Netflix's The Witcher - Season 2

[radesign]

That's it, they don't give two fucks about quality because they know people will keep watching it, just like there have been good shows that were cancelled due to low audience rates.

Regarding tokenism, I kinda like the actors of Istredd and Vilgefortz (he looks like a psychopathic Dornish warrior-mage and I like that idea) but yeah, it's supposed to be a land resembling medieval Poland but with all the fantasy/folklore elements and nearly half the cast looks like they're Zerrikanian. Heck in the anime movie there was a witcher that tells Vesemir about him spending his coin on a male prostitute (unthinkable to speak of that openly in a medieval setting). They may think tokenism is somehow a good thing, but it isn't

That is so sad, because it feels, like the only person who cares is Henry Cavill...

Regarding "representation" - it`s fine, as long as it makes any sense.
Like Lynet Kynes in Dune - the change still fits the world building, and it feels natural. It`s great, very well done.

But in the Netflix Witcher - it`s so obvious it is just tokenism, with no sense at all.
Sapkowski did not built his world with Poland in mind at all.
But it is overall - Europe based. With a bit of Celts, bit of Slavs, bit of Norsemen, bit of Mediterrean - but generally speaking - european.
The author used motifs from slavic, celtic, nordic, and antic mythology.
There are exotic lands, with different people, and there are specifically mentioned in books, and they are far away.
They could go that way, and it would have make sense. But no...

Same goes for the elves - they are quite different than humans - taller, slimmer, different face structure, very different taste for clothing - but here - no, no way , let`s just make bunch of random people with longer ears.
Dryads from Brooklyn is another thing...

World building by Netflix just does not make any sense.

 

[Feline_Witcher]

That is so sad, because it feels, like the only person who cares is Henry Cavill...

Regarding "representation" - it`s fine, as long as it makes any sense.
Like Lynet Kynes in Dune - the change still fits the world building, and it feels natural. It`s great, very well done.

But in the Netflix Witcher - it`s so obvious it is just tokenism, with no sense at all.
Sapkowski did not built his world with Poland in mind at all.
But it is overall - Europe based. With a bit of Celts, bit of Slavs, bit of Norsemen, bit of Mediterrean - but generally speaking - european.
The author used motifs from slavic, celtic, nordic, and antic mythology.
There are exotic lands, with different people, and there are specifically mentioned in books, and they are far away.
They could go that way, and it would have make sense. But no...

Same goes for the elves - they are quite different than humans - taller, slimmer, different face structure, very different taste for clothing - but here - no, no way , let`s just make bunch of random people with longer ears.
Dryads from Brooklyn is another thing...

World building by Netflix just does not make any sense.

I definetly appreciate all the world's complexity and every kind of person that lives on it being represented properly, PROPERLY being the key word here, if not it wouldn't be a true reflection of the real world, but it has to make sense like you say, because tokenism for the sake of it is 1) a FALSE view of the world (Bridgerton anyone?) and 2) it creates stereotypical characters based only on the one trait it serves as a token of, and in the Year of Our Lord 2021-22 we are a little fed up of those.

And yeah Villeneuve's Lyet Kynes really felt like a Fremen

 

[ShannonCannon]

I'm beyond happy i came across The Witcher threw netflix. Even tho the books i assume are better than the show (aren't they always) but watching the series has made me fall in love with The witcher. Now i'm here on the forum learning so much. I also just downloaded the game on my ps4 and will give that a go too. I cant wait 2 years for a season 3 so i will definitely be looking into grabbing the books. Peace & love

 

[Feline_Witcher]

I'm beyond happy i came across The Witcher threw netflix. Even tho the books i assume are better than the show (aren't they always) but watching the series has made me fall in love with The witcher. Now i'm here on the forum learning so much. I also just downloaded the game on my ps4 and will give that a go too. I cant wait 2 years for a season 3 so i will definitely be looking into grabbing the books. Peace & love

Welcome to the World of The Witcher. Hope u enjoy the game as much as we have. I'd even recommend The Witcher 2 as well, but I'll say Witcher 3 is the best one to start with in terms of gameplay. Good luck on The Path

 

[Madlax1992]

After watching season 1 I had 0 expectations from Netflix to do a better job at adapting this series properly. Like all of Hollywood, Netflix thinks that they are better and smarter than the actual author of the story. Netflix is all about meeting diversity quotas rather than putting an effort to make something of quality. I feel sorry for Henry Cavill though. He is a nice chap that clearly does this out of passion as well, not just for money and fame but he can't elevate the entire series alone. A few other actors are also quite competent and dedicated, but it seems like those behind the curtains, involved in writing the scenario, the overall direction simply don't care about the show, other than meeting quotas.

How I would characterize the whole Netflix Witcher? Stillborn.

 

[lelxrv]

While I believe Cavill is woefully miscast in the role of Geralt, he clearly cares and he seems to be a good guy. It's on the showrunner and her writing team.

I liked the first season more because there was more book material and Anya Chalotra (who's probably my favorite actor in the TV adaptation next to Dandelion) was utilized better.

 

[Feline_Witcher]

How I would characterize the whole Netflix Witcher? Stillborn.

Surely u don't mean Botchling?

BTW, I finished Nightmare of the Wolf today, and I must say it satisfied me in a way the live-action show didn't.

Post automatically merged: Dec 29, 2021

While I believe Cavill is woefully miscast in the role of Geralt, he clearly cares and he seems to be a good guy. It's on the showrunner and her writing team.

IMHO all the charisma Cavill's Geralt lacks, Theo James' Vesemir has . I prefer that sort of witcher, roguish and carefree, fighting monsters with a smile upon his face

 

[LeKill3rFou]

I'm beyond happy i came across The Witcher threw netflix. Even tho the books i assume are better than the show (aren't they always) but watching the series has made me fall in love with The witcher. Now i'm here on the forum learning so much. I also just downloaded the game on my ps4 and will give that a go too. I cant wait 2 years for a season 3 so i will definitely be looking into grabbing the books. Peace & love

The positive point of the serie is if you liked it, I really don't see how you can be disappointed by the games (and from what I read, by the books too)

 

[Madlax1992]

Surely u don't mean Botchling?

BTW, I finished Nightmare of the Wolf today, and I must say it satisfied me in a way the live-action show didn't.

In terms of Witcher lore, yes. Botchling.

I watched that movie as well and it was quite decent. Problem is that whoever watches this film and is not acquainted at all with the Witcher universe, they will not have any idea what is going on there. Nightmare of the Wolf is a movie made SPECIFICALLY for Witcher fans. Especially those that played the games.

Even for Netflix standards the movie was quite ok. And Netflix standards are abysmally low. [...]

 

[Draconifors]

As a reminder: regardless of what you think of the show, Netflix, or so on, the #1 rule on this forum is still kindness and respect. Also, real-world politics are not allowed.

 

[CTPhipps]

I feel like there's a lot to complain about but when I here people having casting issues without talking about the acting, stories, plot, or changes from the source material I'm like--well, clearly they're doing something right.

 

[Gilrond-i-Virdan]

BTW, I finished Nightmare of the Wolf today, and I must say it satisfied me in a way the live-action show didn't.

Nightmare of the Wolf really delivered the theme of "who is the real monster" so well! In contrast something like recent Castlevania animated show had that theme too but totally messed it up in the last season.

 

[Madlax1992]

I feel like there's a lot to complain about but when I here people having casting issues without talking about the acting, stories, plot, or changes from the source material I'm like--well, clearly they're doing something right.

Casting the right people for the right roles in the right setting is an important aspect of filming. Casting people to meet whatever quotas means you sacrifice quality for non-artistic reasons. The whole Witcher universe is built upon medieval European folklore. Mostly Slavic, Germanic and Norse folklore and setting. At the very least, I expect anyone adapting this universe into whatever format to respect this very simple setting. Otherwise we get cringe adaptations such as that short Anne Boleyn series with Jodie Turner-Smith as the main protagonist. JTS was not a terrible actress, but she felt totally out of place. Imagine making a film about Desmond Tutu and the actor who portrays him is a white man. Ridiculous.

I am not complaining about their quality as actors. The actress playing Fringilla was decent. The one playing Neneke was cringe though.

 

[Restlessdingo32]

Casting the right people for the right roles in the right setting is an important aspect of filming. Casting people to meet whatever quotas means you sacrifice quality for non-artistic reasons. The whole Witcher universe is built upon medieval European folklore. Mostly Slavic, Germanic and Norse folklore and setting.

I've always figured the cultural elements are the important part myself. How did those cultures function? Their political, economic, societal and belief systems. The behaviours of the people during the time period. Well, the cultures of the fantasy setting.

To offer a show example... I recall a point where Yen mentions her partial Elven blood to Francesca. Francesca directly challenges it. Not because it's inaccurate. She questions it because Yen wasn't a part of the Elven culture. Yen didn't "live" as an Elf. She wasn't part of their society. She didn't go through their experiences. Her behavior wasn't Elven. Francesca bluntly says Yen may have some Elven blood but she isn't an Elf.

Expand that out to appearance and it makes no difference. Yen could have pointy ears, refined features and everything characteristic of whatever goes into the physical appearance or perceived physical nature of an Elf. She still wouldn't be an Elf. Not culturally speaking. So when Yen tries to leverage her partial Elven blood into an advantage Francesca would call her out on it just the same.

 

[koalahugs]

Ah, the "forced diversity" arguments. This always makes me genuinely depressed.

Putting aside the fact that Europe in the middle ages actually wasn't this silo'd off white-only place, the Witcher is set in a fictional fantasy land with its own geography anyway, with its own history, where things have turned out differently, and where there are people, elves, monsters, etc. displaced by a big magical fantasy event. So, with all that in mind, it feels a bit silly to complain about diversity and how various characters aren't white (when they don't necessarily need to be any particular colour to begin with).

Some perspective:
I can explain why Chiron in Barry Jenkins' Moonlight needed to be played by a black male (it's a story about a gay black man in contemporary America).
I can explain why Derek in American History X needed to be played by a white actor (it's a story about a white supremacist).
I can explain why Schindler in Schindler's List is played by a white actor because the film was aiming to feel historically accurate.

I cannot explain why the Skywalker family has to be any particular colour.
I cannot explain why Eve Polastri in Killing Eve has to be any particular colour.
I cannot explain why Fringilla has to be any particular colour.
As far as I can see, those are all colour-blind roles. Meaning their colour isn't relevant to their respective plots nor is it needed for historical accuracy.

In any case, it seems to me that the majority of humans on the tv show happen to be white anyway, so it amazes me that people still complain about there being non-white actors at all. Didn't Sapkowski say somewhere that the Continent is actually meant to be diverse? Tweet by Lauren Hissrich:

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/994977654750167040

Slightly off-topic:
Concerning historical dramas deliberately doing historically innaccurate casting - one of the benefits of doing that is that it makes it really clear to the audience that what you're watching is not historically accurate but is in fact fiction and should be appreciated as such. A bit Brechtian I suppose. It's also something that's been done in the theatre space for ages now, especially with Shakespeare... and it works.

 

[Mobster100]

I enjoyed it. Had a bit of a rough time the first 3-4 episodes or so, because I couldn't really remember the first season all that well, so couldn't remember what was the plot, so a recap would have been nice. Also I think the series in general could push the main plot a bit more, there is a lot of episodes that doesn't really seem to go anywhere except what seems to be a need for Geralt to fight some monsters.

But in general I like it, I think most the characters are as I expected and do a good job.

 

[Madlax1992]

Ah, the "forced diversity" arguments. This always makes me genuinely depressed.

Putting aside the fact that Europe in the middle ages actually wasn't this silo'd off white-only place, the Witcher is set in a fictional fantasy land with its own geography anyway, with its own history, where things have turned out differently, and where there are people, elves, monsters, etc. displaced by a big magical fantasy event. So, with all that in mind, it feels a bit silly to complain about diversity and how various characters aren't white (when they don't necessarily need to be any particular colour to begin with).

Some perspective:
I can explain why Chiron in Barry Jenkins' Moonlight needed to be played by a black male (it's a story about a gay black man in contemporary America).
I can explain why Derek in American History X needed to be played by a white actor (it's a story about a white supremacist).
I can explain why Schindler in Schindler's List is played by a white actor because the film was aiming to feel historically accurate.

I cannot explain why the Skywalker family has to be any particular colour.
I cannot explain why Eve Polastri in Killing Eve has to be any particular colour.
I cannot explain why Fringilla has to be any particular colour.
As far as I can see, those are all colour-blind roles. Meaning their colour isn't relevant to their respective plots nor is it needed for historical accuracy.

In any case, it seems to me that the majority of humans on the tv show happen to be white anyway, so it amazes me that people still complain about there being non-white actors at all. Didn't Sapkowski say somewhere that the Continent is actually meant to be diverse? Tweet by Lauren Hissrich:

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/994977654750167040

Slightly off-topic:
Concerning historical dramas deliberately doing historically innaccurate casting - one of the benefits of doing that is that it makes it really clear to the audience that what you're watching is not historically accurate but is in fact fiction and should be appreciated as such. A bit Brechtian I suppose. It's also something that's been done in the theatre space for ages now, especially with Shakespeare... and it works.

Europe in the Middle Ages was diverse, but not racially diverse. With the exception of the Russian-Ukrainian steppe where Turkic and Tatar people resided, the rest of Europe was mostly white with maybe the exception of the Ottoman Empire who was engaged in the black slave trade.

However, the setting of Witcher revolves around the folklore of Western Slavs, Germanic folklore and Norse folklore. Racial diversity back then in these parts of Europe was non-existent. I can reasonably expect racial diversity if one involved Zerrikania and Offir, who have a sort of Middle Eastern/North Africa vibe, but other than that, not really.

The Witcher universe is still based on a medieval European setting and folklore, even with all the fantasy elements introduced in it. Same as Tolkien's stories are also heavily inspired by European mythology, folklore and Western tropes, especially in regards to Elves and Men of the West.

I do not condemn the show because it is historically inaccurate because it ain't historical in the first place. But it is still placed in a particular setting and it is heavily inspired by elements of a particular real-life culture, that has its own myths, traditions, tales and particularities. So I do expect that setting to be respected. Again, I don't have a problem with introducing black actors or any actors at that in any form of entertainment. But I do expect them to fit the setting they are introduced in. Which in this case it simply isn't.

And I don't see why forced diversity isn't an argument. Hollywood is all about it in the last decade. Movies and any form of entertainment nowadays are judged and reviewed also based on forced diversity. Nowadays every film studio needs to meet quotas to get a passing grade from 'critics'. And they comply, because this is where Western culture is at the moment. Style without substance.

I can accept that for some people this is not an issue and it doesn't bother them. Good for them. But for me it is.

 

[lelxrv]

I don't see the world of Witcher as ethnically diverse for the same reason I don't see it in Game of Thrones. For a setting like Conan it makes complete sense. Not the case with LOTR, Witcher, Game of Thrones...

 

[Feline_Witcher]

I don't see the world of Witcher as ethnically diverse for the same reason I don't see it in Game of Thrones. For a setting like Conan it makes complete sense. Not the case with LOTR, Witcher, Game of Thrones...

Which begs the question of how they're gonna portray Zerrikania in the show, if all the other kingdoms are already multi-ethnic. Imagine if they'd done this in GOT, Dorne would have no difference with Winterfell and Casterly Rock

Post automatically merged: Dec 31, 2021

Casting the right people for the right roles in the right setting is an important aspect of filming. Casting people to meet whatever quotas means you sacrifice quality for non-artistic reasons. The whole Witcher universe is built upon medieval European folklore. Mostly Slavic, Germanic and Norse folklore and setting. At the very least, I expect anyone adapting this universe into whatever format to respect this very simple setting. Otherwise we get cringe adaptations such as that short Anne Boleyn series with Jodie Turner-Smith as the main protagonist. JTS was not a terrible actress, but she felt totally out of place. Imagine making a film about Desmond Tutu and the actor who portrays him is a white man. Ridiculous.

I am not complaining about their quality as actors. The actress playing Fringilla was decent. The one playing Neneke was cringe though.

Agree completely save for the Fringilla bit. I do prefer the game counterpart

 

[Restlessdingo32]

I do not condemn the show because it is historically inaccurate because it ain't historical in the first place. But it is still placed in a particular setting and it is heavily inspired by elements of a particular real-life culture, that has its own myths, traditions, tales and particularities. So I do expect that setting to be respected. Again, I don't have a problem with introducing black actors or any actors at that in any form of entertainment. But I do expect them to fit the setting they are introduced in. Which in this case it simply isn't.

This is why I mentioned cultures specifically. If a person with dark skin is born in France, lives their life in France and is a part of French culture then that person is French. Back during the Medieval years most people in a given European country being "white" was incidental. Assuming it's even true or true to the degree we're assuming. The individual was not French, German, English or Welsh because of their skin pigmentation. They were French, German, English or Welsh because of their cultural behaviour.

Respecting the culture is respecting the culture. If the Elven character is depicted as being of Elven culture that condition has been satisfied. So most people were allegedly "white" in the historical regions the fantasy show is based upon at the time. Who cares? Toss an actor with any skin pigmentation imaginable into the role of an Elf. If they behave like an Elf and live and breath the culture they are an Elf.

It strikes me as a petty complaint.

Which begs the question of how they're gonna portray Zerrikania in the show, if all the other kingdoms are already multi-ethnic. Imagine if they'd done this in GOT, Dorne would have no difference with Winterfell and Casterly Rock

That's not really true. It's the point trying to be made above. The Dornish are the Dornish because they exhibit the customs, behaviour and belief systems of the Dornish. That is what makes them Dorne. The North is the North because they behave as the North. It makes no difference which culture you pick. Whether it be a fantasy or historical one. The culture is the culture because of their behaviour. Not because of skin coloration.