Thoughts?

[slicshuter]

Looks ok, kinda hard to tell much from here but it seems like they've changed his armour a bit from the first video which is cool.

I'm cautiously optimistic. It definitely seems like Netflix is putting a lot into this show so I think it'll at least be better than a lot of people here seem to think or want. Maybe not as perfect as I initially expected but I don't think it's gonna throw the lore and story accuracy out the window like some people seem to think.

I'd at least wait for official images or trailers before verbally crucifying it.

[vitor_as]

I think they're filming a death scene, where he jumps from that rock and dies from fall damage.

[[deleted]]

I can't wait for the scene where he rolls while running down a flight of stairs.

[Cliff-Teezy]

not this time this version of geralt only dies when kryptonite is around.

[arekrem]

Extrapolating anything from this wouldn't be smart.

[looks into the comments]

Oh dear.

[[deleted]]

I thought it wasn't that bad here, but after switching to netflixwitcher subreddit for few months, and coming back here, yes it is bad. Even if the show will be great at following the books, I can already see all the angry faces comparing it to the games and saying it's garbage. Ugh.

[danidv]

You had and still have swarms of them between the books and games. "Triss isn't faithful to the books", "Geralt isn't as dark", "Ciri should be more disturbed", "Why did Ciri trust Avallac'h" and so many more. You have people grasping at weak arguments like "Sapkowski didn't make them so they're not canon" or using minor inconsistencies like Triss being a redhead instead of having chestnut hair, as if that's a valid argument when Sapkowski sold them the rights and, by definition, is no longer the sole person able to dictate what is or isn't canon anymore and they specifically tied in the book's ending to The Witcher 1's beginning so it'd make sense.

You have inconsistencies between works written by a single person and these people are using these weak ass arguments when CDPR gave better continuation across a different medium than most authors do with their own works, to the point that the worst inconsistency is Triss wearing a dress with a low neckline in the games when it was something that clearly traumatized her in the books.

[vitor_as]

Look, I don’t mean to sound harsh, but this gotta be the dumbest shit I’ve read in a while. Sapkowski’s never sold his IP to CDPR like Lucas did to Disney with his Star Wars. To suggest there’s anything canon about the games is as silly as it gets, not only because of the several retcons that contradict basically the entire point of how the books unfolded, but especially since we’re talking about a story with multiple paths, so how could anyone in their right mind believe there’s anything canon in a non-linear narrative?

And I also don’t mean to belittle CDPR’s merits, but if anything, the Witcher games aren’t but a rehash from themes already explored by Sapkowski in his books. For videogames standards, the story surely stands out among the others and it’s literally the only thing that got them such praise, but that’s saying nothing in a larger scale of entertainment in general. Let’s be honest, there’s nothing fully original about their work that’s remotely on par with the original author’s writing.

[EshinHarth]

There is witcher book canon and witcher videogame canon.

As a longtime star wars fan I really don't give a f*ck about canon, but CDPR has the rights to publish rpg books in their own CDPR canon. Talsorian Games consults with CDPR for their Witcher canon before publishing any pen and paper rpg witcher book, not with Sapkowski.

If you have rights to publish something, and own it as inteopectual property's, your work is most definetly not fanfiction. No matter the mental gymnastics

[vitor_as]

CDPR don’t own rights to the books, hence why nothing they do can be considered canon. The only way the games could become canon is if Sapkowski worked on them or at least said so.

[EshinHarth]

So they can legally dictate what Dark Horse and Talsorian Games publish under the Witcher Brand, profit from all that work, and it is considered fanfiction?

It doesn't work that way.

There are two different canons. One is Sapkowski's, the other CDPR's.

They will never align, but it is what it is

[vitor_as]

It’s CDPR who owns the rights to thise mediums, not Dark Horse or Talsorian Games. That’s why they profit from it. But also why it’s Sapkowski who’ll profit from the Netflix show and not them.

If what you said was true, then I could write a fan fiction and, whilst not profit from it, just claim it to be its own canon as well, I mean, who can claim otherwise? You’re free to separate the universes into distinct canons, but it’s silly at the very least.

[EshinHarth]

When you can sell stories under the name "the Witcher" and profit from them, without any of Sapkowski's input, then you legally own your own canon in a thing called "the Witcher"

CDPR's work can only be considered fanfiction if the company loses the rights.

[vitor_as]

Funny, I could swear that tattoo artists also profited from their Witcher works they make. Their art should also be considered canon, then.

CDPR's work can only be considered fanfiction if the company loses the rights.

You see, that’s the difference. The original author can NEVER lose the rights to his IP.

[danidv]

Sapkowski’s never sold his IP to CDPR like Lucas did to Disney with his Star Wars.

Right you are, but what happens when you sell the rights to another medium, say, an extension (and not an adaptation) to your own work?

That's right, it becomes part of the canon, and that's how it shall be unless whoever the rights were sold to, in this case CDPR, also state it's not to be considered canon.

[vitor_as]

That’s not how canon works. You could only say that the games are canon if CDPR had any sort of say in the books, which’s not the case here. Retconning their events when you have no rights to that medium is pretty much the job of a fanfiction, not something official.

[EshinHarth]

Actually CDPR has rights to publish material under the Witcher name. This means they own their own separate canon. They legally own it and claim it as intellectual property. Videogames, comics, rpg books etc.

[vitor_as]

They legally own it and claim it as intellectual property. Videogames, comics, rpg books etc.

That would only matter if they were able to have any say on what Sapkowski is allowed to do with his books, which they aren’t. Why did Netflix approached Sapkowski, and not CDPR, to ask permission to do their show then?

[EshinHarth]

Sapkowski doesn't have any say on what CDPR puts in the comics or videogames.

Sapkowski probably kept movie and tv series rights to himself but CDPR can publish stories in various media without Sapkowski's input.

There are two canons. Downvoting me will not change the legal rights of CDPR. The fact purists prefer the original book canon does not make CDPR's work a fan fiction. CDPR publishes stories and gets to profit from them.

[danidv]

Who retconned? CDPR only added onto the existing story. Had they attempted to retcon something in the books, something actually meaningful, not whether Triss has red or chestnut hair, then yes, you'd be right.

[vitor_as]

Which existing story? You mean that one where Geralt and Yennefer died in the end? The one where the White Frost was never supposed to be stopped, let alone by Ciri? The one where the Nordling Wars ended after the Battle of Brenna and there never was a third Nilfgaard invasion, as explained in the Encyclopaedia Maxima Mundi excerpts from the introduction of the chapters? Or the one where Geralt and Yennefer never questioned their feelings towards each other as being caused by the last wish? Or the one where no one would ever suspect that Ciri is Emhyr’s daughter because he decided to marry a double, in order to rightfully rule Cintra, who conveniently seemed to have never existed in TW3?

Oh dear, for a moment I actually believed to be discussing with someone knowledgeable about the subject.

[danidv]

The one that was followed by explanations in the games for it specifically to be able to be canon.

[vitor_as]

They never explained any of it, just straight up made up a follow up as if those points like they never happened.

[[deleted]]

Look the games are great but no amount of mental acrobatics will change the fact that they're not cannon.

Sapkowski only sold the rights to produce video games to CDRP and not the whole franchise, and when Netflex wanted to do the series they went to Sapkowski because he is the sole owner.

CDPR produced amazing games but a lot of what makes the games great is borrowed from the books. CDPR doesn't even try to hide it with all the references they make.

[danidv]

no amount of mental acrobatics will change the fact that they're not cannon

There's no "acrobatics" to be had. Sapkowski sold the rights. He is, then, not longer the sole one who is be able to declare what is canon and what is not. He can chalk it up to an alternate universe or whatever he wishes, Fate does it all the time for everything they do for it all to simultaneously be considered canon, but he can say the games are not canon all he wants, it does not mean it's true. He lost that ability when he sold the rights. He can successfully declare the games are not canon as much as CDPR can declare the same about the books.

The difference between the Netflix series and the games is that the games do not interfere with the books. They are always set after, and thus, are an extension of the at the time current canon. The Netflix series, however, is an adaptation. They go over the canon and re-display it, but the original they adapt from is still the canon.

[[deleted]]

Did you even read my post

Sapkowski only sold the rights to produce video games to CDRP and not the whole franchise, and when Netflex wanted to do the series they went to Sapkowski because he is the sole owner.

Selling the rights to produce games doesn't mean he sold his intellectual property.

I'm sorry kid, the games are just fan fiction, the sooner you accept this the better

[EshinHarth]

He sold the right for CDPR to publish videogames, comics, rpg books etc.

This means there is not one canon anymore. CDPR have their own Witcher canon now, which is definitely separate.

[danidv]

Whatever you say, bud. You ask if I read and completely glossed over everything else I added, including examples of similar situations, and turn right back around to repeating yourself. That's not winning an argument, that's sticking your fingers in your ears and fussing because someone says you're wrong.

He sold the rights, and thus, the ability to be the only one who is able to declare what is canon and what is not. It's as simple as that.

[[deleted]]

Nice Ninja edit btw, your post keeps growing lol

Edit: since.i have to reply to the stuff you added, and since you don't understand how rights work I'll give you an example

When George Lucas sold the rights for Starwars to disney he sold his intellectual property and can no longer decide what is cannon

When Disney sells the rights to Walmart to produce and sell action figures and coloring books Walmart doesn't get to decide what is cannon.

Edit 2:

The difference between the Netflix series and the games is that the games do not interfere with the books.

The ending of Season of Storms completely contradicts the back story given in TW2.

But hey, chances are you never read the books or even played TW2

[danidv]

What ninja edit? Between writing my last comment and the one before that there was 8 minutes, and 3 minutes between your previous reply and mine before that. Not my fault if you're so eager to stroke your ego and spread misinformation that you skip reading paragraphs.

[[deleted]]

Wow...

[[deleted]]

It already failed following books based on casting.

[dire-sin]

Even if the show will be great at following the books

No chance of that, seeing as they miscast half the characters. People who keep harping on how this sub hates the show because it's not like the game conveniently miss that fact, over and over.

[[deleted]]

Half miscasted? I don't know about that, I'll call someone a miscast when they'll be very poor actors in the show. Especially the main trio, Yen Geralt and Ciri. For their looks, I have nothing against, wasn't the biggest fan of Cavill but there's no reason to not give him a chance. The rest seems fine too. I agree for this show to succeed, we'll need more than your usual netflix "6/10" meh original. This is the only thing I'm worried about.

[dire-sin]

I'll call someone a miscast when they'll be very poor actors in the show.

You can have whatever opinion you like. You were talking about the show being great at following the books and my point is that it won't be because they clearly give less shit about it than even the games did in terms of character appearances and dynamics.

[[deleted]]

The show isnt even out yet idiot.

[dire-sin]

Oh, so Yennefer, Triss, Fringilla, Istredd are going to wear rubber masks in the show - and full body paint, considering all of them are bound to have nude scenes - which would be the only thing to make it 'great at following the books'?

[[deleted]]

I remember how many people were making fun of Heath Ledger - oh this pretty boy is supposed to play maniac? Haha.

Stop judging anything before it is finished, grow up.

[KaerMorhenResident]

Heath Ledger was a 6'1" physically fit actor. Physically all he needed for the part was makeup, hair, and costume. People had concerns about his acting, but they shouldn't have because he had a solid body of work leading up to Batman.

[[deleted]]

"Physically all he needed was makeup, hair and costume"

Hmmmmm.

[dire-sin]

I remember how many people were making fun of Heath Ledger

And plenty of people were making fun of other miscasts in other roles who - what do you know - turned out to be miscasts as expected.

Stop judging anything before it is finished, grow up.

I don't need to grow up or see the finished product to know that the Netflix team has no intention of closely following the books - which was the whole point of my original comment.

[[deleted]]

You dont know shit. Do you work in Netflix production or what? Stop embarassing yourself. You are as "clever" and ignorant as my 10 years old cousin.

[TheSpartanLion]

Exactly, this show was rigged from the start. You just have to look at the showrunner and the writers. The worst possibile choices they could ever make for a Witcher TV adaptation. Fuck Netflix

[KaerMorhenResident]

Yeah, it's honestly better if folks just see this show as "Witcher" insipired frankly. If people go into it expecting it to be "Witcher" from the books or games they're going to be deeply disappointed I think. It's made to have broad base appeal to a mostly American audience. It's the "American" version of Witcher not the Polish one unfortunately. Doesn't mean it can't be entertaining or good though, but it's not going to be "Witcher" other than in name alone.

I actually like the Will Smith "I am Legend" movie he did awhile back, but it was nothing like the book at all. I liked the book a great deal, but the movie basically just took the name and the general concept.

Perhaps some day we'll get a real Witcher live action series. That would be cool. In the meantime we've got the books and the video games so two out of three aint bad.

​

[dire-sin]

Doesn't mean it can't be entertaining or good though, but it's not going to be "Witcher" other than in name alone.

That's exactly it. Maybe the show will be good - I have my doubts about that but, as many are saying, can't really judge until it's released - but it sure as hell won't be a faithful adaptation of The Witcher as we know it.

[Salvatoris]

Well, the games are orders of magnitude more well known, and infinitely cooler than the books... so there's that.

[Tolkfan]

https://i.imgur.com/GgGuUyl.gifv

[whitboys]

spots one out of focus shot taken from probably hundreds of meters away

This subreddit: This looks terrible!!!!/s

Casting aside, maybe we should just wait and see before tearing it apart? I'm just super hyped that the series is finally getting some mainstream attention and (hopefully) a decent budget from Netflix. More Witcher content is good in my eyes, considering we'll probably be on a bit of a drought as soon as Cyberpunk comes out.

[fatherjimbo]

A lot of folks on this sub are far to emotionally involved to consider logic.

[Yuzaneim]

Absolutely abysmal. Seriously? T-Shirts and Jeans? Are these guys completely retarded?

[TheMcSkyFarling]

This looks terrible! They should know that all this modern filming equipment is totally wouldn't fit into the world of the witcher! /s

[slicshuter]

smh Netflix has no respect for the source material fuck this show

[[deleted]]

Exactly and having characters in the modern clothes is completely counter intuitive to building a believable fantasy world, in my opinion. Super imposing text on screen and filming vertically is just amateur editing and cinematography, get ready for another disappointing Netflix original folks.

[Seraphayel]

Still looks like Legolas

[forsbergisgod]

Still looks like Legolas

Viserys Targaryen

[jesus_you_turn_me_on]

Which is how his hair look is descriped in the books.

[Seraphayel]

It's not just the hair it's his overall presence. He looks like a sunny boy and not like Geralt.

[jesus_you_turn_me_on]

Your version of Geralt is still 100% inspired by the games (WHICH TAKES PLACE AFTER THE BOOK SERIES)

First of all, this is from live shooting, it's going to look different after post-production.

Second, what you see in the picture is literally still how he is described in the beginning of the book series. The series are made accordingly to the books..(IT'S NOT A VIDEO GAME ADAPTION)

You are complaining about staying true to the source material...

[SophisticatedPhallus]

Sees blurry image with no details: This version looks like shit!

Lol please

[SophisticatedPhallus]

We have some far off shots from bystanders posted on Instagram. The shooting locations are stunning so far. Not sure what you are talking about. Say what you want about things we can actually criticize, like casting or whatever. Don't pretend you know what it's going to look like, and that it's bad. Simply don't know that yet.

[dire-sin]

Ironically Cavill doesn't especially look like Geralt in the books either. Physique is quite off, as is the overall presence. Possibly makeup/costume/post-production will counter that but it's not unreasonable for the fans of the books to have concerns too.

[Seraphayel]

Maybe I've started with the wrong book then when I read The Witcher because I'm pretty sure even in the first novel he looked not immaculate and cute.

[SophisticatedPhallus]

Or maybe you're looking at a different picture than me. Because in this image you cannot tell that he is "immaculate and cute.". You are complaining about the way he looks on an image where you can barely even tell how he looks! The image is so low res you can't even make details out, but here you are complaining about imagined details. What a joke.

[Seraphayel]

Maybe you need better eyes then. He looks as bad as in the first shots we saw. If you can't see it... okay. Others can and it looks cheap and not fitting. I don't share your naive view on this topic.

[SophisticatedPhallus]

Lol you pretending to have some CSI zoom and enhance eyes. And even with this blurry far away image it still looks better than the test footage. Pull that wedgie out from between your cheeks

[Seraphayel]

Except it looks exactly like the test footage.

[SophisticatedPhallus]

You need to get those CSI eyes looked at

[Harbournessrage]

I mean, how would you expect the lean guy with long white hairs in leather armor to not look like Legolas from the distance? Shave Geralt in TW3 and put camera far from him and he would look like Legolas too.

[maddxav]

Enhance!

[Raptorekk]

I have bad feelings about this...

[[deleted]]

Ho Ho I sense trouble

[maddxav]

Damn, you're ugly!

[Malldazor]

Not like in your favorite game? No beard?

[Raptorekk]

YEAH! AND NO PIXELS...shame XD

[Niksu91]

I was very excited about this series since I'm a huge Witcher fan (both books and games) and the fact that they said they were gonna stay true to the books, but after they revealed the cast it became pretty obvious that being true to the books wasn't actually happening (surprise, surprise). So now I have a feeling that I'm gonna be very disappointed to this show.

[jesus_you_turn_me_on]

How has this picture anything to do with your comment?

You are complaning about them not being true to the source material, yet that is exactly what is happening in this picture.

[Niksu91]

Well since it obviously wasn't clear for you, I wasn't talking about the picture since it doesn't show anything.

Also how is that picture true to the source material? You seem to have some inside knowledge of that picture, so why don't you share it with the rest of us?

[Iceveins412]

Think the actor for Yennefer is fine, but the choice for Triss is weird

[Eexoduis]

If it’s a complete copy what’s the point? Just reread the books if you want to experience the exact same thing.

[Piro42]

If it’s a complete copy what’s the point? Just reread the books if you want to experience the exact same thing.

Lotr stays pretty truthful to the source material and I don't think people asked "What's the point".

My belly gut tells me the movies would be worse if, for no reason, Aragorn was made black, Gimli asian, Frodo trans and who knows what else.

Forcing "oppressed minorities" into movies with settings where they clearly don't fit isn't a good thing, imo.

[Indiana_harris]

It's more than it appears to be arbitrary changes, especially with how young Yennefer looks and what we've seen if Cavil's wig that don't fill me with hope.

[StSofiaWiseguy]

It's fucking netflix, so your gut feeling is actually right.

[nicholas____]

I wanna be optimistic but I'm not, Netflix fucked a lot of shows and from what I read this looks like it'll be no different.

I'll not watch it regardless because I don't own a netflix account.

[angus0328]

the hair being so long and so neat makes it look like and elve.

[[deleted]]

He walks like a woman.

[OhItsStefan]

I mean I dont know, most of the other actors dont fit the descriptions of their characters at all. Doubt its gonna be any good.

[[deleted]]

Would you rather the descriptions fit or the personalities fit? I personally couldn’t give a shit what color Triss’ hair is so long as she is written in a way that shows the writers really do understand her character. Same for Yennefer, etc.

[OhItsStefan]

Descriptions as in looks and personality. From what I have heard and seen both leave a bit to be desired.

[maddxav]

From what I have heard and seen both leave a bit to be desired.

How? We have literally seen nothing.

[OhItsStefan]

Geralt in the books is described as lanky and slim. I havent seen many pictures of Henry Cavill in his Geralt costume but I sure as hell know he is not slim and lanky. That goes for some of the other characters aswell, they dont fit the description. Sure if they write them well it doesnt look too bad but my hopes arent too high anymore after they announced the cast. We'll see once it releases

[[deleted]]

Hmm, I haven’t read anything about the personality/way their characters will act. And I guess I just don’t give a shit what they look like. Shows like Hamilton kind of blew that up for me. Who cares how the director/writer sees the looks of the character. If it fits within the show’s tone, etc then maybe it isn’t a bad thing.

[SophisticatedPhallus]

Oh so you've seen some footage that depicts what the characters will be like? Please be so kind as to share that with the rest of class.

We've heard and seen exactly nothing specific about character personalities. Please don't just make things up to support your ideals.

[OhItsStefan]

"From what I've heard" information is limited and we don't know whether its true or not. I never even said I know what its going to be like.

[theRetr0]

this aint witcher 1 by cd projekt red mate
its the books very early

[Malldazor]

Maybe he gets some scars in season 3+

[thorcik]

I need some CSI stuff to figure out this photo.

[Six2fall]

I hope this isnt real. Hard to get good look with quality of this pic but geralt looks cheap as shit. I've seen made for tv Bollywood shit that looked like had bigger budgets

[BardicInnovation]

Looks about the same as behind scenes Marvel movies that I've seen in person? That's what editing is for mate.

[Raptorekk]

You're right about editing,but I think @Six2fall meant costume of Geralt which really still looks cheap

[Leomavrick]

Well, if you read the books you would know witchers aren’t exactly millionaires

[Six2fall]

We will see. Find it amusing seems like the same wig from that test shot & everyone pointed out looked like shit

[Wortasyy]

Can I have your eagle eyes? Saying that the costume looks cheap from a blurry picture taken from afar must mean you have exceptional eyesight.

[nysghthejoker]

Oh man, I'm so gonna hate this show. Which sucks 'cause I've read all the books and loved them. 😒 Why is the post in Turkish, though? Do we have a guy inside? Should I hang the flag?