steele said:

For as "SJW-ish" as this was supposed to be, the cast is SUPER white. I guess they're going close to the books, but I think diversity would be interesting. A black actor plays Geralt, for example. I mean just go for it. These choices they've done are uninspiring. But I guess the only one I actually know is Superman.

They do seem to be spending their money on having a recognisable lead and having relative unknowns fill the other roles. That's pretty standard for shows, especially fantasy/shows with large production costs. A bit like having Sean Bean in GOT and the rest of the cast being newcomers or relative unknowns (mark Addy, Dinklage and Lena Headey were more niche/cult recognisable). It saves a lot of money and also means they may cast on merit rather than star power for the majority of roles.

I haven't read the books or played the games so I'm not really fussed at all about what the actors look like. That's not to say people familiar with the games/books can't have opinions - it's just worth remembering for the show to be a success it needs to bring in people new to the Witcher and they also will be indifferent/oblivious to how well actors match the source material. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, Maltaran said:

To turn that around, why do you consider it necessary that they slavishly adhere to the descriptions given in the book?

They don't, of course. 

It's acceptable to have actors who are the wrong age, have the wrong hair and eye colour, the wrong build, the wrong facial features. But if they happen to be the wrong race, that's when suddenly the description in the book is a fundamental from which one cannot deviate without ruining everything.

Strange that. Because it's definitely not racist

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, mormont said:

They don't, of course. 

It's acceptable to have actors who are the wrong age, have the wrong hair and eye colour, the wrong build, the wrong facial features. But if they happen to be the wrong race, that's when suddenly the description in the book is a fundamental from which one cannot deviate without ruining everything.

Strange that. Because it's definitely not racist

I'm also against changing an originally black character into a white character. Guess I'm racist against whites too. 

Your attempt at painting people as racists for not wanting a show to deviate from the source material purely for the sake of political correctness is laughable. Seriously, how one dimensional can you be?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

1 hour ago, SweetPea said:

Your attempt at painting people as racists for not wanting a show to deviate from the source material purely for the sake of political correctness is laughable.

I think you should examine the assumption that one could only possibly cast an actor of another race 'purely for the sake of political correctness', and that it could never be the case that the race of the character is a minor issue and that the actor brings other, more important qualities for the role. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, red snow said:

They do seem to be spending their money on having a recognisable lead and having relative unknowns fill the other roles. That's pretty standard for shows, especially fantasy/shows with large production costs. A bit like having Sean Bean in GOT and the rest of the cast being newcomers or relative unknowns (mark Addy, Dinklage and Lena Headey were more niche/cult recognisable). It saves a lot of money and also means they may cast on merit rather than star power for the majority of roles.

I haven't read the books or played the games so I'm not really fussed at all about what the actors look like. That's not to say people familiar with the games/books can't have opinions - it's just worth remembering for the show to be a success it needs to bring in people new to the Witcher and they also will be indifferent/oblivious to how well actors match the source material. 

I agree a hundred percent with everything you said, and I know I have a particular bias. As much as I love the books, I love the games too. When I heard this series was being made, I thought of Geralt as he is visually portrayed in the games. I know that's unrealistic (I mean this was never going to be animated). But I think this is the trouble this series in particular has--a very visual, recognizable set of characters. Unlike GOT which had characters that varied in our heads. I mean, I was far less disappointed when Robert Baratheon didn't have black hair versus Cavill in place of the Geralt in the game, his voice actor, etc.

But I know this is unfair of me, and I'd imagine my not watching the show isn't going to hurt it too much!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, SweetPea said:

I'm also against changing an originally black character into a white character. Guess I'm racist against whites too. 

Your attempt at painting people as racists for not wanting a show to deviate from the source material purely for the sake of political correctness is laughable. Seriously, how one dimensional can you be?

I think, too, that structuring this as political correctness is reductive and harmful, but your explanation shows the racism inherent in your argument. Racism isn't always just about you, you know? It's a structural issue that has seeped into most of our institutions, and because of this, even things like popular, fun books and games are staggeringly represented by white people. Because books and movies are predominantly white, this further alienates and pushes down chances for marginalized groups to not only tell their own stories, but to participate in cultural moments. 

The Lord of the Rings is a great trilogy of books and movies, and the movies particularly were mind blowing in terms of a cultural moment. But how many people outside of the white norm could go to that movie and identify with someone who wasn't white? Who wasn't male? 

When you take Star Wars and add diversity, the internet throws tantrums too. And Star Wars is a universe primed for diversity.

So the argument that this book specifically, though, should adhere to the races in the book doesn't hold up. Because it's the same argument as always which serves to push marginalized groups outside of the culture. It promote the structure of racism.

I think to Mormont's point, when rumors that Idris Elba could play Geralt--of course the internet threw a tantrum (and it was never more than speculation/rumor), but I'll be honest: an actor like Elba would be amazing in the role over Cavill, in my opinion. Elba brings so much to the screen. But of course, "the White Wolf! IT'S THE WHITE WOLF!" I know. It's okay. I'm just saying, some actors have more to offer than others. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, Simon Steele said:

I agree a hundred percent with everything you said, and I know I have a particular bias. As much as I love the books, I love the games too. When I heard this series was being made, I thought of Geralt as he is visually portrayed in the games. I know that's unrealistic (I mean this was never going to be animated). But I think this is the trouble this series in particular has--a very visual, recognizable set of characters. Unlike GOT which had characters that varied in our heads. I mean, I was far less disappointed when Robert Baratheon didn't have black hair versus Cavill in place of the Geralt in the game, his voice actor, etc.

But I know this is unfair of me, and I'd imagine my not watching the show isn't going to hurt it too much!

That's a good point regarding the games already establishing expectations moreso than from the book.

I think comics are more flexible due to different interpretations by many artists meaning it's not really defined. Whereas there's just the one version of the game (Mario and Zelda for example are more recognisable for clothes and hairstyles due to different game versions).

I'd still try and watch the show if I were you as you may get used to the differences or be able to see past it if Everything else matches up?

I think Wert has mentioned the TV show has to tread carefully in that it can't mimic the games too closely where the game is differing from the book. Which complicates things.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

45 minutes ago, mormont said:

I think you should examine the assumption that one could only possibly cast an actor of another race 'purely for the sake of political correctness', and that it could never be the case that the race of the character is a minor issue and that the actor brings other, more important qualities for the role. 

Oh, please. You'd have to be extremely naive to believe that was the reasoning in this situation.

I didn't say political correctness could be the only reason for choosing an actor of a different race, by the way. It's probably very common that they do so because another actor is more qualified for a role. But to cast a black woman in the Witcher world that didn't have any black characters at all? And make the lore changes necessariy to explain it? Don't tell me that they couldn't find a single white actress to play a minor role like that.

1 minute ago, Simon Steele said:

I think, too, that structuring this as political correctness is reductive and harmful, but your explanation shows the racism inherent in your argument. Racism isn't always just about you, you know? It's a structural issue that has seeped into most of our institutions, and because of this, even things like popular, fun books and games are staggeringly represented by white people. Because books and movies are predominantly white, this further alienates and pushes down chances for marginalized groups to not only tell their own stories, but to participate in cultural moments. 

The Lord of the Rings is a great trilogy of books and movies, and the movies particularly were mind blowing in terms of a cultural moment. But how many people outside of the white norm could go to that movie and identify with someone who wasn't white? Who wasn't male? 

When you take Star Wars and add diversity, the internet throws tantrums too. And Star Wars is a universe primed for diversity.

So the argument that this book specifically, though, should adhere to the races in the book doesn't hold up. Because it's the same argument as always which serves to push marginalized groups outside of the culture. It promote the structure of racism.

Thanks, you just made my point for me. You just argued that it's more important to cast minority actors for the sake of political correctness, than being faithful to the source material. I completely disagree with that, and I also disagree with this nonsense of being able to identify with the characters.

I'm white and I have no problem at all watching movies full of black people and enjoying them. That's just what I did last night, actually. I can play games with female and black protagonists just fine. Somehow, I'm able to participate in these "cultural moments".  So no, I think it's a completely nonsensical argument that the cast of a piece of entertainment needs to be of the same race/sex/age/ as me in order to enjoy it. And now that I think of it, that sounds very bigoted. Are you saying black people are so racist they can't even enjoy a movie if the characters are of a different race?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, SweetPea said:

Oh, please. You'd have to be extremely naive to believe that was the reasoning in this situation.

I didn't say political correctness could be the only reason for choosing an actor of a different race, by the way. It's probably very common that they do so because another actor is more qualified for a role. But to cast a black woman in the Witcher world that didn't have any black characters at all? And make the lore changes necessariy to explain it? Don't tell me that they couldn't find a single white actress to play a minor role like that.

Thanks, you just made my point for me. You just argued that it's more important to cast minority actors for the sake of political correctness, than being faithful to the source material. I completely disagree with that, and I also disagree with this nonsense of being able to identify with the characters.

I'm white and I have no problem at all watching movies full of black people and enjoying them. That's just what I did last night, actually. I can play games with female and black protagonists just fine. Somehow, I'm able to participate in these "cultural moments".  So no, I think it's a completely nonsensical argument that the cast of a piece of entertainment needs to be of the same race/sex/age/ as me in order to enjoy it. And now that I think of it, that sounds very bigoted. Are you saying black people are so racist they can't even enjoy a movie if the characters are of a different race?

Political correctness? I'm arguing that it's absolutely fucking racist to take your view, and that has nothing to do with being "politically correct." Jeezus. You literally sound like you're saying, "But I have best video games and movies who are black, so I'm not racist."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

42 minutes ago, red snow said:

That's a good point regarding the games already establishing expectations moreso than from the book.

I think comics are more flexible due to different interpretations by many artists meaning it's not really defined. Whereas there's just the one version of the game (Mario and Zelda for example are more recognisable for clothes and hairstyles due to different game versions).

I'd still try and watch the show if I were you as you may get used to the differences or be able to see past it if Everything else matches up?

I think Wert has mentioned the TV show has to tread carefully in that it can't mimic the games too closely where the game is differing from the book. Which complicates things.

Oh, my supposed "I can't watch this" will literally die the moment the show drops. I bet it's good. I think the showrunner seems super thoughtful and smart. And Wert's point is good too--I get the sense CDPR might not be keen to share what they've brought to the series.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, SweetPea said:

Oh, please. You'd have to be extremely naive to believe that was the reasoning in this situation.

You'd have to be extremely naive not to read the above statement as someone in denial. 

1 hour ago, SweetPea said:

I didn't say political correctness could be the only reason for choosing an actor of a different race, by the way. It's probably very common that they do so because another actor is more qualified for a role. But to cast a black woman in the Witcher world that didn't have any black characters at all? And make the lore changes necessariy to explain it? Don't tell me that they couldn't find a single white actress to play a minor role like that.

Case in point. 

Here, you are explicitly promoting race as the defining characteristic for even minor roles in this series, to the point of suggesting a qualified black actress should have been passed over for the role. But at the same time, you want to maintain that you're not saying it's impossible to cast a qualified black person in a role written for a white person.

It's just that in this case, it's wrong. But funnily enough, it's always 'in this case'. Elba as Bond. Elba as Heimdall. Michael B Jordan as Johnny Storm. Any black actor in The Witcher. There's always a reason why it's wrong for this particular role, whatever the role is. Funny, that. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Simon Steele said:

Political correctness? I'm arguing that it's absolutely fucking racist to take your view, and that has nothing to do with being "politically correct." Jeezus. You literally sound like you're saying, "But I have best video games and movies who are black, so I'm not racist."

"You literally sound like you're saying" = "I know that's not what you're saying but I'm gonna intentionally misinterpret it anyway"

You said minorities can't take part in cultural moments and a predominantly white cast alienates them. You said they can't identify witch characters of different races. I think that is nonsense. I can easily enjoy works of entertainment dominated by characters of a different race or sex, and it doesn't alienate me at all. I can easily identify with characters of a different race or sex. If you can't, the problem might be with you. 

1 hour ago, mormont said:

Here, you are explicitly promoting race as the defining characteristic for even minor roles in this series, to the point of suggesting a qualified black actress should have been passed over for the role. But at the same time, you want to maintain that you're not saying it's impossible to cast a qualified black person in a role written for a white person.

It's just that in this case, it's wrong. But funnily enough, it's always 'in this case'. Elba as Bond. Elba as Heimdall. Michael B Jordan as Johnny Storm. Any black actor in The Witcher. There's always a reason why it's wrong for this particular role, whatever the role is. Funny, that. 

You misunderstood me. I think generally an actor shouldn't be cast for a role that was written for a different race. Especially for a role in a universe where that particular race is not even featured.

If the race is irrelevant for a character, I'm fine with an actor of any race, as long as it's plausible and fits the world.

Just now, 3CityApache said:

And it's not true the Witcher world didn't have any black characters at all. Multiple characters race simply wasn't specified.

I'm sure the books would have been an enjoyable read if the author wasted words on pointing out the race of every single character. This is such a silly argument I'm amazed people still use it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

40 minutes ago, SweetPea said:

If the race is irrelevant for a character, I'm fine with an actor of any race, as long as it's plausible and fits the world.

 

In that case, please explain why Fringilla's race is relevant.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, SweetPea said:

Because we have a pretty good image of her from the books, and black people are nowhere to be found in the Witcher universe.

It's fucking skin pigmentation. It's rare for Nilfgaardians to have red hair -- how important is the color of their hair? Would too many red-haired Nilfgaardians ruin the story? Of course not. How is hair color any different from skin color?

'Race' is a social construct in the real world and does not need to be carried into fantasy worlds. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...