How did the show hold up for you?

[fra85uk]

4 minutes ago, Sir_Charrid said:

Which goes to show that maybe a good TV adaptation should throw the book out the window and ignore the source material?

 

I am not talking About adaptation. I am talking About in-show qualities. The main defects of the show do not stem from poor adaptation but originate from poor filming, poor storytelling, poor dialogue, underwhelming action (exception: ep7 cold open), overuse of tropes like fake-out deaths.

Edited January 12, 2022 by fra85uk

[Scarloc99]

47 minutes ago, DojoToad said:

Look at the poll in this very thread.  People invested enough in WoT to track down a forum have made their voices heard.  More people are unhappy with either changes or just overall quality of the show than are happy with it.

Angry people invested enough in WOT to go and vent about how bad it all is have made voices heard, that does not define the majority. 

[Terry05]

12 minutes ago, Raal Gurniss said:

Fair enough then, it is the best ever made series in history with absolutely nothing wrong with it….The highest possible quality throughout, the pinnacle of thousands of years of entertainment, flawless acting, flawless scripts, flawless special effects!

 

Is that really what you believe? Or is the series really not that good?

 

I can’t think of a single series that ever came close to perfection myself…

 

Are you sure your passion for the show isn’t impairing your judgement?

? Speaking of passion.

 

No, the show has flaws (what show doesn’t as you say also). I was simply saying that what you stated as fact in your initial post was simply your opinion.

[fra85uk]

1 minute ago, Sir_Charrid said:

Angry people invested enough in WOT to go and vent about how bad it all is have made voices heard, that does not define the majority. 

Yes but viewers ratings oscillating between 6.5/10 and 4.7/10 with top critics at 5.4/10 at least indicate that the majority find the show between passable and mediocre 

[notpropaganda73]

17 minutes ago, Raal Gurniss said:

Fair enough then, it is the best ever made series in history with absolutely nothing wrong with it….The highest possible quality throughout, the pinnacle of thousands of years of entertainment, flawless acting, flawless scripts, flawless special effects!

 

Is that really what you believe? Or is the series really not that good?

 

I can’t think of a single series that ever came close to perfection myself…

 

Are you sure your passion for the show isn’t impairing your judgement?

 

Why does saying "No I don't think the show is objectively bad" equal to "It is flawless" in your mind? Talk about a leap

[Terry05]

8 minutes ago, Sir_Charrid said:

Which goes to show that maybe a good TV adaptation should throw the book out the window and ignore the source material and therefore defends Rafes actions so far and says in future he should go much much further. 

 

And also the 65% on RT is the audience score. Last I checked there wasn’t even 5k votes. When I look at RT I tend to check the critic score only. Fans and haters of shows, especially when it is an adaption, brining with it an established fan base, tend to skew results. Prime example is IMDb. The show is not a 10/10 nor is it a 1/10.

[Gothic Flame]

13 minutes ago, Sir_Charrid said:

Which goes to show that maybe a good TV adaptation should throw the book out the window and ignore the source material and therefore defends Rafes actions so far and says in future he should go much much further. 

 

He's already done that. You're only saying differently because you want to pull the teeth from the opposing argument.

[fra85uk]

2 minutes ago, Terry05 said:

And also the 65% on RT is the audience score. Last I checked there wasn’t even 5k votes. When I look at RT I tend to check the critic score only. Fans and haters of shows, especially when it is an adaption, brining with it an established fan base, tend to skew results. Prime example is IMDb. The show is not a 10/10 nor is it a 1/10.

If you take away the 10 and 1 you still get a low result

[Terry05]

2 minutes ago, fra85uk said:

If you take away the 10 and 1 you still get a low result

Do you? A lot more 7-9 ratings than 2-6 from my memory 

[fra85uk]

Just now, Terry05 said:

Do you? A lot more 7-9 ratings than 2-6 from my memory 

There are lots more 10s than 1s. Imbd for example has 27% 10s (amazon astroturfing?) and 7% of 1s.

[Terry05]

1 minute ago, fra85uk said:

There are lots more 10s than 1s. Imbd for example has 27% 10s (amazon astroturfing?) and 7% of 1s.

But we said look at the ratings without the 10s and 1s…

[Terry05]

47.6% 7-9

18.2% 2-6

 

Looks solid enough to me.

 

[fra85uk]

1 minute ago, Terry05 said:

But we said look at the ratings without the 10s and 1s…

Exactly if from an average you take away  27% made of 10s and 7% made of 1s, the number goes down.

[Scarloc99]

4 minutes ago, Gothic Flame said:

He's already done that. You're only saying differently because you want to pull the teeth from the opposing argument.

Sorry not fully understanding your point, Rafe has in no way thrown out the book to the extent it has been done for the witcher. Understand that probably 5% of the book Witcher season 2 is based on is in the 2nd season show, I am not talking minor tweaks to lore or changes to character, pretty much the entire story has been thrown out and re written in massively significant ways. 

Lifted from a reddit post but the below are the main differences. Just note from about episode 4 or 5 onwards nothing in those episodes appears anywhere in the books and is not in anyway related to anything in the books. 

Characters

• Voleth Meir is not in the books. Completely new character.

• Geralt wouldn't use Ciri as bait in the books. Nor did he.

• Ciri is never possessed by a witch.

• Yennefer does not lose her magic in the books.

  • Yennefer never considers sacrificing Ciri for power. Nor does the opportunity ever arise.

• Yennefer is not captured by Niilfgard in the books.

  • Instead, she is blinded following Sodden after taking a fireball to the face from Fringilla. She then spends lots of time in recovery, then--on Dijkstra's orders--tails and saves Dandelion from Rience.

  • No one ever thinks she's dead in the books either (Geralt worries that she died after Sodden, if I recall, but finds out rather quickly she's still out there after visiting the Sodden memorial)

• Later in the series (Post Time of Contempt/Late Season 3 or early Season 4 by comparison), people suspect Yennefer of being a Nilfgaardian spy. But at no point does anyone suspect her of being a spy following Sodden.

• In the book, Triss is the Fourteenth mage who died at Sodden Hill (she didn't actually die, but everyone thought she did). In the show, Yennefer becomes the Fourteenth mage who died at Sodden Hill

• The Stregobor stuff isn't a thing in the books. He's there, but plays no important role.

• Vessemir wouldn't try to use Ciri's blood to create more witchers in the books. Nor would he ever allow Ciri to undergo the Trial. Nor would he let Eskel bring a bunch of hookers to Kaer Morhen

• In the books, Dandelion is actively working with Djikstra and the Redanian Secret Service. This is removed in the show It is implied that Djikstra is funding Dandelion's sandpiper activities, though Dandelion doesn't seem to be aware of who he is working with. This is speculative on my part though.

  • Also in the books, Dandelion is not nearly as comedic as he was in Season 2. He is funny, but they seemed to lean into that aspect of him for Season 2.

  • This is more my interpretation, but in the books, Dandelion is far wittier than he is in the show. He certainly doesn't come across as the type to talk to rats in the book.

• Djikstra is not a rambling drunk in the books (although I didn't find that to be a bad change. It was pretty interesting IMO).

• I don't believe Istredd even appears in Blood of Elves

• Francesa Findabar is not with the Scoia'tael in the books. By this, I mean she's not in the field with them, acting as their leader.

  • She is a member of the Brotherhood of Sorcerers, though she does harbor sympathies for their cause and occasionally meets with Scoia'tel leaders (Filavandrel, as an example). This relationship becomes relevant when she aids Niilfgaard during the Coup at Thanned

• Fringilla Vigo does not become de facto leader of Cintra in the books. Instead, she fucks off to Niilfgard

• Cahir is not captured by the Brotherhood following Sodden in the books. I don't even recall if he was at Sodden. As far as I recall, he traveled back to Niilfgard following the Fall of Cintra, and was imprisoned for failing to capture Ciri. We don't see him again for another two books after Sodden.

  • His execution plot-point never happened in the books.

  • Book Cahir is also not nearly as mustache-twirly-evil-villain as he is in the show. Cahir fans will know what I mean.

• Tissaia is hardly a significant character in the books.

  • Though when she is in the books, she explicitly does not trust the hero-act that Vilgefortz puts on. She is suspicious of him.

• Rience is not a magical bounty hunter in the books. He's an almost fanatical follower of Vilgefortz in the books.

  • Rience is scarred in the show and books, but in the books, it's because Yennefer uses her magic to wound him as he's interrogating Dandelion.

• Lydia Van Bredevoort does not develop her scars from sniffing a vial of elder blood in the books. Instead, her scars are a result of magical experimentation on Vilgefortz' orders, and her wounds are hidden with an illusion.

• Eskel is not turned into a Leshen and then killed (as far as we know. He's not in the books for long.)

• Vilgefortz and Tissaia are not a romantic thing, as far as I could tell. Nor are they really even partners. Vilgefortz is also the genuine champion of Sodden in the books. He does this to gain more authority in the Brotherhood.

  • Vilgy is also way stronger and smarter in the books then how he is depicted in the show. Also, Vilgy never says his classic line. This is a cardinal sin, imo.

• Nenekke is an old and religious lady. She doesn't go around dropping f-bombs in the books.

• Emhyr kept the fact that Ciri was his daughter a big secret in the books. Understandable, given his plans for her (cough Imperial Incest cough)

• Jarre in the books is a bit of a geek, who is very clearly awkward around girls, and has a crush on Ciri. But he's also smart, and good-intentioned. The show reduces him to a dick joke.

• Phillipa plays a much larger role in the book. She meets Geralt in Oxenfurt, and together, with Dandelion and Shani's help, they locate Rience.

• Shani was in the books. Where the hell is Shani in the show?

• Coen is a witcher from the gryphon school. However, in the show he bears a wolf school medallion

Plot Points

• Except for Ciri's training, there is not a single fight at Kaer Morhen. Never. There is no Leshen, nor is there the centipede thing with the claws. There is no possession.

  • There are only four witchers at Kaer Morhen (Vessemir, Eskel, Lambert, and Coen)

  • At Kaer Morhen, Ciri trains and exercises. Eventually, Triss arrives (on Geralt's request) and instructs Ciri on the basics of magic, as well as the Elder language.

• The plot point with Ciri's blood being able to make more witchers is not in the books.

  • Vesemir never collects her blood either. The thought of making more witchers is only ever entertained in the context of Ciri being raised as a girl vs. being raised as a witcher. But the mutagenic process itself/Trial of Grasses is never brought up.

• In the book, Triss travels with Ciri and Geralt to the Temple. In the show, she doesn't. We don't see her get sick.

  • On the path to the Temple is when they run into Yarpen Zigrin again. This doesn't happen in the show. As a result, Ciri doesn't visit Shaerrawedd, and there is no fight with the Scoia'tael.

• There is no fight at Melitele's Temple in the books. Never.

• Yennefer does not travel to the Temple to kidnap Ciri and sacrifice her in the books.

  • In the books, Ciri and Yennefer stay at the temple for a while. Ciri learns more magic.

  • Yennefer is invited to the temple by Geralt after Geralt has already left. See the 'Dear Friend,' bullet point further down.

  • There is no reunion between Geralt and Yennefer in Blood of Elves. They reunite outside Gors Velen in the next book.

• In the books, Rience does not find Ciri at the Temple. Instead, Geralt leaves Ciri in Nenekke's care to find Rience at Oxenfurt.

  • While in Oxenfurt, Geralt meets Phillipa, Dandelion, and Shani. They then track and fight Rience.

    • There is no Shani in the show. ?

    • In the show, Phillipa does not help Geralt find Rience, nor does she help Rience escape

  • In fact, Rience doesn't meet Ciri till the Time of Contempt, which is the next book following Blood of Elves.

• Dandelion doesn't sing at a tavern in Oxenfurt. He sings at Bleobheris, a sacred tree.

  • His Sandpiper plot is not a thing in the books.

  • Dandelion is not arrested in the books.

• The elf and Cintra plot is not in the books.

  • There is a non-human uprising in the North in the books, led by the Scoia'tael, but they are not given Cintra as a place of refuge by the Niilfgardians. Instead, Niilfgard is suspected of funding and arming them behind the scenes to stoke instability in the North.

• Francesca never gets pregnant. Nor does Emhyr commit infanticide against an elven baby in the books.

  • The notion that a pure-blooded elf hasn't been born in decades is also a Netflix invention. Elves have a much smaller window of time to get pregnant, but it still happens in the books. Avallach and Geralt talk about this in Tower of Swallow.

• The magical politics is a thing in the books, but is very different from the magical politics in the show. Stregobor does not interrogate or harm Yennefer, and neither do Tissaia/Vilgy use that as an excuse to seize Council seats.

  • Instead, the magical politics in the book are concerned with the growing distrust between the Kings and their magical advisors

    • The meeting of the Kings at the end of Season 2 is the meeting of the Kings in BoE that puts the Mages on edge, and is used to justify the Conclave in Time of Contempt. However, Tissaia is at the King's meeting in the show, which is not the case in the book. No mages were invited to the meeting in the books.

• When the Kings of the North meet, they do conclude it best to kill Ciri--so as to prevent her falling into Emhyr's hands (they don't want him to have a legitimate claim to the Cintran throne). However, the show cut the King's talk of war with Niilfgaard.

  • In the books, they believe a quick strike across the Yaruga could recapture Cintra, and deal a blow to the South. This conversation paves the way for the Second Great War, but does not happen in the show.

  • The show also leaves out the politics regarding Cintra's throne. Cordhingrer is visited by Geralt in the books, and they develop a plot to--essentially-- smear Calanthe's name and ruin her claim to the Cintrant throne, thus making Ciri's claim to the throne illegitimate. Thus, protecting her from the kings who want her dead for her political power.

• Again, the Voleth Meir plot is not in the books at all. Instead, Blood of Elves focuses on Ciri's training and planting the seeds for future conflicts.

  • I.e. the Second Great War, the Coup of Thanned, Character's motivations to capture Ciri, etc.

• The Monoliths are not a thing in the books.

• The 'Dear Friend,' bit is in reference to letters exchanged by Yennefer and Geralt while Geralt is in Oxenfurt hunting for Rience. Geralt asks Yennefer to travel to the temple to train Ciri. Again, Geralt and Yen don't actually meet though.

• In the books, Niilfgardians are depicted as something more akin to the Romans or English (Highly centralized government with progressive and aristocratic traditions and legal codes). In the books, they are not religious zealots. Though they are also not necessarily 'good' either.

• Yennefer and Cahir never have a team-up in the books.

• Tissaia does not recommend that Ciri be captured, nor does she suggest that anyone protecting her be captured as well. In fact, Tissaia's role in the show is dramatically overblown.

• Ciri is not with Geralt when he meets Nivellen.

• Istredd does not meet with Cordringer and Fenn in the books. Geralt does meet them to find information about Rience and Ciri.

[fra85uk]

2 minutes ago, Terry05 said:

47.6% 7-9

18.2% 2-6

 

Looks solid enough to me.

 

You were arguing that the average was underestimated because of 1s. I proved that it is overestimated for the 10s.

[Terry05]

1 minute ago, fra85uk said:

You were arguing that the average was underestimated because of 1s. I proved that it is overestimated for the 10s.

No I wasn’t. I said take both the 1s and 10s out of the equation.

[DojoToad]

1 hour ago, Terry05 said:

I’d be interested in seeing the numbers on that poll. How many people voted and then haven’t been back? How many votes are made up of accounts created by people already on DM who wanted to skew the numbers? Applies to people for and against the show. 

Doubt there are many, why waste your time if it doesn't matter to you.  But I can be Nynaeve, I mean naive, so who knows...

[fra85uk]

Just now, Terry05 said:

No I wasn’t. I said take both the 1s and 10s out of the equation.

And you get a lower number because the 10s are more than three times the 1s.

[DojoToad]

30 minutes ago, Sir_Charrid said:

Angry people invested enough in WOT to go and vent about how bad it all is have made voices heard, that does not define the majority. 

More people in this poll makes a majority in this poll.  I think you might not understand what majority means...

[Terry05]

2 minutes ago, fra85uk said:

And you get a lower number because the 10s are more than three times the 1s.

I’d be interested to see what the rating was without the two 

[DojoToad]

6 minutes ago, Terry05 said:

I’d be interested to see what the rating was without the two 

I would say anything 6 and above is positive.  Count the 10's - they probably don't think it is a 10 but they definitely like it.  Same with the 1's - they definitely don't like it, even if not actually that rabid.

 

[fra85uk]

7 minutes ago, Terry05 said:

I’d be interested to see what the rating was without the two 

 

It goes down to 7.04.

If you also take away 9 and 2, it goes 6.72.

[Deviations]

Un-Scientific:

1.  Are these newer actors 'blowing up'

2.  Is this series water cooler talk at anyone's job?

3.  Do you see news/entertainment articles on the front page of what ever feed you have or do you need to search for them?

[DojoToad]

No one talks about it where I work - but we only have about 25 people.

[Raal Gurniss]

1 hour ago, Sir_Charrid said:

Lol this is the kind of bias that makes people stop ever taking part in forums and leads to echo chamber mentality. 

You claim that the show just isn't that good, and then insist that if someone can find a single flaw it defends your point it isn t that good, however your follow up argument that all shows have flaws means that in your opinion no show is ever that good, therefore any adaptation of WOT would ever be that good. 

Are there some issuers, yes, can you find issues with every TV show, of course, can a TV show still be really good fun and enjoyable and loved and the flaws ignored, always. 


 

What bias? Whether I like show or not isn’t dependent on it being good or bad! I made that pretty clear….I like many technically less than good shows…Some are downright awful yet have enough charm for me to enjoy them.

 

WoT isn’t that good AND I don’t like it.

I could say “X” show isn’t that good but I do like it….Personal opinion doesn’t really come into the quality of the show m, WoT is about a 4-5/10 quality wise, in my opinion its more a 2-3/10 because I don’t personally like it…

 

Even if I massively enjoyed it I would still rate it 4-5/10 for quality even if I personally rated it 10/10.

 

What’s the issue with that? It really isn’t technically that good of a show, it’s certainly not anywhere near the best top 100 quality shows in the past 40 years….Not even close.