Netflix "The Witcher" Series - Season 2 now Streaming

[43M]

Cant wait to watch this, but I kinda wanna rewatch season 1, but it was kind of exhausting with the way they tell the story (although I still enjoyed it).     

[Shockwave]

6 hours ago, 43M said:

Cant wait to watch this, but I kinda wanna rewatch season 1, but it was kind of exhausting with the way they tell the story (although I still enjoyed it).     

There is a season 1 summary video on Netflix that was edited to show the timeline correctly. Helped me quite a bit. I'm like 4 episodes into season 2 so far and it feels kind of meh compared to season 1. Hoping it gets better. But I'm underwhelmed at this point. I had really high hopes. 

[THE DUKE]

Put me in the camp that thinks season 2 was drastically better than season 1.  Season 1 I struggled to get through at times, while season 2 I couldn't wait to start the next episode after one finished, and really didn't like having to wait when life got in the way, lol.  I may be in the minority, but I really wish they released weekly and not dumping a season all at once.  Prolong the enjoyment and discussion of the show and you don't rush through a season so quick, stuff sticks in better.

Pros:

• Henry Cavill as Geralt might be the best character of any ongoing series right now. Obviously has the physical chops but he really brings an understated nuance of emotion to the character that a lesser actor couldn't with the limited vocal expressions that are necessary for the character.
• Not a big fan of Yen the character, but her character arc I thought was solid this year. A bit soapy with the redemption through sacrifice angle, but they were definitely building to it all season and I thought it paid off well.
• The actress who plays Ciri, light years better this season.
• As has been stated, the VFX were quality this year, a big step up from season 1
• Definitely benefitted having a linear storyline last year. I didn't mind too much how season 1 was structured, but it definitely made it harder to follow.
• The interplay of the politics between the Mage's, Nilfgard, The North, and the Elves was a plus for me.  I thought the double/triple crossing and spying was explained and executed very well.

Cons

• Not sure how I feel about Ciri's dad being the White Flame, they are going to need quite the explanation for that one.  I maybe should have rewatched season 1, but I can't even remember how he supposedly died.  Pretty much knew it was him when Geralt started asking how did Nilfgard know before anyone though.  We're two full seasons through the show now and I just now feel like we might be introduced to the main antagonist.
• The Hut witch or whatever she was called felt a bit McGuffinish to me more so than a well written and planned nemesis for season two. Maybe the weakest angle of the season for me. She was no more than what was needed to get the players in their particular place by the end of the season and introduce the other sphere's (planes of existence?) more.
• Like has been said, a full 10 episodes would have helped, if not 13.  13 may be pushing it, but 2 more episodes that are a little more "monster of the week but used to flesh out characters" would have helped a bit.  I wouldn't have even minded a full episode devoid of Geralt/Ciri to flesh out the political interweaving more.  Maybe just have a couple minutes of her "in training" at Witcher mountain, and have the rest of the episode fleshing out elsewhere.  Then maybe another one at the Haven/Monastery type place where you do the same.
• Probably going to be a long wait for season 3.

[THE DUKE]

Season 1 of Wheel of Time pales in comparison to season 2 of The Witcher.  Pretty much better in every facet imaginable.

[Xenos]

56 minutes ago, THE DUKE said:

Season 1 of Wheel of Time pales in comparison to season 2 of The Witcher.  Pretty much better in every facet imaginable.

I don’t think you can compare season 1 of a show to another show’s second season. Maybe see if there’s improvements in the following season like what happened with The Witcher. Right now The Witcher S2> WOT S1> The Witcher S1.

[Xenos]

59 minutes ago, THE DUKE said:

Put me in the camp that thinks season 2 was drastically better than season 1.  Season 1 I struggled to get through at times, while season 2 I couldn't wait to start the next episode after one finished, and really didn't like having to wait when life got in the way, lol.  I may be in the minority, but I really wish they released weekly and not dumping a season all at once.  Prolong the enjoyment and discussion of the show and you don't rush through a season so quick, stuff sticks in better.

Pros:

• Henry Cavill as Geralt might be the best character of any ongoing series right now. Obviously has the physical chops but he really brings an understated nuance of emotion to the character that a lesser actor couldn't with the limited vocal expressions that are necessary for the character.
• Not a big fan of Yen the character, but her character arc I thought was solid this year. A bit soapy with the redemption through sacrifice angle, but they were definitely building to it all season and I thought it paid off well.
• The actress who plays Ciri, light years better this season.
• As has been stated, the VFX were quality this year, a big step up from season 1
• Definitely benefitted having a linear storyline last year. I didn't mind too much how season 1 was structured, but it definitely made it harder to follow.
• The interplay of the politics between the Mage's, Nilfgard, The North, and the Elves was a plus for me.  I thought the double/triple crossing and spying was explained and executed very well.

Cons

• Not sure how I feel about Ciri's dad being the White Flame, they are going to need quite the explanation for that one.  I maybe should have rewatched season 1, but I can't even remember how he supposedly died.  Pretty much knew it was him when Geralt started asking how did Nilfgard know before anyone though.  We're two full seasons through the show now and I just now feel like we might be introduced to the main antagonist.
• The Hut witch or whatever she was called felt a bit McGuffinish to me more so than a well written and planned nemesis for season two. Maybe the weakest angle of the season for me. She was no more than what was needed to get the players in their particular place by the end of the season and introduce the other sphere's (planes of existence?) more.
• Like has been said, a full 10 episodes would have helped, if not 13.  13 may be pushing it, but 2 more episodes that are a little more "monster of the week but used to flesh out characters" would have helped a bit.  I wouldn't have even minded a full episode devoid of Geralt/Ciri to flesh out the political interweaving more.  Maybe just have a couple minutes of her "in training" at Witcher mountain, and have the rest of the episode fleshing out elsewhere.  Then maybe another one at the Haven/Monastery type place where you do the same.
• Probably going to be a long wait for season 3.

In terms of Ciri’s parents, her grandmother said that they both died in a storm at sea. She probably lied about what happened since she never like Ciri’s dad. And I wouldn’t be surprised that there’s an element of vengeance there from her father.

[THE DUKE]

43 minutes ago, Xenos said:

Right now The Witcher S2> WOT S1> The Witcher S1.

That'll be a hard disagree from me.  Season 1 of The Witcher had it's issues, but I was much higher on it than I am WoT.  For me Witcher Season 2 is on par with a show like Game of Thrones during the good years. Doesn't reach the same highs, but I thought Witcher S2 was consistently good throughout.

[Xenos]

23 hours ago, THE DUKE said:

That'll be a hard disagree from me.  Season 1 of The Witcher had it's issues, but I was much higher on it than I am WoT.  For me Witcher Season 2 is on par with a show like Game of Thrones during the good years. Doesn't reach the same highs, but I thought Witcher S2 was consistently good throughout.

Geralt is amazing and so is Yennifer to an extent in S1. But there were too many inconsistencies and issues between each episode for me in S1 versus S1 of WOT, which I think found it’s bearing after the pilot and got progressively better with each episode. 

[RuskieTitan]

On 12/21/2021 at 1:29 PM, Xenos said:

In terms of Ciri’s parents, her grandmother said that they both died in a storm at sea. She probably lied about what happened since she never like Ciri’s dad. And I wouldn’t be surprised that there’s an element of vengeance there from her father.

A theory of mine. I've only read the first book, and played a bit of the first game, I think most of my 'fandom' is from the card game Gwent but here's my theory based on the additional information from Season 2:

Spoiler

Somehow, Ciri's father found out about the whole bloodlines situation that was discussed about Ciri's bloodlines on the women's side, that elf curse or what have you. As a result, he positioned himself to fall in love with Ciri's mom. What he didn't anticipate / count on was the situation unfoldering with the gift of surprise and Geralt. That threw a wrench in his plans. But I feel like he was planning this all out far in advance, maybe including faking his death? That would allow him to go to Nilfgaard and rise to power (that storyline would be interesting to follow). But based on how he ordered the baby's death to manipulate the elves against the North, I feel like he is indeed the 'big bad' of the story.

Could be completely off-base, but I have no intention of spoiling myself unless I stumble upon this information while playing through the witcher franchise, was gearing up to play next week.

[Jlowe22]

21 hours ago, RuskieTitan said:

A theory of mine. I've only read the first book, and played a bit of the first game, I think most of my 'fandom' is from the card game Gwent but here's my theory based on the additional information from Season 2:

If you're a fan of the Witcher, you gotta play the third game.

[RuskieTitan]

52 minutes ago, Jlowe22 said:

If you're a fan of the Witcher, you gotta play the third game.

I fully plan on it, already own it just haven't gotten around since I wanted to get the 'full' story and slog through the older games first lol

[Jlowe22]

Just now, RuskieTitan said:

I fully plan on it, already own it just haven't gotten around since I wanted to get the 'full' story and slog through the older games first lol

If you're slogging through the first game, you're a braver soul than I.  The second game isn't bad, but both pale in comparison to the third.

I don't know anything about the price nowadays, but the two DLCs for the third game are a must and definitely worth.  The stories are on par at the least or better than the main game, and blood and wine has so much content it's essentially Witcher 4.

[Edge]

I can't really agree with the takes in this thread, but that might also be the case, because i'm a book fan first.

I have a lot of problems with this season, but first i want to list the things i liked. I loved the main characters and actors. Geralt, Yennefer and Ciri were all great. For some the story wasn't the best, but the actors did a tremendous job. I loved the side characters as well. Jaskier was great and showed a more serious side of his. Rience, Dijkstra and Philippa Eilhart were introduced in a very good way. I loved Rience especially and despite the fact that they changed the way of how his face got burned, i liked it here as well. That was a fun scene with Yennefer and Jaskier. They also changed Triss hair, to make it look more like in the games, but it does fit the character better. So that was another good decision. I also liked their decision to keep Istredd. It will be interesting to see where they will take it with him, as he's not playing a part of the story in the novel series, but i can see why they kept him and i do think he has a place within the story. He's a good character, so that was one of the few changes, that i liked.

But besides that i got huge problems with the 2nd season. I tend to say that i liked the 1st season more than the 2nd one, due to the story. Ofc the 1st one was a a little bit confusing and challenging for the viewers, but the storyarcs were more or less close to the books. The 2nd season did change the story quite a bit and that caused some main problems.

Let me start with the reason, why they probably changed up a lot of things. They probably did that, because in book 1 of the novel series, there wasn't an intriguing end. The story focused on character developement, which probably would have been to boring for the series and the viewers. So i get why they introduced a new antagonist for this season, who btw. has no foundation in the novels at all. Ciri does have struggles, but with her dreams. We saw a glimpse of it in a scene between Ciri and Triss Merigold. Unfortunately nothing else came out of that scene. Why? That's a main point within book 1. Triss isn't strong enough to deal with it and help Ciri, so Geralt writes a "dear friend" letter to Yennefer and asks her to help Ciri, which she does.

Here starts my main problem: Character development.

I never get the feeling, that the relationships between Ciri and Triss, but especially Ciri and Yennefer is as close as it should be. Triss should be like a big sister to Ciri. We did see that relationship develope a little bit, but not enough. At least more than the relationship between Ciri and Yennefer. In the books Yennefer is very severe with Ciri, while traininig her. At the same time, she's caring for her and they start to love each other as mother/daughter. In the series nothing of that is shown. At the end Yennefer wants to die for Ciri, but we never can understand why she would do it, as we never saw their relationship getting this close. Yennefer suddenly appears at the temple of Melitele, but they get immediately attacked by Rience, so they flee. Half an episode they walk to Cintra, and get rescued by Geralt in the end and than we directly jump to the end. There was nothing for them to bond. That was so disappointing, especially since they portrayed all 3 of them as a family in the end. We just never see and get why Yennefer and Ciri get that relationship. They did a solid job, through to implement the relationship between Ciri and Geralt, although he should have been the one to train her and not Lambert.

Talking about the witchers, this is another point i didn't really liked. The story of Vesemir was made up as well. The story of Eskel was made up as well and they did him very bad by killing him off in the same episode, they introduced him. What a shame. He's not playing a role in the novel series for the main story, so that decision would have been ok, but why would they kill him off in the episode, they introduce him? If you change it, than create at least a good story. Show the viewers, why they should care about this character and build up his relationship with Geralt and Vesemir, before killing him. That was bad writting.

Another point i really didn't liked was the revelation of Emhyr var Emreis as Ciri's father. Yes that's according to the books, but in the novel series we get that revelation at the end of the story. Emhyr is a huge secret throughout the story. No one really knows his intentions. All the time it's pure speculation and just in the last book it gets revealed, that he is indeed Ciri's father. How he survived should be explained later. Unless they mess that up, it should make sense. I also get why the show runners decided to reveal him earlier. In a series it's tough to have an antagonist, who never gets shown on screen. I just think that they could have build up the mystery for 1 or 2 more seasons. Maybe reveal it in season 4, after we're midway through the series. You get an even more shocking revelation.

But Emhry won't be the only antagonist. I'm not spoiling you, who the other one will be, but if they do it right, they should reveal him at the end of the next season.

At last i want to say, that they also made up the entire story of Yennefer losing her powers. They probably did that, because they made up so much, but i think there was no need for it. I think they could have still told that story, they made up, but just with a more powerful Yennefer, who could have trained Ciri a lot better, if she actually had kept her powers. Btw. in the novel series, she burned Rience face by using her powers, so that was the change i talked about earlier.

In the end the 2nd season was solid. Not as bad as it might sound, but they wasted a lot of potential. That's disappointing to me. They needed at least 2 more episodes to showcase the relationships between the main characters, especially between Ciri and Yennefer and i think if they had told that story good enough, i could have accepted other developments and changes, because some did make sense to spice up the story from book 1 of the novel series. They only did Eskel really, really dirty.

Nevertheless i'm going to watch the next seasons. I'm just to much of a fan of the novel series, to miss seeing certain events unfolding on screen. I hope that the series will do a better job in the next season. After the 1st book, the novel series should offer enough events to cover and build up as intriguing storys. The ending of the next season in particular should show focus on one of my favourite storyparts, so there should be absolutely no need to change up the story even more.

Edited December 26, 2021 by Edge

[PrplChilPill]

Wrong thread!

Edited December 26, 2021 by PrplChilPill

[Xenos]

19 hours ago, Edge said:

I can't really agree with the takes in this thread, but that might also be the case, because i'm a book fan first.

I have a lot of problems with this season, but first i want to list the things i liked. I loved the main characters and actors. Geralt, Yennefer and Ciri were all great. For some the story wasn't the best, but the actors did a tremendous job. I loved the side characters as well. Jaskier was great and showed a more serious side of his. Rience, Dijkstra and Philippa Eilhart were introduced in a very good way. I loved Rience especially and despite the fact that they changed the way of how his face got burned, i liked it here as well. That was a fun scene with Yennefer and Jaskier. They also changed Triss hair, to make it look more like in the games, but it does fit the character better. So that was another good decision. I also liked their decision to keep Istredd. It will be interesting to see where they will take it with him, as he's not playing a part of the story in the novel series, but i can see why they kept him and i do think he has a place within the story. He's a good character, so that was one of the few changes, that i liked.

But besides that i got huge problems with the 2nd season. I tend to say that i liked the 1st season more than the 2nd one, due to the story. Ofc the 1st one was a a little bit confusing and challenging for the viewers, but the storyarcs were more or less close to the books. The 2nd season did change the story quite a bit and that caused some main problems.

Let me start with the reason, why they probably changed up a lot of things. They probably did that, because in book 1 of the novel series, there wasn't an intriguing end. The story focused on character developement, which probably would have been to boring for the series and the viewers. So i get why they introduced a new antagonist for this season, who btw. has no foundation in the novels at all. Ciri does have struggles, but with her dreams. We saw a glimpse of it in a scene between Ciri and Triss Merigold. Unfortunately nothing else came out of that scene. Why? That's a main point within book 1. Triss isn't strong enough to deal with it and help Ciri, so Geralt writes a "dear friend" letter to Yennefer and asks her to help Ciri, which she does.

Here starts my main problem: Character development.

I never get the feeling, that the relationships between Ciri and Triss, but especially Ciri and Yennefer is as close as it should be. Triss should be like a big sister to Ciri. We did see that relationship develope a little bit, but not enough. At least more than the relationship between Ciri and Yennefer. In the books Yennefer is very severe with Ciri, while traininig her. At the same time, she's caring for her and they start to love each other as mother/daughter. In the series nothing of that is shown. At the end Yennefer wants to die for Ciri, but we never can understand why she would do it, as we never saw their relationship getting this close. Yennefer suddenly appears at the temple of Melitele, but they get immediately attacked by Rience, so they flee. Half an episode they walk to Cintra, and get rescued by Geralt in the end and than we directly jump to the end. There was nothing for them to bond. That was so disappointing, especially since they portrayed all 3 of them as a family in the end. We just never see and get why Yennefer and Ciri get that relationship. They did a solid job, through to implement the relationship between Ciri and Geralt, although he should have been the one to train her and not Lambert.

Talking about the witchers, this is another point i didn't really liked. The story of Vesemir was made up as well. The story of Eskel was made up as well and they did him very bad by killing him off in the same episode, they introduced him. What a shame. He's not playing a role in the novel series for the main story, so that decision would have been ok, but why would they kill him off in the episode, they introduce him? If you change it, than create at least a good story. Show the viewers, why they should care about this character and build up his relationship with Geralt and Vesemir, before killing him. That was bad writting.

Another point i really didn't liked was the revelation of Emhyr var Emreis as Ciri's father. Yes that's according to the books, but in the novel series we get that revelation at the end of the story. Emhyr is a huge secret throughout the story. No one really knows his intentions. All the time it's pure speculation and just in the last book it gets revealed, that he is indeed Ciri's father. How he survived should be explained later. Unless they mess that up, it should make sense. I also get why the show runners decided to reveal him earlier. In a series it's tough to have an antagonist, who never gets shown on screen. I just think that they could have build up the mystery for 1 or 2 more seasons. Maybe reveal it in season 4, after we're midway through the series. You get an even more shocking revelation.

But Emhry won't be the only antagonist. I'm not spoiling you, who the other one will be, but if they do it right, they should reveal him at the end of the next season.

At last i want to say, that they also made up the entire story of Yennefer losing her powers. They probably did that, because they made up so much, but i think there was no need for it. I think they could have still told that story, they made up, but just with a more powerful Yennefer, who could have trained Ciri a lot better, if she actually had kept her powers. Btw. in the novel series, she burned Rience face by using her powers, so that was the change i talked about earlier.

In the end the 2nd season was solid. Not as bad as it might sound, but they wasted a lot of potential. That's disappointing to me. They needed at least 2 more episodes to showcase the relationships between the main characters, especially between Ciri and Yennefer and i think if they had told that story good enough, i could have accepted other developments and changes, because some did make sense to spice up the story from book 1 of the novel series. They only did Eskel really, really dirty.

Nevertheless i'm going to watch the next seasons. I'm just to much of a fan of the novel series, to miss seeing certain events unfolding on screen. I hope that the series will do a better job in the next season. After the 1st book, the novel series should offer enough events to cover and build up as intriguing storys. The ending of the next season in particular should show focus on one of my favourite storyparts, so there should be absolutely no need to change up the story even more.

I think you’ll see more of the book’s relationship between Ciri and Yennifer in the third season. At least that’s what I hope happens.