Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

 Dreadwinter wrote:
Something about a curse of the black sun. It has been awhile since I read on that.

Curse of the Black Sun is maybe a real curse but probably not.

Basically, anyone born during a solar eclipse is destined to bring ruin and destruction and all kinds of other things. There is no known cure for the curse (but Witchers contend that all curses have cures). It boils down to nature versus nurture kind of. People believe in the curse of the Black Sun, so children are raised with everyone around them isolating them, bullying them, treating them horribly because they are "destined" to cause all kinds of harm, which inevitably turns them into vengeful angry people who then go about causing a bunch of harm. They are not raised with love and they don't make many if any connections throughout their life. So they end up developing poor social skills and kind of becoming sociopaths. So is it in their nature being cursed? Or is it in their nurture because of how people treat them because they believe in the curse? Geralt often says he isn't sure but he leans more towards the later.

And suddenly as if by magic Ciri had some eyebrows (yes she had them before but being pale Blondey ones kind of blended in)

Watched the first two episodes of s2, enjoyable enough

Also was episode one a story from The Last Wish ? Seem familier but the book was over 10 years ago and at my age what I had for tea is about the limits of my recall

 Turnip Jedi wrote:
And suddenly as if by magic Ciri had some eyebrows (yes she had them before but being pale Blondey ones kind of blended in)

Watched the first two episodes of s2, enjoyable enough

Also was episode one a story from The Last Wish ? Seem familier but the book was over 10 years ago and at my age what I had for tea is about the limits of my recall

Yup. A modified version. The Witcher version of Beauty and the Beast.

Watched the last two episodes yesterday.
I have to say, I didn't like S2 that much. There is clearly a lot happening, but it's cut in such an annoying way, that you switch every 20 seconds to another character. This feels like Punisher S1 and S2 where we acutally don't really see a lot of the main character.
Episode 1 was good because it followed a classical take: they travel somewhere, find a mystery and fight a monster. I enjoyed that.
Episodes 7 & 8 finally pushed the plot forward. Everything in between? To me, it just felt like filler material.

 Lance845 wrote:

 Turnip Jedi wrote:
And suddenly as if by magic Ciri had some eyebrows (yes she had them before but being pale Blondey ones kind of blended in)

Watched the first two episodes of s2, enjoyable enough

Also was episode one a story from The Last Wish ? Seem familier but the book was over 10 years ago and at my age what I had for tea is about the limits of my recall

Yup. A modified version. The Witcher version of Beauty and the Beast.

the witcher does this a few times IIRC, takes a fairy tale and gives it sort of a grim "this is how it really happens" type aprouch, the video game has geralt occasionally make comments about that, someone mentions cinderella and he's like "well what actually hapened was *horriably grim story that vaguely resembles it*

BrianDavion wrote:

 Lance845 wrote:

 Turnip Jedi wrote:
And suddenly as if by magic Ciri had some eyebrows (yes she had them before but being pale Blondey ones kind of blended in)

Watched the first two episodes of s2, enjoyable enough

Also was episode one a story from The Last Wish ? Seem familier but the book was over 10 years ago and at my age what I had for tea is about the limits of my recall

Yup. A modified version. The Witcher version of Beauty and the Beast.

the witcher does this a few times IIRC, takes a fairy tale and gives it sort of a grim "this is how it really happens" type aprouch, the video game has geralt occasionally make comments about that, someone mentions cinderella and he's like "well what actually hapened was *horriably grim story that vaguely resembles it*

Witcher 3 Spoilers:

@ Dreadwinter, that sounds proper bonkers, might have to re-install 3 and see if my new PC can cope with it, it made my old one rather grumpy so didnt finish it or get any xpacs

Blood and Wine is amazing and well worth a playthrough if you have a chance.

 Hanskrampf wrote:
Watched the last two episodes yesterday.
I have to say, I didn't like S2 that much. There is clearly a lot happening, but it's cut in such an annoying way, that you switch every 20 seconds to another character. This feels like Punisher S1 and S2 where we acutally don't really see a lot of the main character.
Episode 1 was good because it followed a classical take: they travel somewhere, find a mystery and fight a monster. I enjoyed that.
Episodes 7 & 8 finally pushed the plot forward. Everything in between? To me, it just felt like filler material.

Someone may have told them (after season 1) to try to be more like the books. Because that's how I recall the first few books before I gave up. Some big things surrounded by lots and lots of filler material.

Just finished watching season 2, got into this season a lot more than the first, I won't say I didn't enjoy the first, but this one drew me in better.

I haven't really thought about the technical reasons why I feel that way, haven't tried to analyse it, maybe it was just the time jumps in the first season, whilst I followed the time jumps perfectly fine maybe it stopped me from engaging with it.

 warboss wrote:
Was anyone else not a fan of Geralt's new armor? It looks nice but it looks like a nice cosplay leather armor you buy at the dealer's room at a major convention. The Nilfgard armor improved though since last season.

Geralts armour felt too much like a video game armour that you might pick up mid to late game.

I didn't hate it, but definitely preferred the one from the first season.

Yeah, it felt too shiny and new. Admittedly, they literally show him making it on screen while he's training Ciri so I can't fault them in that regard. I'd just have preferred something different but that is just an aesthetic preference on my part. I haven't played the games but typically in that genre there are lots of armors to choose from both in games where its just a visual choice and in those where it functionally matters.

 Lance845 wrote:

 Dreadwinter wrote:
Something about a curse of the black sun. It has been awhile since I read on that.

Curse of the Black Sun is maybe a real curse but probably not.

Basically, anyone born during a solar eclipse is destined to bring ruin and destruction and all kinds of other things. There is no known cure for the curse (but Witchers contend that all curses have cures). It boils down to nature versus nurture kind of. People believe in the curse of the Black Sun, so children are raised with everyone around them isolating them, bullying them, treating them horribly because they are "destined" to cause all kinds of harm, which inevitably turns them into vengeful angry people who then go about causing a bunch of harm. They are not raised with love and they don't make many if any connections throughout their life. So they end up developing poor social skills and kind of becoming sociopaths. So is it in their nature being cursed? Or is it in their nurture because of how people treat them because they believe in the curse? Geralt often says he isn't sure but he leans more towards the later.

I think in TW3 they consider it a real curse, as it keeps Eskel pretty busy constantly and his kid has some pretty wacky stuff going on in her life. Like that wolf.

Anyways, the point is that Geralt and Eskel are two sides of the same coin, Geralt's side is just shinier.

Speaking of the game, how did the show look at Vessemir in both the game and the books and go "You know what, lets make him unlikable this time. feth that Grandpa stuff."

 Dreadwinter wrote:

 Lance845 wrote:

 Dreadwinter wrote:
Something about a curse of the black sun. It has been awhile since I read on that.

Curse of the Black Sun is maybe a real curse but probably not.

Basically, anyone born during a solar eclipse is destined to bring ruin and destruction and all kinds of other things. There is no known cure for the curse (but Witchers contend that all curses have cures). It boils down to nature versus nurture kind of. People believe in the curse of the Black Sun, so children are raised with everyone around them isolating them, bullying them, treating them horribly because they are "destined" to cause all kinds of harm, which inevitably turns them into vengeful angry people who then go about causing a bunch of harm. They are not raised with love and they don't make many if any connections throughout their life. So they end up developing poor social skills and kind of becoming sociopaths. So is it in their nature being cursed? Or is it in their nurture because of how people treat them because they believe in the curse? Geralt often says he isn't sure but he leans more towards the later.

I think in TW3 they consider it a real curse, as it keeps Eskel pretty busy constantly and his kid has some pretty wacky stuff going on in her life. Like that wolf.

Anyways, the point is that Geralt and Eskel are two sides of the same coin, Geralt's side is just shinier.

Speaking of the game, how did the show look at Vessemir in both the game and the books and go "You know what, lets make him unlikable this time. feth that Grandpa stuff."

where's the mention of eskel having a child suprise?

In The Witcher 3

Watching some interviews, I love seeing how passionate Henry Cavill is about the series, books and games.

 Dreadwinter wrote:
In The Witcher 3

Spoiler:

She shows up in Kaer Morhen if certain conditions are met, for the Battle

I've never seen THAT what conditions?

I finally watched and overall I liked it. Which is significant since I litterally adored season 1, have watched it multiple times, and have read all the novels after that.

Loved how the story was changed, even significantly, while I still had the feeling that I was watching the same story from novels. My favorite thing was that some characters had much more appearances on screen compared to the novels and they all were portrayed in brilliant way. Tissaia De Vries in particular, but also Istredd and Vesemir and somehow even Fringilla, Vilgefortz, Cahir and Francesca who basically show up only later in the novels.

"Dear Friend" easter egg was awesome .

Only one thing I didn't like.



Like season 1 I had the feeling that the show isn't really smooth to watch without knowing the novel's material.

Is the whole Voleth Meir subplot taken from the games? Or completely invented? I have no clue about the games as I never played them.

 Blackie wrote:
I finally watched and overall I liked it. Which is significant since I litterally adored season 1, have watched it multiple times, and have read all the novels after that.

Loved how the story was changed, even significantly, while I still had the feeling that I was watching the same story from novels. My favorite thing was that some characters had much more appearances on screen compared to the novels and they all were portrayed in brilliant way. Tissaia De Vries in particular, but also Istredd and Vesemir and somehow even Fringilla, Vilgefortz, Cahir and Francesca who basically show up only later in the novels.

"Dear Friend" easter egg was awesome .

Only one thing I didn't like.

Spoiler:

In the novels Emhyr's identity is revealed near the very last pages of the last book. The obsession of avoiding re-casts played a key role here, IMHO they should have hired an actor for Duny and a different one for Emhyr. Yes, they're the same guy but years have passed and revealing it now might ruin the ending.

Dara for example is the same actor but looks like another person .

Like season 1 I had the feeling that the show isn't really smooth to watch without knowing the novel's material.

Is the whole Voleth Meir subplot taken from the games? Or completely invented? I have no clue about the games as I never played them.

completely invented. Based on the slavic folklore legend of Baba Yaga

BrianDavion wrote:

 Dreadwinter wrote:
In The Witcher 3

Spoiler:

She shows up in Kaer Morhen if certain conditions are met, for the Battle

I've never seen THAT what conditions?

Oh I don't remember exactly. When you do get her, she sits in the courtyard with her enormous wolf and you don't really get much information out of her, she does fight in the battle though. It might be one of the conditions from the Witcher 2 Save you can choose.

It is more of an easter egg for Eskel than anything else.

Oh my god they killed you barstewards

Finally wrapped up S2, fair bit of wheel spinning in the middle but good enough (plus I think they've upped the red on Triss, which is nice)

 Turnip Jedi wrote:
Oh my god they killed

Spoiler:

Roach

you barstewards

Finally wrapped up S2, fair bit of wheel spinning in the middle but good enough (plus I think they've upped the red on Triss, which is nice)

Roach in the novels dies or gets lost pretty often. In fact Geralt names all his horses as Roach .

Well thoroughly enjoyed the second season. Preferred it to the first one, for a start having the single timeline made it a lot easier to follow (I loved the fourth wall-breaking moment with Jaskier about that bit).

Thought the characters really developed, some awesome action sequences (unarmed Geralt vs. the mob guys in the Temple was fantastic) and thought the guy playing Vesimier was pretty good for the role. I clapped and laughed in excitement like a school kid when he first appeared on screen

But OMG Roach and also Geralt friendzoned Triss!

Started watching the Witcher season 2, 3 episodes in and I think this might be an advertising campaign for my Native Yorkshire.
So far I have seen 5 or 6 Yorkshire locations.

Episode 1 was a great way to start a show, the story was well done and was believable, also it had Thormund Giantsbane, which always helps!

Episode 2 was a bit meh, big fight at the end was good.

Episode 3 not to be rude... but I think the first impact from the obstacle thingy would have pulverised that lass, not just mess up her hair.

As for the over arching plot, I'm not that invested. Something about it just doesn't grab me, now if the show were to lean on ehat it does best... The Witcher roaming around hunting and fighting big nasty beasty monsters. A monster of the week sort of thing... The X-Files, but with swords.

So does this show still suck? Season one was pretty bad, couldn't even bear to watch the season finale. It's hard to get invested in a show where everyone treats each other with barely-concealed contempt.

 Void__Dragon wrote:
So does this show still suck? Season one was pretty bad, couldn't even bear to watch the season finale. It's hard to get invested in a show where everyone treats each other with barely-concealed contempt.

I'd go with s'alright not outstanding nor dire, then again I like Jaskier so in a very thin slice of the fanbase

 Void__Dragon wrote:
So does this show still suck? Season one was pretty bad, couldn't even bear to watch the season finale. It's hard to get invested in a show where everyone treats each other with barely-concealed contempt.

If you considered pretty bad the first season I wouldn't suggest watching season 2. Season 2 has better visual effects and just one timeline, but that's the same show basically.

General consensus about both seasons indicates that this is a great show, I absolutely love it and in fact I thought season 1 was so good when it was released that I bought and read all 8 novels about The Witcher, then re-watched the show again! It might just not be your cup of tea though.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 stonehorse wrote:
The Witcher roaming around hunting and fighting big nasty beasty monsters. A monster of the week sort of thing... The X-Files, but with swords.

It's something I think it would really bad at this point of the show. Plot from the book is great and doesn't have any monster/minor villain of the week. The witcher roaming and fighting monsters is basically the material of the first two books, which has already been explored in the series, nothing more than the background of the main story.

Rather behind the curve but just finished season 2. I think the first season was way better. This season was way too much wandering forlornly around in the snow and random plot twist reveals.

Maybe I just remember Blavikin too much.

Not enough monsters and awesome sword fights.

 Flinty wrote:
Rather behind the curve but just finished season 2. I think the first season was way better. This season was way too much wandering forlornly around in the snow and random plot twist reveals.

Maybe I just remember Blavikin too much.

Not enough monsters and awesome sword fights.

There aren't many monsters and sword fights in the books too. Probably much less than the tv show actually. IMHO 2nd season issue is being too slow compared to the books' material. It should take 4 seasons, 5 at most, assuming 8 episodes per season to properly cover the whole story, not 7-8. Especially if we get one season every two years.

*ancient chanting* Arise thread, thread arise!

Henry Cavill is out as Geralt of Rivia, Liam Hemsworth is in.

https://kotaku.com/netflix-witcher-s4-henry-cavill-liam-hemsworth-superman-1849719667

This series is now dead for me.

For what it's worth, Liam Hemsworth is a good choice as well though I'd have preferred them just casting him as a different witcher rather than Geralt. Regardless, Henry was only about 1/3 the focus of the show unfortunately despite being the titular character (at least in season 1) so it's less of a change than normal.