The Witcher is getting a Netflix series

[Lorgar Aurelian]

Even if it is true, s1 is still a Yennefer story. It's about her, how she came to be the Yennefer of Vengerberg, the Lamplight of Strong Female Protagonists across the Multiverse.
They say, Yennefer has 37 minutes less screen time in s1 than Geralt does.
Kind of funny, considering the last episode is literally ALL about her being so very strong, female and empowered.

I'm not a witcher fan beyond the show but its my rather limited understanding then Yennefer is more or less Geralts Wife/Ciri's mom so it would make sense to give her a fair amount of build up leading into her and Geralt raising Ciri. So the First season is pretty much how Yenn got to be the yenn Geralt/Ciri know and Geralt trying to avoid fate just wanting to be a monster hunter before Ciri is forced on him.

[Fortress of Arrogance]

I'm not a witcher fan beyond the show but its my rather limited understanding then Yennefer is more or less Geralts Wife/Ciri's mom so it would make sense to give her a fair amount of build up leading into her and Geralt raising Ciri. So the First season is pretty much how Yenn got to be the yenn Geralt/Ciri know and Geralt trying to avoid fate just wanting to be a monster hunter before Ciri is forced on him.

according to books, Yennefer is Geralt's lover, promiscuous and unfaithful at that, as in, one story depicts her spending the night with Geralt only to wake up from their shared bed to meet her other lover the very same day in order to bang him. Not to forget how very spiteful, sarcastic, caustic and jealous she is all the while.
That aside, book Yennefer does not lament the OH SO CRUEL FATE vile men and tyranny of Patriarchy are forcing upon women, using them as simple breeding vessels.
Not to mention that Yennefer literally giving up her womb in exchange for beautification is made up in the series, and has no basis in books.
Her losing powers in s2 is compete bollocks.
Her being any good with swords, able to dual wield, is pure water bullshit.
To be frank, though, she does get quite overprotective with Ciri, almost mother-like level of, and even takes great pains at a certain point in the books to protect her.

That aside, s1 should've been called "The Witch", as it tells her story: whom she was, how she turned out to be the Yennefer of today, what has she meddled with, what she does at large.

Those who speak Russian will have a good chuckle out of this:

[Lorgar Aurelian]

according to books, Yennefer is Geralt's lover, promiscuous and unfaithful at that, as in, one story depicts her spending the night with Geralt only to wake up from their shared bed to meet her other lover the very same day in order to bang him. Not to forget how very spiteful, sarcastic, caustic and jealous she is all the while.
That aside, book Yennefer does not lament the OH SO CRUEL FATE vile men and tyranny of Patriarchy are forcing upon women, using them as simple breeding vessels.
Not to mention that Yennefer literally giving up her womb in exchange for beautification is made up in the series, and has no basis in books.
Her losing powers in s2 is compete bollocks.
Her being any good with swords, able to dual wield, is pure water bullshit.
To be frank, though, she does get quite overprotective with Ciri, almost mother-like level of, and even takes great pains at a certain point in the books to protect her.

That aside, s1 should've been called "The Witch", as it tells her story: whom she was, how she turned out to be the Yennefer of today, what has she meddled with, what she does at large.

I mean spiteful, sarcastic, caustic and jealous sounds like a wife even if they have an open relationship.

I kid But without actually going through the books I can't really contest how much of a focus she gets in them but from every thing I've heard Her Geralt and Ciri are the key cast So it would make sense for them all to get alot of screen time.

The main Issue I think is that even though people say they want to see more of Geralt just hunting monsters that stuff isn't really all that memorable compared to actually character deployment and Progress like we get with Yenn leading into things like thinking Yenn gets more screen time when she's actually almost a whole episode behind Geralt in season 1 and a full episode in season 2.

[Fortress of Arrogance]

I mean spiteful, sarcastic, caustic and jealous sounds like a wife even if they have an open relationship.

I kid But without actually going through the books I can't really contest how much of a focus she gets in them but from every thing I've heard Her Geralt and Ciri are the key cast So it would make sense for them all to get alot of screen time.

You should definitely read the books in order to properly Bear the Word

The main Issue I think is that even though people say they want to see more of Geralt just hunting monsters that stuff isn't really all that memorable compared to actually character deployment and Progress like we get with Yenn leading into things like thinking Yenn gets more screen time when she's actually almost a whole episode behind Geralt in season 1 and a full episode in season 2.

I think it's rather more complicated: people want to generally see more of Geralt interacting around and doing stuff.
They want to draw parallels between books/games and that which unfolds on the screen, they want to catch the nods, the references, the puns and easter eggs, or so I think.
Because from the book standpoint so far, both seasons are un utter disappointment and have close to nothing in common.
To take another potshot at Yennefer, I think season finale of s1, the one completely dedicated to her being Strong, Female, and Powerful, along with the whole subplot about losing her powers in s2, and being forced to decapitate a guy with a 2handed Axe in order to prove that's she's not a traitor are some of the worst scenes in the whole shitshow. Also, "firefucker". (sic!)

[Lorgar Aurelian]

You should definitely read the books in order to properly Bear the Word

It's on the backlog of my current reading list though given how far back it is I doubt ill get to it before the the show is canceled given that I cant think of any decent show surviving a main character recast.

I think it's rather more complicated: people want to generally see more of Geralt interacting around and doing stuff.
They want to draw parallels between books/games and that which unfolds on the screen, they want to catch the nods, the references, the puns and easter eggs, or so I think.
Because from the book standpoint so far, both seasons are un utter disappointment and have close to nothing in common.
To take another potshot at Yennefer, I think season finale of s1, the one completely dedicated to her being Strong, Female, and Powerful, along with the whole subplot about losing her powers in s2, and being forced to decapitate a guy with a 2handed Axe are some of the worst scenes in the whole shitshow.

I can see the argument for wanting more referential book/game stuff or not liking changes to story lines in the show.

[Witchblade77]

I don't think I will ever stop being fascinated about how different people can read the same books and draw such different conclusions to them solely due to their own biases and expectations.

[eschatological]

The problem is Geralt is a fucking boring character outside of what he's physically capable of. He kills monsters with the same stoic indifference almost always. He's the definition of one-dimensional. Even how he became The Witcher is almost like X happened, and his reaction was to flip a switch into being a total psychopath.

And he's a total psychopath. Yenn is also a psychopath. But at least she's had some depth in the books. It doesn't surprise me that any medium that isn't an action-based RPG (which highlights what Geralt IS good at, IE bashing things skulls in) might feel more Yenn-focused, storywise.

[RobertoCarlos]

The problem is Geralt is a fucking boring character outside of what he's physically capable of. He kills monsters with the same stoic indifference almost always. He's the definition of one-dimensional. Even how he became The Witcher is almost like X happened, and his reaction was to flip a switch into being a total psychopath.

And he's a total psychopath. Yenn is also a psychopath. But at least she's had some depth in the books. It doesn't surprise me that any medium that isn't an action-based RPG (which highlights what Geralt IS good at, IE bashing things skulls in) might feel more Yenn-focused, storywise.

Why are you making it out like Geralt is a sylvester stallone character?

And the books are called "the witcher" for a reason.

If the showrunners/writers dont like the source material, maybe they should create their own characters rather than using it as a vehicle to backdoor in their failed solo projects because no one actually gave a shit about their ideas so instead they hijack popular material and characters like Geralt.

[eschatological]

Why are you making it out like Geralt is a sylvester stallone character?

And the books are called "the witcher" for a reason.

If the showrunners/writers dont like the source material, maybe they should create their own characters rather than using it as a vehicle to backdoor in their failed solo projects because no one actually gave a shit about their ideas so instead they hijack popular material and characters like Geralt.

Are you suggesting Geralt is an interesting character of any depth, even in the books? I never got that impression. He kind of reminds me of Kratos from before the God of War remake - yes, he has strong emotions/feelings, but they're one note and rarely change.

[Mehrunes]

rumors you mean? HE, wasn't saying anything, there is NO confirmed information. that he ended up leaving anyways, is a confirmation bias. correlation. they have NOTHING other then rumors and conjecture.

Yes, let's pretend that all rumors are equal to each other and that the reliability of the source is something to be merrily ignored. Doesn't really change much, because contrary to you, Cavill said aplenty on the issue already. Like the part where he said in interviews that he'd like to play in Witcher for years to come, as long as it stayed true to the source material. And I'm sorry to interrupt your little "he's returning to movies so he won't have time and that must be the primary reason" spiel, but he didn't actually take any hiatus from movies in the previous seasons, so your premise doesn't exactly pan out and as such is as much, if not more biased than my position.

according to books, Yennefer is Geralt's lover, promiscuous and unfaithful at that, as in, one story depicts her spending the night with Geralt only to wake up from their shared bed to meet her other lover the very same day in order to bang him. Not to forget how very spiteful, sarcastic, caustic and jealous she is all the while.

And for the people who haven't read the books, that other lover was Istredd. Which was the only story that actually involved him in the source material. I.e. the first season of the show spent hours on his character only for him and Yenn to have a rather decisive falling out before she even met Geralt, meaning all that time didn't even lead to the whole point of his character. Though like I said, I've yet to finish season 2, so maybe it's included there. It'd require the show to mess with the timeline of the Istredd vs. Geralt thing, but then again the show already wiped its ass with the timeline pretty thoroughly.

I mean spiteful, sarcastic, caustic and jealous sounds like a wife even if they have an open relationship.

I kid But without actually going through the books I can't really contest how much of a focus she gets in them but from every thing I've heard Her Geralt and Ciri are the key cast So it would make sense for them all to get alot of screen time.

The main Issue I think is that even though people say they want to see more of Geralt just hunting monsters that stuff isn't really all that memorable compared to actually character deployment and Progress like we get with Yenn leading into things like thinking Yenn gets more screen time when she's actually almost a whole episode behind Geralt in season 1 and a full episode in season 2.

They could have always given more character development to Geralt himself. If they didn't spend half the season on non-canon adventures of Yennefer that turned her into some fuckup laughing stock of the mages, that happened to have deeply hidden massive power that came at the last second and changed things for her (whereas in the books Yennefer was a respected member of the magic community even years before the main saga - with no mention of that ever being different in her youth - even without her having some abnormal levels of power) and screwed with the timeline of his meeting with Ciri, there was plenty of growth for him in regards to his attitude towards fate, the law of surprise and Ciri. Kinda the core point of the pre-saga short stories. Alas, the writers, in their now-confirmed disdain for the source material, just so happened to miss that.

[Syegfryed]

The main Issue I think is that even though people say they want to see more of Geralt just hunting monsters that stuff isn't really all that memorable compared to actually character deployment and Progress like we get with Yenn leading into things like thinking Yenn gets more screen time when she's actually almost a whole episode behind Geralt in season 1 and a full episode in season 2.

If we got 10 episodes of just Geralt hunting monsters it would be more memorable than season 1 and 2 combined.

And she being "almost one episode" behind, does not seem like improve the point any better, if the show is about him she should get at least half the time he did for the entire season lol

- - - Updated - - -

The problem is Geralt is a fucking boring character outside of what he's physically capable of. He kills monsters with the same stoic indifference almost always. He's the definition of one-dimensional. Even how he became The Witcher is almost like X happened, and his reaction was to flip a switch into being a total psychopath.

And he's a total psychopath. Yenn is also a psychopath. But at least she's had some depth in the books. It doesn't surprise me that any medium that isn't an action-based RPG (which highlights what Geralt IS good at, IE bashing things skulls in) might feel more Yenn-focused, storywise.

Seems like this is a problem from the show and how they changed him from the games and books, show geralt is boring and a psycho

With just playing the first game i know that isn't true, not the best ever, but a good one

[Lorgar Aurelian]

They could have always given more character development to Geralt himself.

They could very well Have given more Character development to him that's for sure and the balance between Geralt's and Yenn's screen(book) time/deployment man be done in a more fitting manner.

Though I would say that as far as complains/wishes go I don't think I've seen like any one saying Geralt needs more development just that they want to see him hunt more monsters and more or less just want action.

- - - Updated - - -

If we got 10 episodes of just Geralt hunting monsters it would be more memorable than season 1 and 2 combined.

Obviously not to some people if they think he got less screen time then Yenn.

[Delekii]

Why are you making it out like Geralt is a sylvester stallone character?

And the books are called "the witcher" for a reason.

If the showrunners/writers dont like the source material, maybe they should create their own characters rather than using it as a vehicle to backdoor in their failed solo projects because no one actually gave a shit about their ideas so instead they hijack popular material and characters like Geralt.

And if you don't like what they are doing, maybe you should create your own series and stay true to the source material with your own money?

I love the new cool that people think they are with whining about other people adapting stuff, as if they have any say whatsoever in what the adapter does with the source more than the adapter has over the source in the first place.

If you don't like something, say you don't like it, or don't consume it, and move on. Heck, critique the shit out of it. But pretending like you have a say over what someone else wants to make is nonsensical. Nobody, in any genre, with any source material, at any time, has a mandate to make their product what you want it to be.

(I quoted this post because it was one of the most direct claims as such in the last few pages, but this applies equally to a whole lot of people here, and in the Lord of the Rings threads, and the Wheel of Time threads, and... so on so on. The list goes on.)

[Fortress of Arrogance]

Are you suggesting Geralt is an interesting character of any depth, even in the books? I never got that impression. He kind of reminds me of Kratos from before the God of War remake - yes, he has strong emotions/feelings, but they're one note and rarely change.

I am suggesting you read the story about Geralt and Essi Daven.

[RobertoCarlos]

And if you don't like what they are doing, maybe you should create your own series and stay true to the source material with your own money?

I love the new cool that people think they are with whining about other people adapting stuff, as if they have any say whatsoever in what the adapter does with the source more than the adapter has over the source in the first place.

If you don't like something, say you don't like it, or don't consume it, and move on. Heck, critique the shit out of it. But pretending like you have a say over what someone else wants to make is nonsensical. Nobody, in any genre, with any source material, at any time, has a mandate to make their product what you want it to be.

(I quoted this post because it was one of the most direct claims as such in the last few pages, but this applies equally to a whole lot of people here, and in the Lord of the Rings threads, and the Wheel of Time threads, and... so on so on. The list goes on.)

Honestly that is such a dumb take.

"If you dont like you do better!"

Hey how about not shitting on source material when all you have to do is re tell the story in the adapted format. Theres always a bit of creative room where appropriate but theres a reason the story is a success and just changing things for an agenda or political statement isnt a compelling way to create art.

[Fortress of Arrogance]

And for the people who haven't read the books, that other lover was Istredd. Which was the only story that actually involved him in the source material. I.e. the first season of the show spent hours on his character only for him and Yenn to have a rather decisive falling out before she even met Geralt, meaning all that time didn't even lead to the whole point of his character. Though like I said, I've yet to finish season 2, so maybe it's included there. It'd require the show to mess with the timeline of the Istredd vs. Geralt thing, but then again the show already wiped its ass with the timeline pretty thoroughly.

Exactly.
Thank you for going length to properly describe the conundrum between the triangle.

- - - Updated - - -

Obviously not to some people if they think he got less screen time then Yenn.

I'd happily watch 10 episodes of Geralt doing the usual Witcher/Geralt things. as long as it's not only dialogues, but action aplenty, aswell.

- - - Updated - - -

I love the new cool that people think they are with whining about other people adapting stuff, as if they have any say whatsoever in what the adapter does with the source more than the adapter has over the source in the first place.

Could you please name and describe exactly what and how has been adapted in regards to book Witcher series moving to tv series?
I am afraid I do not see no adaptations to look at.

- - - Updated - - -

Honestly that is such a dumb take.

"If you dont like you do better!"

Hey how about not shitting on source material when all you have to do is re tell the story in the adapted format. Theres always a bit of creative room where appropriate but theres a reason the story is a success and just changing things for an agenda or political statement isnt a compelling way to create art.

NOOOO, you cannot JUST transfer a book to tv without "adapting" it to MODERN TIMES and injecting it with a(n) (un)healthy dose of the MESSAGE.

[Delekii]

Honestly that is such a dumb take.

"If you dont like you do better!"

Hey how about not shitting on source material when all you have to do is re tell the story in the adapted format. Theres always a bit of creative room where appropriate but theres a reason the story is a success and just changing things for an agenda or political statement isnt a compelling way to create art.

Here is a list of things in your post that are not subjective:


/list

It's not compelling to you, it's shitting on the source material to you, etc etc.

For those that created it, it did what they wanted it to do. Given that they bought the rights, paid the wages, and so on... diddums to you?

It's not a shit take, it's the only take. Your choices are do it better yourself, or whinge.

[Fortress of Arrogance]

It's not a shit take, it's the only take. Your choices are do it better yourself, or whinge.

A false choice: it's not twofold as you present it.

[Delekii]

A false choice: it's not twofold as you present it.

And option 3 is?

I mean, I guess there is "do nothing". You're right! I apologize.

[Fortress of Arrogance]

And option 3 is?

I mean, I guess there is "do nothing". You're right! I apologize.

How about "Hold those who try to shut you up in utter contempt and disregard and keep voicing your opinion and critique" ?