The Witcher S3: Bye Bye Henry

[Heartofice]

26 minutes ago, karaddin said:

On top of not giving a lot of these plots enough room to breathe, the 8-10 episode season could be subconsciously coding the show as "prestige" when that's really not what some of them are going for. If you're expecting prestige and get Supernatural then obviously you're going to be disappointed most of the time, but Supernatural can be perfectly entertaining if that's what you're choosing to watch and just looking to enjoy it.

Depends what the viewing behaviour for the show is expected to be. I’ve never watched Supernatural but I struggle to believe it’s something people binge or watch with 100% attention, or that you would need to.

If Netflix is in business of creating background noise shows then yeah you’d expect them to be different.

Something like the Witcher seems to demand your attention however, or at its so hard to grasp what’s going on sometimes that it feels like you need to concentrate to not miss something. 
 

I suspect they just need to bang stuff out and get new content regularly, too much pressure to ever make anything truly good. 

[Consigliere]

Supernatural seasons 1-5 > The Witcher.

[karaddin]

1 hour ago, Consigliere said:

Supernatural seasons 1-5 > The Witcher.

There's a lot more than the first 5 seasons though! I didn't watch far past that lol. But it actually wasn't meant to be a diss on Supernatural, I picked that because it's a high volume show that was still quite good at times - it's just not pretending to be prestige tv.

HoI - I wouldn't characterize Supernatural as background tv, that's getting into sitcoms etc. 

[Consigliere]

1 hour ago, karaddin said:

There's a lot more than the first 5 seasons though! I didn't watch far past that lol. But it actually wasn't meant to be a diss on Supernatural, I picked that because it's a high volume show that was still quite good at times - it's just not pretending to be prestige tv.

True. Unfortunately Supernatural declined sharply post season 5 although there are still a number of pretty good self-contained episodes after that even though the seasonal arcs deteriorated substantially and the writers took a dump on their own established canon. Still, at least seasons 1-5 told a complete story.

I think that Supernatural seasons 1-5 executed their overarching plotine much better than The Witcher has managed thus far and their monster-of-week/self-contained episodes were also more enjoyable than anything The Witcher has done.

[SeanF]

On 7/20/2023 at 6:11 AM, horangi said:

I did a rewatch of the first two seasons followed by, just now, wrapping up Episode five S3.  I think I enjoyed it more this time around just by leaning into the 'fun' and not expecting something that will go down as a top 5 fantasy series of all time.  Which, at least the English version, kinda fits where the source material is in my mind having read the series through.  The stand alone monster a day episodes from the Anthology are all fun.  And once they got through the Season 1 time skipping mess of the child surprise introduction (which at least they have the good humor to make fun of in Season 2), the longer arcs in S2 and S3 are enjoyable and the added 'monster of the day' that weren't a part of the original text were mostly fun adds that addresses some of the complaints that others mentioned here about a lack of actual Witchering in the later books.  I also liked some of the 'relatively' subtle hints and foreshadowing such as the Episode 4 clue on who the big bad is (which sadly in Episode 5 they feel they need to reveal Sherlock Holmes style instead of just leaving it out there as a reward to those that caught it).  I will admit it helps that I read the series, the expansive list of names and countries etc would be a bit hard to keep up with just on the show alone, but it did seem fairly faithful in broad strokes with the books in that most of the plot points I was able to remember what was going to happen next and be right. 

A few changes from the books I havent liked include making Nilfguard in S1/S2 into maniacal Chaos cultists from Warhammer rather than 'just' a giant strategic threat lead by a cult-of-personality dude on a mission.  It really weakened Fringilla's and to a lesser extent Cahir's characters, and it was nice that S3 showed both the empire and those two acting like the more human relatable awfulness of historical zealots and despots.  I also didnt like that they had to kill off so many Witchers including some of the 'known' characters just to feed the monster-of-the day plots.  It almost felt like they were fridged so that Geralt can move on with his adventure (I also thought Vesemir's actor was particularly wooden).  I also wished that, like with WoT, they gave the plot more episodes to breath and prevent so much skipping from location to location.  But then, I grew up when fantasy/Sci-fi series had 20+ episodes a season and could take an entire episode exploring a single element of the world, so mileage may vary. 

Overall though, it was just good, low mental investment fun.  I am looking forward to some of the future events, where I hope the party expands to include one of the later books' more memorable companions. 

I agree with a lot of that.

I do wish they'd kept the elves as per the books.  They are unfairly persecuted, but their principal grievance with humans is that they are no longer in charge, and the ones doing the persecuting.

Nor did I like making Nilfgaard religious fanatics.  The games, OTOH, lean too far in making Nilfgaard sympathetic.  There are "progressive" elements to Nilfgaardian society, compared to the Northern kingdoms, but overall, they're an extremely brutal, expansionist empire.

 

[RhaenysBee]

Eventually I struggled through the first installment of season 3. With a couple of worthwhile highlights sprinkled on top, I found the first four episodes hot garbage.

Then the fifth episode rolled around and it was delightful. Not perfect at all and not early game of thrones material, but certainly five times the quality of the first four episodes combined. You can smell the sweat on the cleverness of the episode, but at least that signals the effort and thought that went into writing actually cohesive dialogue, considering cause and effect, having a purpose and direction and using basic writing tools. Maybe I’m imagining it but I could also feel that the actors shined and enjoyed a script with some flow and an actual story to tell, as opposed to having to deliver empty lines that are so disconnected, directionless and fragmented they barely feel like a story. It had an atmosphere, it went from A to B and it was possible to make sense of how and why we landed at B. 

The problem with the previous 4 episodes was the complete lack of understanding of the world, the terrible storytelling both in terms of plot, dialogue and character.

Throwaway lines of names and places and weird words littered over a rice paper thin plot isn’t world building. As an audience member (one that even read the novels but kinda forgot them), my reaction is a momentary what/who the fcks that again followed by instantly forgetting the word. There are a myriad ways to do this while building characters and/or plot but of course you would have to think about it and work on it and spend twice the time in the writing room so that you have ample time to develop every aspect of the series without trade offs for one or the other. The result is a tiny, empty, lackluster universe in which no borrowed element from the novels work for either plot, or character (eg my ugly one, lilac and gooseberries, etc). 

Characters are generally soft and lack gumption, the main characters lost themselves (well the writers rewrote them) and the supporting ones are tropes rather than anything else. Yennefer is Yen now. Just like that, because… well, you tell me. “Yen” used to be a thing in Yennfer’s story because Geralt called her that while Istredd called her Yenna. That was a thing between each duo and a source of jealousy and tension in the love triangle. But now Yennefer is generally Yen, to the council and to Ciri (rather than Madam Yennefer). I think I have said all there is to say about her. 
The last time I have seen the semblance of light in Joey Batey’s face when playing Jaskier was back in season 1. The guy looks like he would rather be anywhere else in the world and there’s nothing but anguish in his eyes in any scene he’s put in. Which also says everything that needs to be said about Jaskier. 
Henry Cavill is trying really hard to breathe life into the shell Geralt is with limited screen time and a small supporting role in the events of the story. And Ciri… ah it’s too exhausting. Let’s hope the second installment will remind her that it takes more than a childlike sense of justice and morality to make a good leader. Though tough love has pretty much evaporated from the series.

The dialogue is for the most part painful to listen to and probably equally painful to deliver for the actors. The main cast is doing the best they can, most supporting characters fail to take their lines and characters seriously. Most of the dialogue says absolutely nothing, it’s just word salad out of context. 

Overall it’s a 4/10 for me. 3ish scores for the first 4 episodes and a solid 7 for the 5th. I will watch the next installment because of Henry’s Geralt and then I’m out. And I don’t think I said anything that counts as spoiler but do correct me in case I did. 

Edited July 23, 2023 by RhaenysBee

[AncalagonTheBlack]

 

[Zorral]

You know what, I think I'm gonna enjoy this Vol. II.

Likely the last, or at the very least, among the very last, of such productions I'll be seeing for a very long time, thanx to the streamers', etc.' shyte treatment of the creators, whether writers or actors, or tech people, wardrobe, scene dressers, etc.

[IlyaP]

2 hours ago, Zorral said:

thanx to the streamers', etc.' shyte treatment of the creators, whether writers or actors, or tech people, wardrobe, scene dressers, etc.

What's the story here? Have reported started leaking of Netflix productions engaging in dodgy behaviour?

[Zorral]

14 minutes ago, IlyaP said:

Netflix productions engaging in dodgy behaviou

Not leaking ... people have been complaining about this for a long time already.

Though most were shocked to learn of how the actors in Orange Is the New Black were treated, for example.  They'd been fairly quiet for a while, but anyone around them knew.

Also, you know what's going on with long established Brand names -- people are shocked that Musk is destroying that of Twitter to replace it with a nothing known logo of X, as zuck did FB with Meta.  That jerkwaddie from Warner's decided to dump the trusted, known Brand of Quality, HBO, for MAX, wtf?  while replacing the quality with dreck reality and home improvement shows, and dumping the credit role for everyone involved in the quality HBO original programing.

I foresee loads of people dumping their subs to just about all of them by the fall of next year.

Not to mention regarding AP, it's insistence on pushing 'rental's' and 'hubbing' of other streamers of which fee it gets the biggest share, while also substituting licensing anything in favor of its freevee dreck with commercials -- people are gonna why bother?

Back to cable, where people are paying a ridiculous amount all over the place for these streamers that have primarily dreck content -- WITH COMMERCIALS.

 

Edited July 24, 2023 by Zorral

[karaddin]

24 minutes ago, IlyaP said:

What's the story here? Have reported started leaking of Netflix productions engaging in dodgy behaviour?

On top of what Zorral mentioned there's some other really shitty behavior going on with writers that's also really harmful to the industry. The old model was for the writers to be part of the whole production, they'd write the initial script but they'd still be around for all the filming etc as well so they're on hand to update dialogue that isn't working etc, which gave them a chance to pick up other important skills on set. It meant that if they eventually get a chance to be show runner, they are already up to speed on a bunch of production related skill sets.

The more recent trend has been to isolate writers from the rest of the production, this both hurts their prospects for career progression, lowers the quality of writing (since they're not there to do edits), lowers their income, and when they do get a chance to be a show runner etc they're coming in with a much smaller skill set than they have historically which can lower the quality of the show or cause it to outright fail.

Part of what they're demanding in the writers strike is restoring these aspects of career progression.

[IlyaP]

49 minutes ago, Zorral said:

Not to mention regarding AP

AP? .... Associated Press?!

[Zorral]

21 minutes ago, IlyaP said:

AP? .... Associated Press?!

Amazon Prime.

[IlyaP]

22 minutes ago, Zorral said:

Amazon Prime.

Oh. Sorry. I uh, clearly use streaming services and watch, like, y'know. Stuff. 

/hides in a book

[Ran]

Finished the first half of the season. LIke others, the first three episodes were not too inspiring, but we found the fourth good enough that we decided to press on and get the fifth. I know others have said they find the structure of the episode frustrating, and it could have been edited a little more tightly, but like @RhaenysBee I thought it was a pretty delightful episode as the structure allowed the narrative to unfold in a non-linear fashion that added layers to the interactions and what was going on. It ends on a cliffhanger, of course, but it left me curious as to where to go.

Geralt and Yennefer worked especially well together, and it's a shame that they've so often been kept apart. The romance between them feels like a core feature of the show, as I guess it is in the novels.

[SeanF]

On 7/25/2023 at 1:05 AM, karaddin said:

On top of what Zorral mentioned there's some other really shitty behavior going on with writers that's also really harmful to the industry. The old model was for the writers to be part of the whole production, they'd write the initial script but they'd still be around for all the filming etc as well so they're on hand to update dialogue that isn't working etc, which gave them a chance to pick up other important skills on set. It meant that if they eventually get a chance to be show runner, they are already up to speed on a bunch of production related skill sets.

The more recent trend has been to isolate writers from the rest of the production, this both hurts their prospects for career progression, lowers the quality of writing (since they're not there to do edits), lowers their income, and when they do get a chance to be a show runner etc they're coming in with a much smaller skill set than they have historically which can lower the quality of the show or cause it to outright fail.

Part of what they're demanding in the writers strike is restoring these aspects of career progression.

Presumably, it saves money, but otherwise, I can't see the point of excluding writers.

The absence of writers was obviously a big issue in later seasons of Game of Thrones.

[karaddin]

2 hours ago, SeanF said:

Presumably, it saves money, but otherwise, I can't see the point of excluding writers.

The absence of writers was obviously a big issue in later seasons of Game of Thrones.

It's the sort of penny pinching that costs them money down the line, but yeah.

[IFR]

The second half is not getting the warmest reception. It looks like Cavill made the right call (which I would have said from season 1, but it seems like a lot of people enjoyed that first season).

It's frustrating, really. You know what is a good movie that came out recently? Oppenheimer. In fact, it's perhaps the best movie of the year so far. It's based on an excellent book, and it loyally adapted from it. There was no "updating things for a modern audience" or changing up the plot to keep it interesting. It was a faithful adaptation.

One might suggest that loyally adapting from The Witcher books would be too boring. And I again point out that a faithful adaption about the life of a theoretical physicist was made into the most compelling movie of the year. It was intelligent and it was utterly engaging.  It only took appropriate talent to make it work.

Which sadly is lacking with the writers of this show.

[Corvinus85]

Watched episode 6. The Witcher has succeeded in taking the crown from GoT for dumbest fucking battle in a big TV show.

Spoiler

So much plot armor and standing around. Who directed this crap? Not to mention the writing going with it. 

There was hardly any room for any scene to breath. Redania does a coup, no it's Vilgefortz + the elves, but wait Cahir actually had a change of heart. Hey look Fringilla is here, too. Stregobor is going to go out like a boss, except we see this explosion from above and that's it. 'Member in season 1 when like 20 mages fought an entire army. Now they just wave their arms like idiots.

The never ending rollercoaster of Geralt, Ciri and Yennifer randomly finding each other continues. (And I guess add Triss to the mix)

At least Geralt v. Vilgefortz had something to it.

 

Edited July 28, 2023 by Corvinus85

[IlyaP]

1 hour ago, Corvinus85 said:

Watched episode 6. The Witcher has succeeded in taking the crown from GoT for dumbest fucking battle in a big TV show.

So, what you're saying is, this season is basically a....liver-destroying drinking game?