There has been speculation for months that Henry Cavill might show up in Deadpool 3, aka Deadpool & Wolverine, but … Continue reading "Henry Cavill Is Playing Wolverine In Deadpool 3"
The source material is what keeps it from just being another generic fantasy setting with stereotypical characters, which is what the writers were turning The Witcher into in the very first season, and I heard it got worse from there but stopped watching.
Great adaptations keep the important bits. Cavill trying to keep the important bits was the only reason the show wasn't worse. The writers and producers were the ones who signed on for a Witcher project and tried to turn it into their own.
I think you are kind of assuming he was only keeping the important bits and wasn’t being stubborn. We actually have no idea what the dynamic was truly like and who was “right.”
We know Cavill wanted to do a Witcher show, we know the writer's changed things significantly, and Cavill left the show. A writer that left was the one who brought up the other writer's mocking the source material, so it wasn't only Cavill that seemed to have an issue. Then there are the fans, who also did not appreciate the changes.
Why try to put the blame on one actor for being stubborn when the situation is the commonly seen Hollywood adaptation leaves out important details from the source?
I think you are kind of assuming he was only keeping the important bits and wasn’t being stubborn.
Since he has articulated the parts he likes about the Witcher that weren't included, and fans who agreed with him complained about the same parts being left out, it is pretty safe to assume he wanted to keep the important bits.
Jumping the gun to saying he was stubborn is blaming him. Is wanting to make a show based on the source material being stubborn, or just being dedicated to the source material?
Once again, I did not blame him. I did not say he was stubborn. I’m saying it’s totally possible he was, just like it’s possible he was totally (or largely even) in the right and the parents for TW are just stubborn hacks who need to hear him out. But again, none of us actually know what was going on. Snippets we’ve gleaned from media is not sufficient.
Cavill reportedly badgered his agent to let him meet with The Witcher showrunner Lauren Schmidt-Hissrich as she recalls him being "really annoying" with his insistence on playing the lead role in the series that (at the time) she hadn't even begun writing yet
Yeah, no the show had no intentions of telling the same story from the start.
Cavill messed everything up before even starting, this is entirely on him for pushing his way into a show and demanding what he wanted instead of what everyone else was doing.
Why make multiple video games that have nothing to do with the source material as well? Very few adaptations are 100% faithful to the source material, lots tell alternate ideas, it’s hilarious that people think this one should be the outlier. The other media in this universe already has nothing to do with the books already lmfao.
It’s called telling additional stories or fleshing out other stories.
The Witcher could be a vast universe with multiple stories to tell, why tell the same one multiple times?
There is a difference between telling different stories with the same settings and characters and changing the setting and characters enough that it loses the things that make the setting and characters unique.
The Lord of the Rings movies were a great adaptation even though the deviated from the source material to fit the mew medium. The Dark Tower was a terrible adaptation, and felt like some other movie pretending to be the Dark Tower.
You can't tell the difference between an adaptation and a sequel? The show was not a "different story", it was a poorly-made adaptation that they didn't want to make. They wanted Game of Thrones using an unrelated existing IP. If they really wanted a different story entirely, they should have avoided using the characters and events from the books.
They are both doing the exact same thing, expanding on existing lore. It’s extremely weird that you think there’s a difference here.
Why is one more acceptable than the other, when they are doing the exact same thing? You can of course make excuses like you did to defend it, but it’s still the same exact thing in the end. Arguing otherwise is just asinine.
I don’t know how you consider an adaptation the same as a sequel. Would you watch yet another movie with the origin story of Spider-man and think it expands the lore of Spider-man? It doesn’t make sense.
The Witcher TV show is garbage, especially the second and third season. I’m glad that you appear to enjoy it, but it’s not for me. I wouldn’t call an adaptation that bastardizes the source material an expansion of the lore, but you are free to do you. In either case, even if the show was a truly unique story and IP, it doesn’t even follow its own narrative. Characters make nonsensical decisions that go against their character traits established in the show. Pacing is weird, dialogue is not good. Cavil was carrying the entire show on his shoulders.
If you look at user reviews for season 3, you will see I’m not the only person with this view. S3E5 was the worst episode of any TV show I have ever seen. The franchise deserved better. The showrunner drove this show into the ground. They clearly don’t understand the source material, or how to make an interesting story in the Witcher universe. They need to do better.