Witcher series for Netflix confirmed!

+
All this TV series from netflix are very strange. Maybe a film would be better

You know...there was a time when I would have said the same, but frankly, the Battlestar Galactica reboot and Game of Thrones have blown my mind with the consistent quality they delivered.

I'm eager to see if other networks can achieve the same level. If so, I'd argue it's far easier to fund smaller, episodic installments of any story. This also allows for a more comprehensive adaptation of a text. I'm sure we wouldn't have even a third of the scenes we have for GoT if they had tried to make full-length, feature films instead.

Downside, of course, is time and happenstance. Actors are tied up for years and years, drama and nonsense happens, people pass away...consistency will always be a problem for any such project.

I'd argue that a balance would be to plan out a story arc that could be completed in fewer seasons (...love the number 3...), then worry about getting as much filming as possible done for the entire series at each location. More planning, definitely, but a tighter production run. Stories could still be far more expansive than a typical, big-budget film, but it would mitigate stuff going wrong.

I also think animation (especially an efficient version of CG) would make a masterful medium for such a venture. Minimal need for sets or locations; actors would be exclusively motion capture and/or VO. This means that there could be some significant, real-life come-and-go without interrupting the visual continuity. Even a project that spanned 5+ years could maintain a level of cohesion not possible when filming live actors. (I can't even begin to describe how much easier it would make casting, as an actor's physicality would be irrelevant.)
 
Last edited:
Leaked set photo. It was nice of them to use fan made costumes.

 
Agreed about animation, but replacing a voice actor can be as hard as replacing any other actor.

It's definitely never a situation I'd choose to be in (as either the actor or director). Chemistry between a cast grows over time. Any actor chosen as a replacement will not usually gel right away. The dynamic changes. It's actually great stuff for introducing new characters, but it's equally horrible if trying to carry on an established character.

There are many character actors out there that can very professionally match the energy and speech patterns of other actors. What's really awesome about animation is that what they look like becomes completely a non-issue.

I'm not too worried about The Witcher series, though. My bet is that they'll wind up handling it the same way as the Sherlock Holmes BBC series in the end. Some shorter stories (~1 hour) at the beginning, similar to the structure of the original book, and then perhaps some longer episodes (1.5-2 hours) once the main arc with Ciri gets rolling. Each novel could be compressed into one or two episodes each.
 
it would have been nice to have accurate representation, but they were always going to push BAME actors in to the show despite what Hissrich said about keeping her political agenda out of it, that was never an honest statement. I just hoped the top 3 would be true to character because they are the story. A baby faced Indian as Yen just doesn't cut it for me.

Extremely Disappointed.

Yep that pretty much sums it up for me. I don't understand why they couldn't cast people who look like the characters are supposed to look, it just feels very racist to me - no offense intended to anyone who is excited for the show, it just seems like the showrunners felt there were too many white characters so they wanted to remove some. I'll definitely not be spending any $ to watch this. Again to re-iterate, not intending to hurt anybody's feelings, just sharing my opinion on this.
 
I also think animation (especially an efficient version of CG) would make a masterful medium for such a venture. Minimal need for sets or locations; actors would be exclusively motion capture and/or VO. This means that there could be some significant, real-life come-and-go without interrupting the visual continuity. Even a project that spanned 5+ years could maintain a level of cohesion not possible when filming live actors. (I can't even begin to describe how much easier it would make casting, as an actor's physicality would be irrelevant.)

I agree, animation would be alot better.. even if it just used the same style as the castlevania series.

Live action... would have to be done akin to HBO's game of thrones, which might be very expensive.. making it risky. Maybe if they followed the books+games then it could work.. just animation gives alot of imaginative expression without reaching the budget ceiling as fast.
 
I agree, animation would be alot better.. even if it just used the same style as the castlevania series.

Live action... would have to be done akin to HBO's game of thrones, which might be very expensive.. making it risky. Maybe if they followed the books+games then it could work.. just animation gives alot of imaginative expression without reaching the budget ceiling as fast.

Mm-hm. Big time. Plus, I think the best way to handle a huge venture with live action would be to film all needed scenes with a certain set of actors to ensure that we'd get all the shots needed for the entire series (not just a certain episode or season) in one go. That would be hellish on the actors, but it would be waaay more cost efficient. It would also require the writers to completely blanket the entire series up-front. That could potentially take years, but it would be steady work (and since writers are so, sooo highly paid...:sneaky:...) it would not be such a huge investment.

Having multiple cameras and studios working simultaneously might sound way too expensive, but it saves a LOT on time. Plus, if there are any on-location shots to be done, having the whole script in-hand from the beginning makes that much easier to schedule, and much less likely to be impacted by weather and such, in the long run.

In the end, there would be this massive delay of at least a year or two after shooting began where there would be, essentially, nothing to release. I can see investors absolutely crapping themselves about that at the table or getting cold feet when problems invariably arise. The editing team would need to be top notch, and they'd have a job of work in front of them when they arrived on set, as they'd be looking at reviewing not only a monstrous script, but hundreds of hours of footage before they could even begin. But I think the final result would be so cohesive, so seamless, and ultimately save so much time that it would make quite an impression.
 
All the costume design I've seen thus far looks amateurish and doesn't take historical cues from the books. Witcher is not a high fantasy look, it's firmly rooted in a late medieval aesthetic.
Based on the Nilfgaardian Armor vid...I...am forced to agree. Provided it's valid. That just looks...ah...I'm not really sure what I'm looking at. And the actual movement and action for the scene in the foggy forest was...hopefully...just a walkthrough of the the scene...maybe...?

I don't like being negative before I've actually seen the final product, but from a strictly design perspective, most of what I've seen looks more cartoonish and caricatured than "stylized".

Continuing over here, because, well, it's the proper thread.

From what I see, if this is indeed the final costume, it looks like unnecessary 'innovation' by the designer, or, perhaps, just plain ignorance. (I'm reminded a bit of early Hollywood's abysmal representations of mediaeval armour and jousts. Ugh!) If it is a place-holder, however, it's a truly odd one, given the thoroughly unrealistic texture of the armour. After all, why bother to make something like that, if it's only temporary? It certainly doesn't look like something which could be corrected in post-production. If it were, they'd just be wearing pure blue or green suits, for CGI, nay?

In any case, from a practical armoury perspective, the design is preposterous, would require ridiculously elaborate manufacturing with mediaeval technology, and would lend nothing to defence. Furthermore, there's really no comparison between that armour and CDPR's Nilfgaardian coat, which is a solid, accurate, reasonable harness, appropriate for heavy infantry and foot-knights. This leads me to wonder how much disappointment there may be, when audiences who've played the games watch this series. Amongst those with an eye for details, I wager rather a lot.
 
Continuing over here, because, well, it's the proper thread.

From what I see, if this is indeed the final costume, it looks like unnecessary 'innovation' by the designer, or, perhaps, just plain ignorance. (I'm reminded a bit of early Hollywood's abysmal representations of mediaeval armour and jousts. Ugh!) If it is a place-holder, however, it's a truly odd one, given the thoroughly unrealistic texture of the armour. After all, why bother to make something like that, if it's only temporary? It certainly doesn't look like something which could be corrected in post-production. If it were, they'd just be wearing pure blue or green suits, for CGI, nay?

In any case, from a practical armoury perspective, the design is preposterous, would require ridiculously elaborate manufacturing with mediaeval technology, and would lend nothing to defence. Furthermore, there's really no comparison between that armour and CDPR's Nilfgaardian coat, which is a solid, accurate, reasonable harness, appropriate for heavy infantry and foot-knights. This leads me to wonder how much disappointment there may be, when audiences who've played the games watch this series. Amongst those with an eye for details, I wager rather a lot.

That, and the final result looks like something a high school student might come up with when asked to design D&D armor that looks like "bad guys".

I simply don't see how the design in any way captures the weight or down-to-earth grittiness of The Witcher universe. It looks like a design that Marvel may have rejected for The Avengers.
 
Where are the actual pictures though?

Hm? The video is supposedly the actual costuming. To be fair, a lot can be done in post to play with lighting and texture...but I don't think there's much to be done to try to qualify that armor design as a rooted, worldly concept. Maybe it's all part of a "dream sequence" or something...
 
It's just poor design across the board. Look at Cavill in the wig in his first appearance. Everyone mocked it because it's poorly done. They've hired the wrong people for the job, plain and simple. Which is a shame because when it comes to directors, cinematography and effects they've hired some the best talent in the business.
 
Not digging costume work on the show. Maybe it will look better with proper cinematography, but so far... It feels like we were spoiled by GoT and Witcher games.
 
Top Bottom