The new Witcher series on Netflix
I was a bit worried about the Witcher series. And it seems I hold a strange stance. I neither loved nor hated the series. Reviewers seem to hate it, and others seem to love it.
Personally, I feel like the story and characters are great. But, the pacing is horrible.
The 8 episodes could probably have been reduced to 6. And the timeline jumping was not necessary in my opinion.
Otherwise, it was well done.
I'm happy to hear that it will get a second season, and I can only hope that the pacing and timeline get a little better. Now that Geralt has been united with Ciri and much effort has been spent on back story to get us here already, it certainly seems like they could afford to be a bit less jumpy going forward.
I would also say that anyone not familiar with the games has a lot of good reason to be disappointed. Without any real explanation of Ciri's importance, ending the season as they did really leaves the viewer with nothing. One would think that the giant battle was more important to the story line than Ciri and Geralt's meeting.
But, the battle isn't that big of a deal, and while it kind of fills the role of the major plot element it is also clear that the show runner knows that it isn't the main event and thus didn't spend the effort on this that they could have.
In fact, that would have been one way to improve that first season. Keep it at 8 episodes, but divert some of the time into building up to that battle scene a bit more. Give us a reason to feel more for the characters who died, or to feel the importance of the battle to the region or the point in time. The relationship between Yennefer and Tessaia, for instance, could have used more effort. And maybe something to make us feel something for the other sorceresses who died. Or maybe some more backstory on Fringilla.
Put simply, I understand why the critics might jump on this. I don't think it was bad necessarily. But, it could have been muchly improved.
This first season made it clear that Ciri meeting Geralt was important, but at no point explains why. The meeting isn't exciting in and of itself, and a battle is offered up as a more exciting thing to wrap up the season on, but it doesn't actually FEEL like an important moment. We really needed to feel that the battle was important, even if it wasn't. I mean, it certainly would have been important to SOME people in the story and that perspective is what was needed. The timeline is so confusing that my wife and I didn't realise most of the season was taking place in the past until we were like 3-4 episodes in.
What I loved was the acting, and the story in general. I also liked the way that it felt like Geralt was endlessly completing quests without feeling like a normal RPG endless quest like experience. It gave the whole thing a familiarity to the game experience which was pretty awesome. And the feel of familiarity to the game is crucial to me personally because the Witcher 3 is the only game of any real complexity that I've completed in probably the last 15 years.
Personally, I feel like the story and characters are great. But, the pacing is horrible.
The 8 episodes could probably have been reduced to 6. And the timeline jumping was not necessary in my opinion.
Otherwise, it was well done.
I'm happy to hear that it will get a second season, and I can only hope that the pacing and timeline get a little better. Now that Geralt has been united with Ciri and much effort has been spent on back story to get us here already, it certainly seems like they could afford to be a bit less jumpy going forward.
I would also say that anyone not familiar with the games has a lot of good reason to be disappointed. Without any real explanation of Ciri's importance, ending the season as they did really leaves the viewer with nothing. One would think that the giant battle was more important to the story line than Ciri and Geralt's meeting.
But, the battle isn't that big of a deal, and while it kind of fills the role of the major plot element it is also clear that the show runner knows that it isn't the main event and thus didn't spend the effort on this that they could have.
In fact, that would have been one way to improve that first season. Keep it at 8 episodes, but divert some of the time into building up to that battle scene a bit more. Give us a reason to feel more for the characters who died, or to feel the importance of the battle to the region or the point in time. The relationship between Yennefer and Tessaia, for instance, could have used more effort. And maybe something to make us feel something for the other sorceresses who died. Or maybe some more backstory on Fringilla.
Put simply, I understand why the critics might jump on this. I don't think it was bad necessarily. But, it could have been muchly improved.
This first season made it clear that Ciri meeting Geralt was important, but at no point explains why. The meeting isn't exciting in and of itself, and a battle is offered up as a more exciting thing to wrap up the season on, but it doesn't actually FEEL like an important moment. We really needed to feel that the battle was important, even if it wasn't. I mean, it certainly would have been important to SOME people in the story and that perspective is what was needed. The timeline is so confusing that my wife and I didn't realise most of the season was taking place in the past until we were like 3-4 episodes in.
What I loved was the acting, and the story in general. I also liked the way that it felt like Geralt was endlessly completing quests without feeling like a normal RPG endless quest like experience. It gave the whole thing a familiarity to the game experience which was pretty awesome. And the feel of familiarity to the game is crucial to me personally because the Witcher 3 is the only game of any real complexity that I've completed in probably the last 15 years.
Comments
Post a Comment