Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[TD1]

I don't yet feel like Wheel of Time has really completely broken things relative to the books.

I mean it's nowhere near the level of The Dark Tower for example.  I'm still sad about that one - those were some of my favorite books.

The Dark Tower movie is a travesty, a tragedy, and does not deserve to bear the name.

I agree about the Dark Tower adaptation. Imo, WoT isn't far off deserving a similar description. It's 'a travesty, a tragedy, and does not deserve to bear the name.' The main difference is that I don't think the Dark Tower was a good movie in general. I think the WoT series might be okay (though not stellar) if you wanted a mostly-generic-and-modernly-diverse-fantasy-show with little originality - a perfect background series en par with earlier BBC fantasy originals.

Jordan is not alive, and thus wasn't there to stop them randomly changing massive elements of the world, characters, plot, themes, and pacing and it shows.

Though Sanderson is, of course, still alive. I saw a quote recently of him saying the script was 'fantastic.' Not sure how much he collaborated on the show.

[Ulfarr]

I binged the 2nd season of Witcher yesterday. Funny thing is what prompted me to watch it, was reading someone complain about it on some other site.

Now I'm not that into the Witcher universe (I haven't played the games or read any of the books), so I can't comment on how faithfull it was on the source material. Compared to season 1, it now has a linear stracture and it focuses a lot on the overarching story around Nilfgaard's invasion and Ciri. While, these choices aren't necessairly bad, I feel like they restricted the show to a grimmer theme/tone and I somewhat miss the general lightheartedness of the first season.

Overall i'd say it is quite enjoyable.

[McTraveller]

Just started on second season of The Witcher, so can't say too much about it.

I guess I don't feel as strongly that Wheel of Time is a terrible adaptation. I do have some problems with the editing and sequencing of the story*, but it's not been enough for me to bail yet.

Spoiler: *Real WoT Spoilers!!! (click to show/hide)

For example, in the most recent episode, the reveal of who in fact is the Dragon Reborn was... really awkward.  I don't understand why they did it that way.

EDIT:

Spoiler: Witcher Spoilers (click to show/hide)

Ok so I don't understand, on first watching, that thing in S2:E2 with the witch in the woods. I think I have to watch it again.  Mostly I feel like I missed some dialog or something.

[TD1]

Spoiler: *Real WoT Spoilers!!! (click to show/hide)

For example, in the most recent episode, the reveal of who in fact is the Dragon Reborn was... really awkward.  I don't understand why they did it that way.

I'm not gonna watch it, so mind saying how they did it? Obviously spoiler the reply for others!

[McTraveller]

Spoiler: WoT (click to show/hide)

There were several things in earlier episodes that (if you had read the books) were Rand clearly using the One Power, but the show didn't really indicate it by showing the weave.

In the episode, it showed him "re-remembering" the events, but this time with the weave, and then he just went to Moirane and said "it's me."

It was really odd, because in the books it was clear at the time that he was using the Power, where they tried in a goofy way to mask it to try and make it a "surprise reveal" in the show, and it didn't work well in my opinion.

It kind of goes with my feeling that the show is all right and entertaining enough, and more or less follows the sense I remember for the story, but has some really odd storyboarding / editing choices.

[Il Palazzo]

Shit, that Witcher is kinda terribad. The first season wasn't good either, but it was still bingeable as a sort of guilty pleasure. This one is just ugh. At least so far, after two episodes. Bad acting, shit direction, confused script, generic visuals.

@McTraveller

Spoiler: Witcher (click to show/hide)

I completely forgot how the story was in the books, but I think the witch is meant to be some meddling outside power, following its own agenda for as of yet inscrutable reasons. Maybe it's that demon Vesemir mentioned the first witcher fighting, or something.

Honestly, I find myself struggling to care enough to sort it all out.

[Folly]

Marvel's Hawkeye just concluded its first season.

First of all, Kingpin had better survive that off-screen implied death, because that is by far the lamest way that any Marvel villain could possibly die and he just deserves better.

Anyway, this show is mostly a introduction for Hawk-Girl(not her real title). And it does that reasonably well. The new sidekick provides an enthusiastic breath of fresh air, which serves to effectively counter Hawkeye who is worn-out and eager to retire at this point.

Aside from that, the show really fails to provide any meaningful stakes. There's an assassin who is confused about her motives and gives up as soon as she stops to think for two seconds, a deaf girl who has daddy issues or whatever, the aforementioned Kingpin whose appearance feels like nothing more than a cameo, and the Tracksuit Mafia who seem to have no greater role than to showcase what trick-arrows are capable of. At no point during this show did I feel like our protagonists were in real danger, nor that these events would have any impact on the greater Marvel Cinematic Universe.

Overall the show is watchable, but expectations should be kept fairly low.

[Vector]

Shit, that Witcher is kinda terribad. The first season wasn't good either, but it was still bingeable as a sort of guilty pleasure. This one is just ugh. At least so far, after two episodes. Bad acting, shit direction, confused script, generic visuals.

@McTraveller

Spoiler: Witcher (click to show/hide)

I completely forgot how the story was in the books, but I think the witch is meant to be some meddling outside power, following its own agenda for as of yet inscrutable reasons. Maybe it's that demon Vesemir mentioned the first witcher fighting, or something.

Honestly, I find myself struggling to care enough to sort it all out.

I agree with you, the second season has gutted everything worth seeing in Witcher. They have rearranged the plot to the point where there is no meaning in it left, too, and almost all of the charming scenes are gone. My interpretation is that you could easily watch the television show without being spoiled for the books because they are too different.

[Robsoie]

Putting in spoilers just in case

Spoiler: witcher (click to show/hide)

One of the big problems with the Witcher ntflix serie is that the serie change its director every 2 episodes and change the writer every episode.

Due to that there's a very noticable quality and interest difference between episode , character building, dialogues, pacing are so different that it really make it difficult to watch.
season 2 by example, the 2 first episode were frankly below mediocre, while the 2 that followed were very noticably much better and quite good, then came to be just average only in the following 2 etc...

Then there are all the changes (and not for the best unfortunately) in characterisation (what the frack have they done with Cahir that's not even the same character at all, he was one of my favorite and they completely changed who he was) and all the various plots that feel like some bad fan fiction. As someone that has read and enjoyed all the books it's sometime maddening to see nearly all those changes always be made for the worse (out of the monoliths things at least add something as the book barely mentionned one at some point but does not give it a real role in the story)

The special effects aren't always great, the cg/sfx can be quite good when it comes to spells and background environment, but when it comes to creatures both the design and the handwork (nearly laughed when i saw that guy in the 1st episode of season 2) on them look incredibly cheap in comparison to other series.
And frankly in season 1 how can you make a dragon in CG that look like cheap that, not only that's not a dragon they did but a wyvern and a cheaply designed one at that !
Why the difference is important you may ask ? because wyverns are monsters that also exist in the witcher world in the books .

Very sad , as there are some episodes that are truly great (some actors also do very good in their role, now if only they were wrote much closer to how they are in the books, still can't believe the complete Cahir rewrite), but half of the serie is ... barely reaching mediocre while it should be much better dammit.

[McTraveller]

I have to say, I'm pretty amused at how much "crosstalk" there is on Stargate SG-1 to other sci-fi of the era, both in little easter eggs in the plot and numerous* actors, especially from Star Trek, showing up as extras.

Spoiler: * (click to show/hide)

So far, I'm on season 6, at least: John de Lancie, Renee Auberjonois, Armin Shimmerman, the guy that played the doctor on Enterprise.  Some of the other "extras" on TNG showed up too, but I don't know their names off the top of my head.

Also had Dean Stockwell from Quantum Leap.

Fun!

[Ulfarr]

Putting in spoilers just in case

Spoiler: witcher (click to show/hide)

Then there are all the changes (and not for the best unfortunately) in characterisation (what the frack have they done with Cahir that's not even the same character at all, he was one of my favorite and they completely changed who he was) and all the various plots that feel like some bad fan fiction. As someone that has read and enjoyed all the books it's sometime maddening to see nearly all those changes always be made for the worse (out of the monoliths things at least add something as the book barely mentionned one at some point but does not give it a real role in the story)

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

Out of curiosity, did they change Cahir from how he is in the books? If yes, how so?

About netfilx's Cahir:

In season 1 they pretty much establish that even at his best, he is a a hot headed zealot, a good fighter and maybe a successful commander but he has no actual mind for subtlety*. Meanwhile in season 2 he is constantly in situations that require some degree of political skills and he can't just brute force his way to get what he wants. In that sense, it seems quite justified that he was rather incompetent.

*I think the key scene showcasing his character, is the one where Cahir killed everyone in that tavern because "he had steel at the ready"

[Robsoie]

Spoiler: Cahir (click to show/hide)

In the book we first discover Cahir only from Ciri's point of view, he's not yet characterised so for a long while we're lead to think there's a dark armored guy that want to catch Ciri for nefarious ends, basically it seems the character is a replay of the "black knight" from various legends.

Then we learn progressively that Ciri point of view was actually very blurry as it is linked to her memory of childhood (Ciri in the book was younger than in the serie when she had to flee Cintra) and a specific closed vision (spoiler for what the vision is as the serie hasn't yet touched it, i wonder if they also changed that part completely) and so is very far from the complete picture.

Cahir isn't the "black knight" but he is in fact a "real knight" i mean a man bound to his duty and his lord (and that's why he's after Ciri) above his own safety. But being a real knight he's also bound to honor and the knightly vow "defend the widow and orphan" .

Then after a *spoiler* event/battle (that despite all the story change from the book i think will still happen next season in the netflix serie as it's too big to not be there or changed) it definitively become clear that Cahir isn't the bad guy Ciri imagined him to be.
Later in the book he get an important role too but it's too spoiler for now, but considering who he is in the book it makes perfect sense he does that.

In fact Cahir can be considered as one of the rare "good guy" in that dark fantasy world (so of course dark fantasy means he has may flaws but still is overall good) , even when following the order of his emperor, nothing in common with the "twirling mustache"-like villain they made of him in the tv serie that is ready for atrocity, torture and entertain the idea all the time to reach his goal (the only common point between books' Cahir and netflix version is that they're trying to catch Ciri).

Additionally out of the complete change of characterisation , his role in the book also is different, Cahir does NOT command the Nilfgaard army at all, he's a lonely knight that role is an agent for his emperor on a secret mission that often put him in difficult situation.

[ChairmanPoo]

A while ago I noticed this LoL show on Netflix, called Arcane. Game inspired shows are never good, so it was odd to see a 100% score on rottentomatoes. Went and checked it out. And boy, is it beautiful or what.

Castlevania was pretty good, never watched the second season.

Castlevania has 4 seasons now, with the fourth concluding the story of Trevor Belmont and his company. There is a sequel in the works, set to focus on descendant Richter Belmont.
The series has been a bit rushed in my opinion; ambitiously tackling lots of different characters and plots simultaneously, and not quite giving all of them the time they needed to feel complete. That kept things exciting though.

On the subject of video game shows, DOTA: Dragons Blood is also on Netflix, and I consider it quite good. Production values aren't quite as high as Arcane, and the setting more fantasy cliche. But still a solid show.
Season 2 is scheduled for January 2022!

Last season was rushed because the show producer was involved in a scandal.

[Ulfarr]

Spoiler: Cahir (click to show/hide)

In the book we first discover Cahir only from Ciri's point of view, he's not yet characterised so for a long while we're lead to think there's a dark armored guy that want to catch Ciri for nefarious ends, basically it seems the character is a replay of the "black knight" from various legends.

Then we learn progressively that Ciri point of view was actually very blurry as it is linked to her memory of childhood (Ciri in the book was younger than in the serie when she had to flee Cintra) and a specific closed vision (spoiler for what the vision is as the serie hasn't yet touched it, i wonder if they also changed that part completely) and so is very far from the complete picture.

Cahir isn't the "black knight" but he is in fact a "real knight" i mean a man bound to his duty and his lord (and that's why he's after Ciri) above his own safety. But being a real knight he's also bound to honor and the knightly vow "defend the widow and orphan" .

Then after a *spoiler* event/battle (that despite all the story change from the book i think will still happen next season in the netflix serie as it's too big to not be there or changed) it definitively become clear that Cahir isn't the bad guy Ciri imagined him to be.
Later in the book he get an important role too but it's too spoiler for now, but considering who he is in the book it makes perfect sense he does that.

In fact Cahir can be considered as one of the rare "good guy" in that dark fantasy world (so of course dark fantasy means he has may flaws but still is overall good) , even when following the order of his emperor, nothing in common with the "twirling mustache"-like villain they made of him in the tv serie that is ready for atrocity, torture and entertain the idea all the time to reach his goal (the only common point between books' Cahir and netflix version is that they're trying to catch Ciri).

Additionally out of the complete change of characterisation , his role in the book also is different, Cahir does NOT command the Nilfgaard army at all, he's a lonely knight that role is an agent for his emperor on a secret mission that often put him in difficult situation.

I see. Most complains that I had read before, were almost exclusively about the casting choices which, to put it politely, didn't really hold any merit. Changing the characters, that's a different story and after reading what you wrote about book Cahir, I would have liked if they had kept him that way. Thanks Robsoie

About the Castlevania show:

1. Sypha, is arguably one of the best examples for how a wizard character should fight. Highly mobile. Highly destructive. Just lovely. 
2. The toilet paper scene! That timing... right in the middle of a global shortage of toilet paper 

Spoiler: Major spoiler about the last episode of season 4 (click to show/hide)

From a dramatic standpoint, Trevor should have died at the final fight. His "final sacrifice" was a great way to show his character growth and they just had to cheapen it with an ex machina.

[McTraveller]

So after Ep 8 of Wheel of Time, I think I understand what is most different in feel from the show compared to the books, and probably what many people are feeling.

The show feels rushed.  Especially considering the late Robert Jordan had... ponderous pacing.