I'll admit I got bored halfway through the first episode and started watching a Cheers rerun instead. I'll have to give this another shot later.
Damn wait just checked my netflix, I didn't even make it halfway. Stopped watching 20 minutes in. Lol.
Guy who plays Geralt seems to be trying to do a voice impression of Geralts voice actor from the games...all the time, whenever he speaks.
I half expected to see a quest completion notice pop up on the screen in the first episode with the iconic quest completion music. When it didn't come up I forgot that it wasn't the game.
That's when I knew the show was good.
One complaint I have is that it is TOO true to the games/books. It gets instantly deep into the history and lore right off the bat. How the hell is a casual watcher just supposed to jump into this and make heads or tails of all the times and labels being thrown around? I guess people get over it quickly.
Perhaps I should be thankful that as a fan of the series, I have something to enjoy that is so ridiculous geeky and nerdy that I don't have to worry about ti getting watered down for casual watchers.
Onwards to episode 2. Enjoying the show so far. I will play the shit out of Witcher 3 this whole weekend. I still haven't beaten that game. I have over 70 hours logged in the game and just made it to Skellige. I am an ultra completionist and have done almost every single side quest before traveling along the main story.
I enjoyed the first season overall. I have a few gripes here and there and would have liked to see more of the nerdier Witcher elements (as in the actual background around
Spoiler:), but I suspect they're keeping that for later seasons. They already did a ton of world building and dumped a huge amount of info on viewers in the first season.
Witchers themselves, their gear, the potions, Signs etc
Originally posted by dadudemonThat was my issue.
One complaint I have is that it is TOO true to the games/books. It gets instantly deep into the history and lore right off the bat. How the hell is a casual watcher just supposed to jump into this and make heads or tails of all the times and labels being thrown around?
I've never played the games, or read the books/supplementary material, so I had absolutely NO clue what was going on at first... Especially when the episodes started time-hopping and whatnot. I was still able to piece the story together eventually, but it definitely wasn't written for a n00b like me. /shrug
I have never played the games nor read the books but didn't find it confusing at all. I had questions and suspected there was some time-shenanigans but those were answered by the 4th episode. I never felt confused, though. There were little clues ever since the first episode and the timeskip doesn't make it difficult to follow the plot since the 3 main character's stories are told separately. So when they occur doesn't matter as far as understanding what's happening.
I have noticed one compliant from a lot of people who played the games but never read any of the books, in that the show isn't as Geralt-centric as they expected. Which I kind of understand. He's the main player character in those games and the one you follow the most of the time, so they're used to that. But eh, they were never going to please everyone. But, for someone like me who, who has a bit more knowledge and is a big fan of the setting and the mechanics of the world itself, they did a lot right IMO.
Originally posted by Galan007
That was my issue.I've never played the games, or read the books/supplementary material, so I had absolutely NO clue what was going on at first... Especially when the episodes started time-hopping and whatnot. I was still able to piece the story together eventually, but it definitely wasn't written for a n00b like me. /shrug
I think a bit of time-skipping while hand-holding the reader/watcher is definitely part of good story telling.
HOWEVER, as the movie Alexander taught us, doing random time-skips without any hand holding is a terrible idea.
I am half tempted to recut The Witcher into a coherent timeline. Just edit in the parts into a chronological timeline. Perhaps even splice together the "stories" so you can watch the entire story unfold for one character as it happens, until the timelines all converge.
There's no reason, at all, that they could just start with Episode 4 (but leave out all the Jennefer story stuff). So at least the watcher can get an idea of why the Nilfgaardians destroy Cintra later on.
In fact, now that I think about it, it would be nice to do the first 4 episodes as the origin stories of:
Geralt
Jennefer
Ciri
Triss
And then make the next 2-3 episodes the history stuff that lead up to Cintra being destroyed.
Damn, I'm super tempted to make my own cut of this show, now. It wouldn't take long. Perhaps just a couple of hours.
I'll continue to watch the show at work while I doing boring change logging for all the stuff we have to do in Jan. 🙂
I'm used to time jumps at this point, because a lot of other shows, like War of the Worlds, Treadstone, Titans etc. make liberal use of it nowadays. You almost half expect a flashback arc or something.
And it seems to vary from person to person with this. Because I know other people whose first exposure to The Witcher was this show, and they were able to follow it through to the end.
Originally posted by BruceSkywalker
I've watched the first three episodes.. I rather enjoy this.Does Geralt eventually meet up with Yennifer and Ciri?
I've only played the game. I have;t read any of th novels but ill sometime in 2020
Yes and yes. (The 2nd right at the last scene of the season)
The first is a lot more.... eventful.
That's a gripe I've seen among quite a few reviewers and critics as well (probably one of the biggest, actually), and I can't really disagree. Especially when it's also kind of one-sided. For the men, it was generally more tastefully done, with shots either being strategically angled or out of focus to keep things less explicit.