English
8.093
2019
Poland
Geralt of Rivia, a mutated monster-hunter for hire, journeys toward his destiny in a turbulent world where people often prove more wicked than beasts.
Overview
Reviews
Mark Rushow wrote:It got better a couple episodes in. A lot felt forced, stiff, and didn't have enough suspension of disbelief (that magic touch). But it was good enough to keep me watching and liking it more as it went on. I didn't like the puzzle of events though. Can't wait for a fan edit putting events in sequential order. Just that thing that is hard to put into words. You feel it is all fake whether it is acting, timing, camera work, wire work, choreography or what not. Closer to Shannara chronicles than Game of Thrones in suspension of disbelief. Or World of Warcraft (the movie) rather than Lord of the Rings.
Sushruta wrote:I finished watching The Wicher at one go straight, so it is evident that it kept me hooked until the very end. Let me be clear about something: I am not much of a fan of these medieval sagas. But something about The Witcher struck me as different.
Yes, there are many flaws. The acting of the supporting cast is not very strong, the storyline is a bit obvious, and sometimes things happen too conveniently for the story to progress.
But the good things certainly dominate the bad things. The "Dunkirk approach" to the editing mostly worked well, even though ambiguity remained at certain places. I guess those will be cleared in the second season. Henry Cavill was magnificent as the titular character. The dialogues were very strong too, thanks to its source material.
The pace of the series was strong, and it picked up interest as the episodes rolled by. I, personally, preferred this over the Game of Thrones (I know I am going to get a lot of flak for this), but hey, choices, right?
CyberManX wrote:Solid series. One flaw, that kept it from getting 5 stars, is how the show deals with the multiple timelines in Season 1. It could have definetly been handled better. I am looking forward to future seasons.
Donzauker99 wrote:the timeline is the critical issue in this show.
it is not consistent in the last two episodes how comes that after syntra distruction the girl spent more than 4 days walking around the continent while the Witcher maybe 2 days before the event I do not want to spoil.
Dialogues are an issue too..: I do not like the millenial slang in a show that take place in a medieval/fantasy time.
Donza.
Dean wrote:Black Triss Merigold, non-white Yennifer, black elves in the middle of medieval Europe... This is abomination of Witcher world. The only characters that looks and sounds just like in game is Geralt.
Peter89Spencer wrote:Wow!
The Witcher was a thrilling Netflix series, with stunning special effect, superb choreographic fight scenes and a great cast.
Henry Cavill wa awesome as Geralt.
Though I was feeling confused with the different timelines for each episode, I did understood why, and it finally brought us all to speed on the last 2 episodes.
Can't wait for series 2 to come.
Hachado wrote:I originally watched this in 2019 when it released and was a big fan, the world was captivating and interesting yet bleak and grounded. Such was my interest, I shortly after played all the games and began reading the books, now two years later and with season 2 about to come out I decided it was worth a rewatch.
On my second watch I wasn't quite as impressed, now able to judge the show both as an adaptation of material, characters and stories I was familiar with from other works and also able to better analyse the show as a piece of television in its own right now that I could better understand the quite convoluted plot and timeline.
The Show is an attempt to adapt two collections of short stories that serve as precursors to the main witcher series, these stories are often only loosely connected although are often thematically related and take place over a huge span of time and place. The show ambitiously tries to construct a cohesive narrative out of this in 8 episodes and it doesn't really quite work, limited to only 8 episodes so much subtlety and intricacy is lost and that which is there, is often poorly explained. I blamed myself on my initial watch for often being confused at what was happening but now after watching again while familiar with the source material I don't feel the show really does a good job of setting up the political background and bounces from one extreme to another either name dumping with no context or flanderization such as Nilfgaard = Nazis.
I would never expect a Movie or Tv show to be able to capture or match everything from a book series where the only limit is the readers imagination but was very surprised how I much preferred nearly all the voice acting and visual aesthetics of the video games compared to the show, from the creature design to the Nilfgaardian armour to the sense of character I think the games does it all better. The acting here overall isn't great, although I do like Cavil as Geralt.
Overall I still think the first season was decent and I did still enjoy it and hopefully pretends better to come but can't say it particularly succeeds either as an adaption of the first two witcher books or as a particularly well crafted piece of television.
Hachado wrote:I originally watched this in 2019 when it released and was a big fan,
the world was captivating and interesting yet bleak and grounded. Such
was my interest, I shortly after played all the games and began reading
the books, now two years later and with season 2 about to come out I
decided it was worth a rewatch.
On my second watch I wasn't quite as impressed, now able to judge the
show both as an adaptation of material, characters and stories I was
familiar with from other works and also able to better analyse the show
as a piece of television in its own right now that I could better
understand the quite convoluted plot and timeline.
The Show is an attempt to adapt two collections of short stories that
serve as precursors to the main witcher series, these stories are often
only loosely connected although are often thematically related and take
place over a huge span of time and place.
This could lend itself nicely to an anthology style monster of the week collection with common themes, characters and world building however the The show ambitiously tries to construct a cohesive narrative out of this in 8 episodes and it doesn't really quite work, limited to only 8 episodes so much subtlety and intricacy is lost and that which is there, is often poorly explained. I blamed myself on my initial watch for often being confused at what was
happening but now after watching again while familiar with the source
material I don't feel the show really does a good job of setting up the
political background and bounces from one extreme to another either name
dumping with no context or flanderization such as Nilfgaard = Nazis.
I would never expect a Movie or Tv show to be able to capture or
match everything from a book series where the only limit is the readers
imagination but was very surprised how I much preferred nearly all the
voice acting and visual aesthetics of the video games compared to the
show, from the creature design to the Nilfgaardian armour to the sense
of character I think the games does it all better. The acting here
overall isn't great, although I do like Cavil as Geralt.
Overall I still think the first season was decent and I did still
enjoy it and hopefully pretends better to come but can't say it
particularly succeeds either as an adaption of the first two witcher
books or as a particularly well crafted piece of television.
Avishka_4500 wrote:My rating is 3/5. If you think wooow unbelievable this part, you are absolutely wrong. because I feel that some boring episodes here.
Zugifilmofil wrote:I'm not big fan of fantasy movies or shows but I started to watch and it was pretty good. But then it came second season and it was terrible. Third is also not good and its more about side actors than Whitcher itself. Also it became another woke trash that I hope was not in the book. Also, except from main character acting is not good also, especially two women side actors. I gave it rather high score of 6 just because of first season, but otherwise it would be 3 or 4. You know what, just after this review I will give it 5 because as I write this I came to realize it did not deserve more. Like so many possibly good movies and shows today, ruined by woke stuff.
moviemovement wrote:The first season was going really great. But by season two, they altered the story from the book so much and completely ruined this Polish piece of art.
Dean wrote:Cast is the biggest turn off for this show. It's totally different from the games series or the book. It's a huge downgrade to watch this garbage after "Outlander". Forced diversity sucks. Oh and there isn't such a thing as a black elf, but stupid people who made this show apparently don't know about it.
sirdorius wrote:The first season was pretty good in my opinion. It was not perfect because of the confusing timeline and some poor casting choices (Fringilla in particular). But at least it followed the story of the books.
But season 2 hurts. The writers of the show are rewriting the story unnecessarily, and it turns out much worse than the original material. Except for episode 1, the writers of this show simply do not understand what makes The Witcher world interesting. The Deathless Mother is boring, the brief glimpse of the Wild Hunt is boring and out of a million creepy and original monsters, the series finale has them fighting a bunch of velociraptors, because this is apparently Jurassic Park.
And while Henry Cavill isn't doing so great in the role of Geralt, I can hardly blame him, considering the bad dialogue writing overall. Freya Allan as Ciri is the best thing in this series. And to think that they almost didn't cast her just shows how out of touch the producers of this show are.
Just follow the books, and maybe this series can be saved.
Edit: Season 3 is such a trainwreck, it doesn't even deserve a review.
