Henry Cavill Is Playing Wolverine In Deadpool 3 | Giant Freaking Robot
Henry Cavill Is Playing Wolverine In Deadpool 3 | Giant Freaking Robot
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"
You're viewing part of a thread.
Why make a show called the Witcher that has nothing to do with the source material?
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.
Are you serious? The games are basically unofficial sequels to the books. They absolutely have something to do with them lol wtaf.
The games are basically unofficial sequels to the books. They absolutely have something to do with them lol wtaf.
So are they faithful to the material, or are they a separate story like the show was?
The games aren’t the books, the show wasn’t either, and people are mad about that, lmfao.
They're continuations of the story. They take the established lore and expand on them, just like an additional book would.
Huh, just like what the show was doing…. What’s your point here again?
That one media can tell a different story than the books, but another can’t? Thats just asinine lmfao.
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.
You obviously haven’t read the books, it can’t be a sequel… yennefer and Geralt were dead and ciri fucked off to an alternate reality at the end of the books. Runes basically don’t exist in the books, among basically everything else the games take for liberty.
The show was confusing, because Cavill wanted non-canon game stuff with canon book stuff, when the show wasn’t either. You can’t have the person that fucked the entire thing up, be the one “carrying” it lmfao.
So yeah… both are doing the exact same thing, using the lore to tell a different story.
You obviously haven’t read the books, it can’t be a sequel… yennefer and Geralt were dead and ciri fucked off to an alternate reality at the end of the books.
Correct, but thanks for the spoilers I guess? I also haven't beaten the games either. That's how I know the show sucks. I'm interested in reading the books and finishing the games, but I don't give a fuck about the show. I don't mind if the games are not a perfect adaptation of the books, video-->game adaptations (and vice versa) usually suck, but the game is fun, engaging, and has a great story. The show does not. Stop comparing the games to the show. You might consider them similar as derivative creative art goes, but they aren't playing in the same league quality-wise. The show will be remembered about as fondly as the Star Wars holiday special.