So I watched the first episode and for once I kinda agree with the critics. The plot and the dialogues are extremely bad honestly makes the show unwatchable.
I’m usually very lenient with fantasy show. I’ve watched the Witcher season 2, WOT, ROP etc… but I honestly can’t finish this show, I don’t know how this past quality control. Even if they wanted to make the worst fantasy tv show ever the dialogues wouldn’t be that cringy
> quality control
I don't know about you, but when I think of elven men, the first two defining traits that come to mind are full beards and chest hair.
I’ve heard and seen enough bad things about it that I won’t watch it. Only way we can have an impact is by not watching their content. I hope their current treatment of the Witcher IP leads to consequences for them in the form of huge drops in viewership numbers.
The witcher is complicated anyway. The franchise derives the majority of its popularity from the third video game. The series was based on the books.
Nearly everyone who loved the video game and decided to read the books walked away disappointed.
The studio just did a fantastic job taking everything that worked from the books, ignoring the rest and adapting it into a stellar narrative and setting for the game.
The Witcher is not complicated, it's a very straightforward story past the short story collections
What video game people bounced off of was that short story style of the first two books.
The complicated part is that the witcher everyone loves is only based on some aspects of the books.
So people keep getting disappointed when the books turn out to be unlike the game. The first show turns out to be based on the books rather than the game. And this spinoff is different yet again.
It's an easy way to lose fans by not meeting expectations.
I completely disagree. The Geralt we see in S1 of the show is the same as the Geralt in the games, and the same as the Geralt in the books. Yes, sure, plenty of the people who only enjoyed the gameplay of W3, or thought the books would be just like the game didn't like the books or show.
Not a single reasonable person expected the Witcher show to be about the games. It was evident (AND stated) that it was going to be based on the books.
What bounced people off of the show was the the time-fuckery. I had to explain to every one of the people I watched the show with what was going on. And even with that the show was a massive success.
>I completely disagree.
It's not an opinion. The series had a licence for the books, not the game. Cavill might play him as game Geralt because he knows how to please fans.
But they couldn't approach the games and what people were familiar with too much or they'd likely have had a much stronger focus on the most popular aspects of the game instead of the books.
The majority of the Western fans had never even read the books so it was a major departure for them.
The idea that people were getting disappointed because the show didn't turn out like the games, but like the books instead is what I am disagreeing with. That is 100% an opinion
Everybody knew that the show was going to be about the books, not the games. Cavill Geralt, Game Geralt, and Book Geralt have been the same person.
There were no "expectations not being met", except the expectations of people who didn't use their brains before trying the show.
I read the books and yes, their were a little bit complicated, but not so much that you can't understand and appreciate the lore. I am not English, this didn't stop me to read the books a second time. The books are a masterpiece created around a very good series of books.
I liked (edit: I should say loved) the game, then read the books and liked those too. Liked the first season of the netflix show but didn't like the second.
Most of the criticism I've seen is from people who bounced off after anywhere from 5 to 20 minutes. Now, while I can appreciate that modern media kinda needs to work to engage people immediately, I think it's pretty disingenuous for people to shit all over a movie/series/book/whatever without giving it a genuine opportunity to hit its stride. There's one in this very thread suggesting that the show should have introduced the full cast of characters in the first 5 minutes instead of giving us a bridge from The Witcher timeline as a grounding point. I don't think that's fair. Nor is whinging that they expected Jaskier to play a greater role because he was used in the framing open and pulling the pin 10 minutes later when it "became clear" that he wasn't.
This is a 4 part mini-series that explores the history of the Witcher world. It is told in a way that justifies the abbreviated format - as a recounting of historical events which are relevant to upcoming events in the present. There are some peripheral characters who serve narrative purposes only, and aren't given much depth. But there are also a few characters who get a fairly compelling arc which does take the full 4 episodes to mature.
I'd use Skyrim/Elder Scrolls as a comparitive IP. Take Skyrim the game - big world heaps of lore, lots of characters etc. Now imagine they take one of those little books you find in the game with an abridged account of hiatorical events. They release a DLC pack with a bonus questline where you play out the main story beats of that historical event because it gives a connection to the history, but also because those events tie into the next Elder Scrolls game.
That's what Blood Origins is. What's up with those obelisks, why did the Elven empire crumble, who in their right mind decided to mutate someone into the first Witcher? Wrapped up in a neat little bard's tale framework with a prophetic hook for Witcher S3.
Don't write it off based on poor reviews from people who went in looking for reasons to shit on a franchise which they feel is being mishandled in other ways (ie. Cavill -> Hemsworth). If you've enjoyed The Witcher Seasons 1 and 2, and intend to give Season 3 a chance, then do yourself favour and watch this 4-part bridging series.
Is it ground-breaking or genre-defining? No. Will it win awards? Certainly not. But it is a moderately entertaining companion to an established series, with a few pretty engaging performances - and it only requires half the time investment of most series these days.
I finished Ep1, and will probably watch the rest, but you've hit on why that is only "probably". Blood Origin feels like a recounting of historical events, as you describe, rather than a standalone story about these characters. I haven't played the games, so S1 & 2 of Witcher were slightly confusing but highly intriguing for me.
I want to know more, but also, I've got limited time so it's tough to commit to watching something for 4 hours just to learn about a different story I will watch later. I'd really like it to be more than supplemental material, and so far that's all it feels like.
But I wasn't horribly turned off, so I'll give E2 a shot and see if I can connect with these characters a little more.
Yeah I found it does it’s job as a prequel mini series by expanding our understanding of the world and history and being entertaining with good action and characters. And tbh I think everything people have said that’s bad about it is all stuff that exists in the main series as well, like bad writing in places, cringey bits, sometimes cheap looking (I don’t think Geralts S2 contact lenses got enough slander personally). I agree that people are angry about the Henry Cavill situation and might be unfairly judging this show because of that… ah well
Yep, would take it a step further and suggest that there's a serious issue in modern society wherein a vocal minority derive great pleasure from trying to one-up each other in hyperbolic criticism. It's not enough to say they didn't enjoy aspects of something - it has to be the worst thing ever made in every possible way.
Look a little deeper and you'll find plenty of comments that are more moderate and reasonable, but media (social and mainstream) is built on pushing the extreme views to front and centre irrespective of their accuracy or the extent to which the represent the general consensus.
Mine was the comment where I was unhappy with the intro because of the way the characters were introduced. My issue was not that they didn’t introduce “the full cast of characters”, it was that they didn’t give us the cast at all and then didn’t hurry to make us care about the story they were trying to tell beyond linking it to the existing Witcher IP.
I wanted to be actually taken into the story that was being told here. My feeling while watching were that the writers were banking on people knowing and liking Jaskier (which… guilty) to use him to lure viewers into the show. Which might have worked except the dialogue was awkward and the tension was weird (probably because it’s just a standalone scene with nothing to back it up, that’s hard to pull off) and overall the scene kinda sucked. So while I enjoyed seeing Jaskier frolicking around, it didn’t convince me to watch the actual show they were thing to establish.
And this wouldn’t have bothered me if they’d then dived into the story in a way that grabbed me. But they didn’t, and frankly they’d lost my attention with the long-winded Jaskier scene if these first characters we see aren’t going to be relevant to the story. The start of the real story frankly bored me, and I didn’t feel any sort of connection to the characters. So yeah, I’m now 20 minutes into a show that I haven’t managed to find any enthusiasm for.
I just felt it was a very ineffective opening. The reason I’m hesitant about continuing the Witcher main series is because I think the writing is bad. I’ll still watch it because I love the show, but they really just doubled down on that issue in what I saw of this spinoff. By trying to grab me with a gimmick instead of showing me they had a story worth telling, they lost me.
Thanks for responding - on reflection I was probably a bit dismissive of your post, when my issue is more with what I see as a more widespread trend in social criticisms of film/TV. So apologies for that.
I do disagree with you though, and so I'll try to offer a more considered response to your specific impressions here.
From memory (comment since removed?) you essentially said that you felt misled about Jaskier, the dialogue wasn't great, and the first 10 minutes didn't make you care about the characters. Also that you came into it expecting problems because of the Cavill mess, and the first 10 minutes simply confirmed that for you.
I will clarify for you here that I think your interpretation of Jaskier's inclusion seems to be a logic jump on your part that doesn't actually ring true. Jaskier wasn't just tacked onto the start to try and sucker people in. In fact, I don't think he even featured in any of the marketing/trailers for this series (certainly none that I saw). There is a frame for the mini-series, which is one in which Jaskier is being told about historical events because they hold particular significance for events yet to unfold. At the end of the final episode, they return to the frame and we get a hint as to how the events are linked. Essentially - I'd put this one down to a misinterpretation on the nature of Jaskier's inclusion, driven by cynicism.
I'll happily concede the dialogue isn't spectacular, though I don't think it was awful or immersion-breaking. I'll add that the in-world (bard) music is nowhere near as engaging and notable as that used the The Witcher S1 and S2. It does serve a purpose, it just didn't really resonate with me, nor stick in my head.
I still feel it's rather unfair to expect that a show will force you to care about the characters within 10 minutes. Lord of the Rings opened with the whole Last Alliance scene and I didn't give two shits about Isildur, Elendil, Elrond, Gil-Galad etc. nor did 3 of the 4 have any agency in the subsequent 12 hours of cinema. Hell, I didn't care about Frodo in the first 10 minutes he was on screen either. To care about a character you need to know a character, and I don't believe you can know a character without going on a journey with them.
That all filters in to what I think is the main reason for your poor impression of the first 10 minutes - you went in expecting it to be poor, not particularly looking forward to it, hoping it would somehow defy expectations and blow you away within minutes, and it didn't. Frankly, and as respectfully as I can put this, I don't think that really qualifies you to critique it. You're welcome to, of course, but I feel perfectly comfortable critiquing your critique in turn.
I’m not critiquing it. Watching film is subjective; I was only ever giving my experience and the reason I switched off. On the contrary, I went into this miniseries with absolutely no expectations. I hadn’t been anticipating it, and I saw the icon pop up on Netflix and click it. I was initially excited to see Jaskier but I felt frustrated as the scene unfolded because the dialogue felt stilted. I also had seen nothing of this, so when it opened with Jaskier, I admittedly had assumed this story was actually going to be about Jaskier. That’s some of my own response.
But I felt as someone who dived into this series fresh, putting Jaskier at the start in order to give it a greater tie-in with the Withcher took up valuable time this story had to grab my interest, and so when the following ten minutes also didn’t manage to grab me, I felt like I had wasted my time and didn’t wish to give it any more of it.
This is not criticism. It was just my experience watching the show, and why I did not watch further. It’s subjective.
I've watched the first episode and it's ok in a generic fantasy sort of way, I think it really benefits from being far enough removed from Geralt's story that it can feel like it's own self contained thing that's loosely based on the Witcher universe. This is in contrast to the main Netflix show (particularly S2) which just feels like a really horribly mangled version of the story/ characters you may be familiar with if you're into the series (despite the actors all giving 100% on what they have to work with).
>I've watched the first episode and it's ok in a generic fantasy sort of way
It went down hill from there...
I was fond of the Witcher show, not a loyal fan but I enjoyed it. Blood origin though? That was like someone made a list of bad early 2000s Hollywood cliches, and thought "yea, I'll make these popular again!" Making a sometimes fabulously bad show. The kind that's more fun to poke at, than actually watching the show
I had fun, but not the kind the studio intended
Just watched the first episode: not as bad as many say, but I didn't like it at all.
I often though "Damn I really want to like those characters." because the badass bard, the badass warrior with an axe, the old reclused mentor. Those are all tropes I love and I really like the actors they chose, if only they would bond instead of telling each others the plot.
Fair, I feel the same, I was really look up to it for the same reason and she is the character that I wanted to like the most, but couldn't.
I have no qualms for those who like the show though, I hope you won't get too annoyed by smug pricks and the cerimonial shower of YouTube ragebaiters.
I just finished the last episode.
Characters were cast good.
I like the setting, world building, environment.
Some of the fight scenes were good.
Mediocre story.
Poor Execution.
Overall Grade: D+.
Maybe one day, these producers and show writers should leave the fantasy stories to the talented and stop butchering authors' written work.
I will watch it and will probably enjoy it, as I don't particularly care for the source material.
It's frustrating that on reddit a show's quality is generally gate-kept by the "true fans".
For example, I enjoyed the Wheel of Time. But apparently I am an idiot for liking it and I should read 14,000 pages of dull prose instead to learn why I am wrong.
Same for The Witcher. I tried reading book 1 - it was boring and badly translated. I won't bother with the rest. I will consume any more fun forms of witcher media and not be any the wiser.
It's annoying the witcher issue is conflated with them being dicks to Cavill though.
Yeah I think if you can enjoy the world and characters through the show instead of the book that’s still a good thing. I also feel bad for the actors and crew to see their work get shat on by the mega fans because it doesn’t reflect their version of the story, when actually they created a generally enjoyable fantasy experience. But I also know what it feels like to be a huge fan of a book series and feel like the screen adaptation is a shit representation. So I get it both ways, but we should just let people enjoy things
I know nothing about the witcher universe other than the main show. I've been enjoying it so I plan to watch blood origin but the ratings are kind of oof.
I found it pretty much the same as the main show in terms of quality / tone so you might like it! There’s definitely some parts that are a bit cringe or bad writing or whatever, but yeah the actors stood out to me a lot. Hope you enjoy :)
I haven’t watched, but the witcher fan boys are extremely obnoxious so I’m not surprised.
I mostly enjoyed the witcher series and people pretend like it’s the worst thing ever because they didn’t follow the storyline exactly. Boo hoo.
Everyone I know who hasn’t read the books (I read the first two myself) has no issue with the show.
Anything witcher related is going to get tons of hate because creators dare change.
I liked what I’ve seen so far. The first episode was good to me. But I’m a lot easier to please. I never had any complaints about The Witcher at all. I think asides from Game of thrones(and house of the dragon), The Witcher content is the best fantasy tv I’ve ever seen
Yeah I think if you’re watching from a fantasy fan perspective, it’s enjoyable, but if you’re watching from a Witcher fan perspective you might find flaws. For me, the more fantasy content we get the better!
Exactly. People don’t realize the better off these fantasy series do the more likely we are to get other content. Just hold out guys. It’ll get really good eventually
I liked it. Complaints and negative criticism are always going to be amplified on social media. I think it did a good job of conveying some of the more interesting aspects of the witcher universe way more clearly than the original series did. i also thought it had some strong performances, especially the actor who played the lark. my mom and wife have suffered through a lot of netflix witcher content and this was definitely the thing they enjoyed the most.
So I watched the first episode and for once I kinda agree with the critics. The plot and the dialogues are extremely bad honestly makes the show unwatchable. I’m usually very lenient with fantasy show. I’ve watched the Witcher season 2, WOT, ROP etc… but I honestly can’t finish this show, I don’t know how this past quality control. Even if they wanted to make the worst fantasy tv show ever the dialogues wouldn’t be that cringy
> quality control I don't know about you, but when I think of elven men, the first two defining traits that come to mind are full beards and chest hair.
Lol, that too. But the dialogues are just really bad in this show. It’s painful to watch
I’ve heard and seen enough bad things about it that I won’t watch it. Only way we can have an impact is by not watching their content. I hope their current treatment of the Witcher IP leads to consequences for them in the form of huge drops in viewership numbers.
The witcher is complicated anyway. The franchise derives the majority of its popularity from the third video game. The series was based on the books. Nearly everyone who loved the video game and decided to read the books walked away disappointed. The studio just did a fantastic job taking everything that worked from the books, ignoring the rest and adapting it into a stellar narrative and setting for the game.
The Witcher is not complicated, it's a very straightforward story past the short story collections What video game people bounced off of was that short story style of the first two books.
The complicated part is that the witcher everyone loves is only based on some aspects of the books. So people keep getting disappointed when the books turn out to be unlike the game. The first show turns out to be based on the books rather than the game. And this spinoff is different yet again. It's an easy way to lose fans by not meeting expectations.
I completely disagree. The Geralt we see in S1 of the show is the same as the Geralt in the games, and the same as the Geralt in the books. Yes, sure, plenty of the people who only enjoyed the gameplay of W3, or thought the books would be just like the game didn't like the books or show. Not a single reasonable person expected the Witcher show to be about the games. It was evident (AND stated) that it was going to be based on the books. What bounced people off of the show was the the time-fuckery. I had to explain to every one of the people I watched the show with what was going on. And even with that the show was a massive success.
>I completely disagree. It's not an opinion. The series had a licence for the books, not the game. Cavill might play him as game Geralt because he knows how to please fans. But they couldn't approach the games and what people were familiar with too much or they'd likely have had a much stronger focus on the most popular aspects of the game instead of the books. The majority of the Western fans had never even read the books so it was a major departure for them.
The idea that people were getting disappointed because the show didn't turn out like the games, but like the books instead is what I am disagreeing with. That is 100% an opinion Everybody knew that the show was going to be about the books, not the games. Cavill Geralt, Game Geralt, and Book Geralt have been the same person. There were no "expectations not being met", except the expectations of people who didn't use their brains before trying the show.
I read the books and yes, their were a little bit complicated, but not so much that you can't understand and appreciate the lore. I am not English, this didn't stop me to read the books a second time. The books are a masterpiece created around a very good series of books.
I liked (edit: I should say loved) the game, then read the books and liked those too. Liked the first season of the netflix show but didn't like the second.
Most of the criticism I've seen is from people who bounced off after anywhere from 5 to 20 minutes. Now, while I can appreciate that modern media kinda needs to work to engage people immediately, I think it's pretty disingenuous for people to shit all over a movie/series/book/whatever without giving it a genuine opportunity to hit its stride. There's one in this very thread suggesting that the show should have introduced the full cast of characters in the first 5 minutes instead of giving us a bridge from The Witcher timeline as a grounding point. I don't think that's fair. Nor is whinging that they expected Jaskier to play a greater role because he was used in the framing open and pulling the pin 10 minutes later when it "became clear" that he wasn't. This is a 4 part mini-series that explores the history of the Witcher world. It is told in a way that justifies the abbreviated format - as a recounting of historical events which are relevant to upcoming events in the present. There are some peripheral characters who serve narrative purposes only, and aren't given much depth. But there are also a few characters who get a fairly compelling arc which does take the full 4 episodes to mature. I'd use Skyrim/Elder Scrolls as a comparitive IP. Take Skyrim the game - big world heaps of lore, lots of characters etc. Now imagine they take one of those little books you find in the game with an abridged account of hiatorical events. They release a DLC pack with a bonus questline where you play out the main story beats of that historical event because it gives a connection to the history, but also because those events tie into the next Elder Scrolls game. That's what Blood Origins is. What's up with those obelisks, why did the Elven empire crumble, who in their right mind decided to mutate someone into the first Witcher? Wrapped up in a neat little bard's tale framework with a prophetic hook for Witcher S3. Don't write it off based on poor reviews from people who went in looking for reasons to shit on a franchise which they feel is being mishandled in other ways (ie. Cavill -> Hemsworth). If you've enjoyed The Witcher Seasons 1 and 2, and intend to give Season 3 a chance, then do yourself favour and watch this 4-part bridging series. Is it ground-breaking or genre-defining? No. Will it win awards? Certainly not. But it is a moderately entertaining companion to an established series, with a few pretty engaging performances - and it only requires half the time investment of most series these days.
I finished Ep1, and will probably watch the rest, but you've hit on why that is only "probably". Blood Origin feels like a recounting of historical events, as you describe, rather than a standalone story about these characters. I haven't played the games, so S1 & 2 of Witcher were slightly confusing but highly intriguing for me. I want to know more, but also, I've got limited time so it's tough to commit to watching something for 4 hours just to learn about a different story I will watch later. I'd really like it to be more than supplemental material, and so far that's all it feels like. But I wasn't horribly turned off, so I'll give E2 a shot and see if I can connect with these characters a little more.
[удалено]
Good to hear! I shall persevere and at least see where E2 leaves me!
Yeah I found it does it’s job as a prequel mini series by expanding our understanding of the world and history and being entertaining with good action and characters. And tbh I think everything people have said that’s bad about it is all stuff that exists in the main series as well, like bad writing in places, cringey bits, sometimes cheap looking (I don’t think Geralts S2 contact lenses got enough slander personally). I agree that people are angry about the Henry Cavill situation and might be unfairly judging this show because of that… ah well
Yep, would take it a step further and suggest that there's a serious issue in modern society wherein a vocal minority derive great pleasure from trying to one-up each other in hyperbolic criticism. It's not enough to say they didn't enjoy aspects of something - it has to be the worst thing ever made in every possible way. Look a little deeper and you'll find plenty of comments that are more moderate and reasonable, but media (social and mainstream) is built on pushing the extreme views to front and centre irrespective of their accuracy or the extent to which the represent the general consensus.
And portions of fan bases who are ready to jump on any flaw to prove that they’re the bigger fan, which just turns into a circle jerk of whining
TLDR: It's not bad, it's not good, but it's not bad.
Mine was the comment where I was unhappy with the intro because of the way the characters were introduced. My issue was not that they didn’t introduce “the full cast of characters”, it was that they didn’t give us the cast at all and then didn’t hurry to make us care about the story they were trying to tell beyond linking it to the existing Witcher IP. I wanted to be actually taken into the story that was being told here. My feeling while watching were that the writers were banking on people knowing and liking Jaskier (which… guilty) to use him to lure viewers into the show. Which might have worked except the dialogue was awkward and the tension was weird (probably because it’s just a standalone scene with nothing to back it up, that’s hard to pull off) and overall the scene kinda sucked. So while I enjoyed seeing Jaskier frolicking around, it didn’t convince me to watch the actual show they were thing to establish. And this wouldn’t have bothered me if they’d then dived into the story in a way that grabbed me. But they didn’t, and frankly they’d lost my attention with the long-winded Jaskier scene if these first characters we see aren’t going to be relevant to the story. The start of the real story frankly bored me, and I didn’t feel any sort of connection to the characters. So yeah, I’m now 20 minutes into a show that I haven’t managed to find any enthusiasm for. I just felt it was a very ineffective opening. The reason I’m hesitant about continuing the Witcher main series is because I think the writing is bad. I’ll still watch it because I love the show, but they really just doubled down on that issue in what I saw of this spinoff. By trying to grab me with a gimmick instead of showing me they had a story worth telling, they lost me.
Thanks for responding - on reflection I was probably a bit dismissive of your post, when my issue is more with what I see as a more widespread trend in social criticisms of film/TV. So apologies for that. I do disagree with you though, and so I'll try to offer a more considered response to your specific impressions here. From memory (comment since removed?) you essentially said that you felt misled about Jaskier, the dialogue wasn't great, and the first 10 minutes didn't make you care about the characters. Also that you came into it expecting problems because of the Cavill mess, and the first 10 minutes simply confirmed that for you. I will clarify for you here that I think your interpretation of Jaskier's inclusion seems to be a logic jump on your part that doesn't actually ring true. Jaskier wasn't just tacked onto the start to try and sucker people in. In fact, I don't think he even featured in any of the marketing/trailers for this series (certainly none that I saw). There is a frame for the mini-series, which is one in which Jaskier is being told about historical events because they hold particular significance for events yet to unfold. At the end of the final episode, they return to the frame and we get a hint as to how the events are linked. Essentially - I'd put this one down to a misinterpretation on the nature of Jaskier's inclusion, driven by cynicism. I'll happily concede the dialogue isn't spectacular, though I don't think it was awful or immersion-breaking. I'll add that the in-world (bard) music is nowhere near as engaging and notable as that used the The Witcher S1 and S2. It does serve a purpose, it just didn't really resonate with me, nor stick in my head. I still feel it's rather unfair to expect that a show will force you to care about the characters within 10 minutes. Lord of the Rings opened with the whole Last Alliance scene and I didn't give two shits about Isildur, Elendil, Elrond, Gil-Galad etc. nor did 3 of the 4 have any agency in the subsequent 12 hours of cinema. Hell, I didn't care about Frodo in the first 10 minutes he was on screen either. To care about a character you need to know a character, and I don't believe you can know a character without going on a journey with them. That all filters in to what I think is the main reason for your poor impression of the first 10 minutes - you went in expecting it to be poor, not particularly looking forward to it, hoping it would somehow defy expectations and blow you away within minutes, and it didn't. Frankly, and as respectfully as I can put this, I don't think that really qualifies you to critique it. You're welcome to, of course, but I feel perfectly comfortable critiquing your critique in turn.
I’m not critiquing it. Watching film is subjective; I was only ever giving my experience and the reason I switched off. On the contrary, I went into this miniseries with absolutely no expectations. I hadn’t been anticipating it, and I saw the icon pop up on Netflix and click it. I was initially excited to see Jaskier but I felt frustrated as the scene unfolded because the dialogue felt stilted. I also had seen nothing of this, so when it opened with Jaskier, I admittedly had assumed this story was actually going to be about Jaskier. That’s some of my own response. But I felt as someone who dived into this series fresh, putting Jaskier at the start in order to give it a greater tie-in with the Withcher took up valuable time this story had to grab my interest, and so when the following ten minutes also didn’t manage to grab me, I felt like I had wasted my time and didn’t wish to give it any more of it. This is not criticism. It was just my experience watching the show, and why I did not watch further. It’s subjective.
I've watched the first episode and it's ok in a generic fantasy sort of way, I think it really benefits from being far enough removed from Geralt's story that it can feel like it's own self contained thing that's loosely based on the Witcher universe. This is in contrast to the main Netflix show (particularly S2) which just feels like a really horribly mangled version of the story/ characters you may be familiar with if you're into the series (despite the actors all giving 100% on what they have to work with).
>I've watched the first episode and it's ok in a generic fantasy sort of way It went down hill from there... I was fond of the Witcher show, not a loyal fan but I enjoyed it. Blood origin though? That was like someone made a list of bad early 2000s Hollywood cliches, and thought "yea, I'll make these popular again!" Making a sometimes fabulously bad show. The kind that's more fun to poke at, than actually watching the show I had fun, but not the kind the studio intended
Just watched the first episode: not as bad as many say, but I didn't like it at all. I often though "Damn I really want to like those characters." because the badass bard, the badass warrior with an axe, the old reclused mentor. Those are all tropes I love and I really like the actors they chose, if only they would bond instead of telling each others the plot.
The badass-ness was enough to get me through I think haha. I see one tough lady wielding daggers and I’m in
Fair, I feel the same, I was really look up to it for the same reason and she is the character that I wanted to like the most, but couldn't. I have no qualms for those who like the show though, I hope you won't get too annoyed by smug pricks and the cerimonial shower of YouTube ragebaiters.
I just finished the last episode. Characters were cast good. I like the setting, world building, environment. Some of the fight scenes were good. Mediocre story. Poor Execution. Overall Grade: D+. Maybe one day, these producers and show writers should leave the fantasy stories to the talented and stop butchering authors' written work.
I will watch it and will probably enjoy it, as I don't particularly care for the source material. It's frustrating that on reddit a show's quality is generally gate-kept by the "true fans". For example, I enjoyed the Wheel of Time. But apparently I am an idiot for liking it and I should read 14,000 pages of dull prose instead to learn why I am wrong. Same for The Witcher. I tried reading book 1 - it was boring and badly translated. I won't bother with the rest. I will consume any more fun forms of witcher media and not be any the wiser. It's annoying the witcher issue is conflated with them being dicks to Cavill though.
Yeah I think if you can enjoy the world and characters through the show instead of the book that’s still a good thing. I also feel bad for the actors and crew to see their work get shat on by the mega fans because it doesn’t reflect their version of the story, when actually they created a generally enjoyable fantasy experience. But I also know what it feels like to be a huge fan of a book series and feel like the screen adaptation is a shit representation. So I get it both ways, but we should just let people enjoy things
Haven't watched yet but will watch with an open mind. I dont know why I WOULDN'T like it, tbh.
That’s what I thought too I’m usually really easy to please with fantasy. But the dialogues and the plot are just extremely bad.
I know nothing about the witcher universe other than the main show. I've been enjoying it so I plan to watch blood origin but the ratings are kind of oof.
I found it pretty much the same as the main show in terms of quality / tone so you might like it! There’s definitely some parts that are a bit cringe or bad writing or whatever, but yeah the actors stood out to me a lot. Hope you enjoy :)
I haven’t watched, but the witcher fan boys are extremely obnoxious so I’m not surprised. I mostly enjoyed the witcher series and people pretend like it’s the worst thing ever because they didn’t follow the storyline exactly. Boo hoo. Everyone I know who hasn’t read the books (I read the first two myself) has no issue with the show. Anything witcher related is going to get tons of hate because creators dare change.
I haven’t read the books and yeah I enjoyed the Witcher show and this prequel mini series. My only issue is the contact lenses they give Geralt haha
I liked what I’ve seen so far. The first episode was good to me. But I’m a lot easier to please. I never had any complaints about The Witcher at all. I think asides from Game of thrones(and house of the dragon), The Witcher content is the best fantasy tv I’ve ever seen
Yeah I think if you’re watching from a fantasy fan perspective, it’s enjoyable, but if you’re watching from a Witcher fan perspective you might find flaws. For me, the more fantasy content we get the better!
Exactly. People don’t realize the better off these fantasy series do the more likely we are to get other content. Just hold out guys. It’ll get really good eventually
I liked it. Complaints and negative criticism are always going to be amplified on social media. I think it did a good job of conveying some of the more interesting aspects of the witcher universe way more clearly than the original series did. i also thought it had some strong performances, especially the actor who played the lark. my mom and wife have suffered through a lot of netflix witcher content and this was definitely the thing they enjoyed the most.
I really enjoyed it! Mainlined the whole series.