The Witcher (Netflix TV series)

I started up on this a couple of days ago. I got through the first three episodes and came to the conclusion that I had no clue as to what was going on. So, I decided to come to this thread to see if anything was explained better. I saw the part about there being several different timelines, so when I got to episode 4 and dead Queen Mama showed up again it wasn't too much of a WTF moment.

I guess I can say I'm enjoying it, I just can't make much sense out of it.

How and why did humpback girl turn into hot girl? Did she have a baby during the process? Is that what attacked Witcher when he hid in that coffin?

Who is chasing humpback/hot girl through those portals and why?

Is the princess marrying porcupine man the same little girl running around with the black elf guy? Is she de-aging or something?

Not much of this show makes very much sense, but I'll see it through.
 
Laspector said:
I started up on this a couple of days ago. I got through the first three episodes and came to the conclusion that I had no clue as to what was going on. So, I decided to come to this thread to see if anything was explained better. I saw the part about there being several different timelines, so when I got to episode 4 and dead Queen Mama showed up again it wasn't too much of a WTF moment.

I guess I can say I'm enjoying it, I just can't make much sense out of it.

How and why did humpback girl turn into hot girl? Did she have a baby during the process? Is that what attacked Witcher when he hid in that coffin?

Who is chasing humpback/hot girl through those portals and why?

Is the princess marrying porcupine man the same little girl running around with the black elf guy? Is she de-aging or something?

Not much of this show makes very much sense, but I'll see it through.
Click to expand...

Magic turned her into hot woman.
No she had a hysterectomy as part of the ritual to make her look the way she does now.
No, different creature.

Just an assassin.

No that girl is the child of the Princess and Porcupine guy.
 
I never got their use of being out of order time-wise. It wasn't a surprise twist thing, you saw they were jumping around, but the way the did wasn't overt enough to not confuse people. And i think that's all it achieved - it made things confusing, it didn't come off as a twist and it didn't come off clearly. They have been better served doing a Location/present day, or 10 years ago, etc. That was my only real complaint frankly.
 
cboath said:
I never got their use of being out of order time-wise. It wasn't a surprise twist thing, you saw they were jumping around, but the way the did wasn't overt enough to not confuse people. And i think that's all it achieved - it made things confusing, it didn't come off as a twist and it didn't come off clearly. They have been better served doing a Location/present day, or 10 years ago, etc. That was my only real complaint frankly.
Click to expand...

I think the time jumping added to the experience, but I think it could have been done better this instance. I find, in some stories, that the ability to see characters going through certain situations, but already knowing their fate (like the queen, the druid in her retinue, etc) changes the way you see events in a way that an author/story teller can use to their advantage.

But, there just wasn't enough evidence shown to differentiate one time from another to experience those things AS you watched the show (you had to go back and calculate how it changed previous scenes. by the time there's no doubting the time hopping, a lot of the potential to use that story telling technique is gone.
 
But it added nothing. You'd watch most of an episode then a scene appears and you're like, wth? this happened a long time ago. I'm not saying show it in order (which would hurt the story they're doing), but i'm saying you have to do a better job letting the viewer know the time frame they are in with this since it's not a 'reveal' aspect near the end of a season.

Either hide what you're doing for that 'ah-ha' moment, or be straight with the audience. You do yourself a disservice to muddy it up for no real reason.
 
:lol:

That's what I'm saying man. By the time you've watched enough episodes to see it's different time lines, and can tell them apart, the directors ability to have actually USED that to their advantage has been squandered for all previous episodes.
 
Even though the series is still going, I feel like I'm necro-posting here... Anyways...

Variety is reporting that Geralt is being recast with Liam Hemsworth taking over from Henry Cavill. I'm assuming this is due to Cavill's return to Superman.

variety.com

‘The Witcher’ Season 4 Recasts Geralt of Rivia With Liam Hemsworth, Henry Cavill to Exit Series

“The Witcher” has been renewed for a fourth season by Netflix, though the hit fantasy series will be missing one familiar face. Henry Cavill will exit the production after the upcoming …
variety.com variety.com
 
Sluis Van Shipyards said:
If that's true the show is dead. I can't see that he would leave with the way he fought to get that part because he loves the character.
Click to expand...
Cavill is a hardcore fan of the Witcher (reads the books, local expert on set, plays the games during lockdown) and has repeatedly asked for the show to be loyal to the source material.

The show has diverged pretty significantly from the books in the later half of season 1 and especially in season 2. Not sure about season 3 yet and although Cavill does claim it is closer to the books, there are some major changes in season 2 that are hard to overcome. Nevermind the recently statement by DeMayo that some of the writers disliked and even mocked the books and games aka the source material which could be a small sign behind the curtain.

I feel a little bad for Liam Hemsworth since he is getting mocked as the "wish" version of Cavill and its not his fault he is the recasted actor (it is a nice job for him). However, yeah I think the show is over. Even if Liam does an amazing job, unless the writers get better its likely over.
 
1667236729585.png


1667391568427.png
 
Last edited:
joberg said:
I'll vote for Mikkelsen in the role of the Witcher (y)
View attachment 1634417
Click to expand...
I feel Geralt is younger and more rugged, scarred and brutish from his fights with monsters. Mikkelsen always gives off an aura of wisdom and using his mind to solve problems (Hannibal, the best magician in Dr. Strange, LeChiffre getting out of his predicament using poker). He would be a cool witcher who is probably based around a sign and potions built.

We havent seen Liam in the outfit and he could look good as Geralt. Its the writing thats the issue.
 

Your message may be considered spam for the following reasons:

If you wish to reply despite these issues, check the box below before replying.
Be aware that malicious compliance may result in more severe penalties.

Similar threads

ghostryder
Dark Matter (Apple tv series)
Replies
3
Views
256
CB2001
CB2001
JiminSTLouis
Alien TV Series???
Replies
14
Views
995
CB2001
CB2001
gunnerk19
Top Gun: The TV series?
Replies
5
Views
499
Solo4114
Solo4114
renaissance_man
The Signal - Netflix
Replies
6
Views
427
joberg
joberg
renaissance_man
Spaceman - Netflix
Replies
11
Views
668
Halliwax
Halliwax
Back
Top