The Witcher (2019)
In General, I understand that the series objectively, it is not bad (6 of 10). However, I fiercely bombed: I can look at adaptation in the cut from the source, because I think that the whole gag of the show-run and writers, is not good history, and really hurts. On the background of the source changes look the worst alternative (not just equivalent but the other namely the worst). In order to further me biased is not called a fanatic of the books, I primeco that changes in adaptations are understanding (and sometimes even approve of). Example: Game of Thrones (familiar with the book series); they are "a fan of" Resident evil (the first part of the game and its remake), while the first part of the film adaptation of the cult believe in the genre (although, in addition to the General motif, with the original film adaptation has nothing to do); all deviations from the original, in the games by CD Projekt RED take approvingly, as most of them are either for the benefit of the narrative (for example the school of the snake, which is not Canon), or in favor of entertainment (a scar on the face; two swords behind, etc.). With Sapkowski's books met even before he published the first part of the game the Witcher. The series from Netflix not the case when the changes of the Canon of the benefit of screening (I realize that movies and books like the format too different, and certain changes can not be avoided. But overall, Netflix failed to properly adapt the source under a movie format)). The Witcher from Netflix absolutely mediocre pop instead of serious topics and less about philosophy and more evil; instead, the philosophy about who really is the monster (monster or the people themselves); instead of the harsh realities of war and the middle ages; instead of demonstrating the phenomena of xenophobia; instead discuss the dilemma of technological progress; rather, the lack of division into good and evil (Hello Nilfgaard) and gray morality more about what is Muti purpose. Give an example, for those who have already reviewed the first series is just brilliant about the Butcher Blaviken, because in the future can be summarized: The books in the course of the dialogue reveals the theme of greater and lesser evil. Geralt tries to avoid conflict Renfro with Stregobor. He doesn't want to take either side, although each of them tries to convince the witch that it needs to kill Stregobor/renfri is the lesser evil. But the Witcher does not not to interfere. Renfri forcing him, because, as follows from her speech: "There are lesser evil and greater evil, and behind both of them in the shadows hiding Very Great Evil. Very Great Evil, Geralt, is such that you can't imagine, even if you think nothing is able to surprise you. And you know, Geralt, sometimes it happens that a Great Evil will grab you by the throat and say: Choose, brother, or I, or that which is bit smaller". In the book Geralt at some point he understands (in this case, everything is logically furnished) that renfri he was deceived and did not intend to leave the city... She intends to cut civilians in the town square, until the until hiding and avoiding her Stregobor not come out of his tower this is a Very Great Evil. This is an ultimatum. Stregobor of course wanted to put on the residents. And Geralt is trying to prevent a bloodbath among the civilians. - There will be no second Tridata with difficulty and said Geralt. And it would not be. Stregobor ridiculed me. Said I can kill the whole of blaviken and add a few nearby villages, but he still from the tower will not work. What? Yes, I tricked you. I lied to all my life, if it was necessary, then why to make an exception for you? As a result, Geralt stood up for the innocent, the commoner who only just got under the hand, becoming hostage to someone else's conflict. But there was a misunderstanding, and in consequence received a reprimand, stone face nickname: "the butcher of Blaviken". After this, the reader is able to feel the essence of injustice and as a consequence, the penetration stage, and empathy for the main character incomparably higher than in the series. In the series also have a philosophy about the greater, middle, lesser evil? Some fleeting pathos, nothing more. More about Muti-purpose, typical for classic fairy tales than serious reasoning on the subject. How much dialogue is cut (in the series we are seeing some verbatim excerpts from the book), their premise does not have time to open up. Netflix is everywhere relegated to the primitive and the dialogues and thoughts of characters. It's very corny... Compare: in the series, on Geralt finds some vision in which out of place the current storyline, some sort of haze about the purpose of the CRIS (although events Yogam is still very far away)... 1) on the basis of seeing, a witch sent to protect Stregobor (which is certainly not a positive character, that would be for him to stand up), instead of a desire to prevent the utilization of many innocent people; 2) Not in advance, only on arrival, Geralt realizes that there is one hostage (Marilka); 3) the ultimatum Renfri used only one hostage, instead threatening to dispose with his gang the whole area of local residents; 4) Next, renfri something fleeting it talks about what will be cut all in a row up until Stregobor not come to the area. But this is the moment from the gang renfri there was one renfri, and they came together in a fight. Feel the difference it's all greatly devalues the story! Story and dialogues abolished to impossible, so do not have time to feel the characters, and have taken a moral dilemma on each side of their personality, about the complexity of the upcoming choice... the Quote about "more, less, mean, evil..." here more as a passing reference than philosophy on the subject. In the dialogue topic is poorly developed, what does not work in synergy with the narrative. And because almost all that did not affect Netflix. I have painted more in the first series, all the subsequent, about the bad graphics and the other compound of the series... I would go into details and explained in detail their point of view, but the number of characters is limited in the review. Rave reviews from ordinary people (especially in the West) I am not completely clear. Perhaps bezrybe cancer and fish from what viewers who are not familiar with the book, praising the work of Netflix. But knowing that the writers wrote the story from scratch, and filmed already quality the source to forgive unauthorized, which didn't lead to anything good not excusable. Broken all the polymers and thoughts of the book what is evil and good, who large monsters (the people or the monsters).
Watch The Witcher online all seasons
Who is starring in movie The Witcher?
Who are creators of The Witcher (2019) ?
The Witcher (2019) wallpapers HD
The Witcher (2019) Watch trailer
The Witcher 2019 Watch online full movie In General, I understand that the series objectively, it is not bad (6...
The Witcher (2019) reviews
Will start review with the fact that for me, and I am sure for many others, the series of the Witcher is not just the books you borrow in a room with a white and ceramic, not just a series of games that you play to "kill monsters", and experience. Experiences that will last a lifetime and will often remind myself of the warm evenings we spent together over a favorite book or game. And I, as a fan, most likely, will be very subjective in terms of evaluation of the series. But if the show is aimed at fans, talking about exploitation of the Witcher series as a desire to "acquire", then please take the subjective for the objective. I'm not doing any big differences between book and game series, despite the fact that the characters are different, and the game Geralt is a little away from the book of the original, but this is caused by the development of character in time, his experience and circumstances that happened to him, and even if there are differences, they fit well into the atmosphere of the game and the universe in General. But what we see in the series: a steroid KACHOK, which in common with Geralt only the name, with pompous indifference to everything, live the same events as in the book. Feigned indifference, arrogance and pathos, which is only out of place, or by the time the quote is of a lesser and a greater evil from the trailer of the game in conversation with Stregobor. Something that allows itself to Geralt in the series outrageous. For example, such responses Kalanta it would have led to the block, and for talking to Foltest even more so. Book Geralt knows how to behave with royalty, and overall good person who understands others and their hierarchy in this world. Done with the NIT-picking to the character of one hero, but if such a blunder with the main character, then you already understand... And Yes, I know I'm not the first, but black artists it's something. In a world in which for the excellent shape of the ears you are burned on the main square, of course, fit well and are black like the great wizards and commanders of the army of the Queen Calanthe (sarcasm). Bakinskie dryads, as already noted: "more like a tribe of finding wakanda" that's just sand in the eyes of the person who at least once read books. And now, when someone writes in Google "Fringilla Vigo", they have in the results of the black face. Thank You, Netflix! But there are good moments like a good hit and acting Buttercup and Tissue de Vries, well, and beautiful scenery. At this pluses end. The series most likely will not come even a person who is not familiar with the universe because Creasy plot and confusing the timelines. I wanted to like the Game of Thrones added blood, severed heads and naked and waiting for the cashier. Not sure they got or not, but the rating on IMDb is disappointing. Conclusion: after this misunderstanding how the view of the Witcher series from Netflix I want to reread all the books and re-take the game to forget it as a nightmare. 2 out of 10
I must say that I am a big fan of the Witcher. In the distant 2000s, I remember now that on the channel Ren-TV (now the birthplace of wild propaganda and the supernatural) was the 12th Polish fantasy series on the works of Andrzej Sapkowski "the Witcher". In truth the series, I did not like, for the time homelessly characters and poor special effects against which even cheap productions on YouTube look like creations Scorsese. It was pathetic all except the main character Geralt and his friend dandelion. Although Michal Zebrowski, then performed the title role pulls on the killer of the middle ages, the witch had turned out quite tragic and dramatic character. Then I decided to read the book, as there are certainly contained interesting. And I got sucked into a whirlpool with a head, since they have all the things we love about Robert E. Howard is a charismatic and brutal character, croesy cabbage anything that moves and Terry Pratchett, as the irony and humor in a cycle with the head missing. And here all this effervescent cocktail finally decided to film. And to film the decent and expensive. Indeed, in recent years NETFLIX has monopolized the market of small screens for their original projects. Around the project formed a bunch of hype and fake news, like Geralt to be gay, and Cyrilla black lesbian. Not satisfied with all from Directors to casting. I'm surprised at all these people who sit at home in front of the TV and discuss what have not seen. Fans games, full throat screaming where two swords behind the beard, although no one thinks like them to pull out and wear. Well, why... Because it was in the game. There is another side of the coin. The people are more intelligent, read books about the Witcher and know what to like. Though they have the other extreme. You see, in medieval Europe there was black elves and Indian magicians. And dragons, witch, the Manticore, cut the other dwarves were found under every Bush. And I want to say it's just a story (in Russian), and in zamorski fantasy. This world though is similar to Europe, but only partly. Instead of the Church and of God here is the purpose, but the crusaders Nilfgaard. But everyone has their opinion and it is the place to be, despite the absurdity of what we are discussing. Let us briefly about the plot, although who are we kidding. And so you all know. During the first series we are shown the main character in "Mr. armored pants" Henry Cavill, who has provided us with a pretty good image of the evil hunter. In the series he's powerful, uncompromising, did not prevent him from time to rattling off jokes right and left. The story starts from the beginning when Geralt got his famous nickname the Butcher. Further on we present Jeniffer (Ana Calitri), cirilla (Frey Allen) and of course the local rock star Buttercup. With the development of the main story of the capture of the continent are not friendly armies and the political intrigues of sorcerers and fortune-tellers in each series, the Witcher takes the order to the evil and killing her. Very interesting was revealed the background to Ian, which in the book were only mentioned in passing. We show the transformation of a man from the bottom up to achieve limitless power. Well, the story zirilli woven from several books and written notes. Of the obvious advantages of the series is Geralt of course. Henry Cavill, as a fan of games and books are very authentic able to move like the Witcher from the books. The beginning he is a soulless killing machine, but with the development of the series, he transformered into quite the sarcastic and charismatic character, which can be put on a par with heroes and anti-heroes. Ana Calatra in the form of Jenifer in my opinion not up to the original book because of their youth and inexperience, well, she doesn't have the look of wisdom and sharpness of mind of several generations. Well, Freya Allan got in the way of an innocent girl in which there is devilry at 100%. Exactly what I imagined reading the book. And of course the main Joker Buttercup (John Betty). Their tandem with the Witcher personally, reminded me of a story about the friendship between Donkey and Shrek. Especially in the first series, but then like in a cartoon become the best of friends. And this rebirth is one of the best finds of the series. The Witcher can be viewed as anything but exactly what this series will look is unique. Ragged narrative gives us to get acquainted with the characters based on the stories of Sapkowski. Yes, people who read books and played games, it will be easier to understand the intricacies of the intrigues of sorcerers and the motivation of the characters. But the point is that initially, when nothing is clear, it's catchy and makes the screen the entire first season to end. And in the finale everything falls into place and provides interesting groundwork for later seasons. Since he has already extended for at least a second season. No doubt I recommend to view, abstracting from any views as positive. or negative. 8 out of 10
TV series with good actors, impressive effects and interesting world, but the doers of terrible things with timelines and dismissive relating to the characters. This is new from the Netflix series "the Witcher". Start with the pros. The first advantage of the series the selection of key actors. The principal characters are very alive and believable, you believe them, and this is important. Emphasizing Henry Cavill, he's a bit of a harsh fighter with the undead, who doesn't want to meddle in the problems of others, but he is doing. The image turned out interesting, so I "liked" it. CRIS and Jennifer also played well, to me the game has not arisen (which is not true about their story branches, but more on that later). And Buttercup... a stunning character, and the songs are good (in the original at least). Well, the Roach, of course, excellent, but the time could it more to highlight. If you take the actors for minor roles, then all is not so simple. The main claim is misplaced tolerance. Black people in the Slavic fantasy look, to put it mildly, neorganichno, and black elves all strange. As the advantages of this series I want to celebrate it the audiovisual piece. Monsters (though not well) look awesome, the scenery is beautiful, nature is varied, the magic is good, too so visuals can be seen that tried. And the music... the music in "the Witcher" is amazing. Both songs and background music fit perfectly with what's on screen and nice to listen to. Even after the season ended, still I want to sing "toss a coin to your witcher" and see memes about the fact that you have to pay a hammered coin. Now let's talk about the cons. As I mentioned above, the major drawbacks, in my opinion, two brutal violence over the timeline and abuse of characters. Terrible characters and turn psychologically and physically. Physical violence in the show a lot, maybe even too much, and sometimes not very reasonable. That is, someone is killed and/or cut off body parts often, just to be, without much need for narrative. But psychological violence too much, but over the audience. The characters are very fickle, and it's annoying. Often the scene type "- No, I'm not going to do that! *5 seconds later* Well, I'm in". This happens often, each time wondering, "why are you so unprincipled and windy, I don't understand!" In fact, in the course of watching the show thought "I don't understand" had me quite often (perhaps because I do not read books, and games not played, but it's not exactly). To understand exactly what the storyline of different characters occur in different time need to watch half of the series, but even then all the time looking at narrative with suspicion, suddenly they have jumped to the future, and you the audience didn't say anything. The "feature" of the series was irritated by the fact that the time between the series is not defined at all, and you don't understand the events of the last series was yesterday or several years ago. Because of this, for example, in one series only Geralt meets dandelion, and the next they are already familiar for several years, and then all Geralt is freaking out (very unexpected and illogical), and Buttercup from the show lost. Much the same happens with Jennifer there they met, and in the next series of the Witcher already in love. All these temporal shifts and I did not like. To summarize, we can say that the series unfairly berated by critics and a bit overrated by the audience-fans. The person who does not know anything about the universe before watching, will first be did not understand, then the relationship is will depend on your personal liking to the genre, the actors and the way of doing storytelling. But one series for sure you can give credit after viewing a desire to read books and/or play games. 7 out of 10
I finally finish the Witcher! Frankly, some places in the rewind. Just for the sake of "the Witcher 3" I bought a console and this game was a masterpiece. The books were good, but the storytelling is not particularly liked! After the failure with custom, I wasn't expecting from the series of something special, but it was worse than my expectations. But especially the season finale. 8 series is a complete failure! Let us all in order: 1. Story! He's a horrible curve. It seems that there was some kind of ridiculous, and then suddenly the hunt for the dragon in isolation from the storyline. And 7 series suddenly tell the events of the past, while repeating scenes from the first series. It turns out a terrible mess! Despite the fact that I beat the game and read books, navigate the plot was difficult. 2. No understanding of for whom the shot show. If fans of the universe, why is so little Canon and those things that we fell in love with? Why characters are so much at odds with the books and the game? If for all, why the story and the barrier to entry such that it is unlikely to be understood by a person not familiar with the universe of the Witcher? Why not make a banal chronology and prehistory? 3. Actors! Caste was a failure, it was clear long before the release of the series. But the actors themselves did not specifically draw their characters. Yennifer I only liked in the first series when she was ugly. There played well! But the usual Ian she is not stretched. No sense of a strong and powerful character that she wanted to show. There's only bad game of arrogance and pride, which again is not disclosed neither in the plot nor in the formulation of the character. The computer version of Ian coped 100 times better! It livelier. Triss... the red-haired beauty and a powerful magician, but not here! And it's not about looks actress, it's her game. She could not show and part of the power of the sorceress! Of all pleased only Arpen Siegfried. 4. Geralt. Cavill, the star of this series and the most expensive actor. But he got the Witcher with the syndrome of bricks! Book-game Geralt was a very sarcastic character, which his words do not climb, and Geralt was Kavila terribly boring! Mostly knits his face and is silent. His gait and movements are wooden, there is no grace and power. A feeling of perekonnast character. He looks more like the characters of Schwarzenegger. 5. The Witcher. Why separately? Because it's not like what we see of Superman who was made a mutant and who has honed the art of killing more than 100 years. During action scenes he's not doing anything would not do all the other characters. Where pirouettes? Where the inhuman force of the blow of the sword? Where superlucent? In episode 6, he fights next to the sorceress Yennifer along. Although repeatedly should surpass her in this. The style of fighting, by the way, is no different from the style of Ian. Although she was a witch and he was a machine for shredding enemies. If he's hurting somebody or uses force, it is again not different from the other characters. Before us is the same person, which is slightly better able to swing the sword. Yes, it even robalo with a spear almost killed!!! What superpowers would you then say... 6. Motivation and moral choice. This series did not deliver! Geralt mostly good causes right and left, although in the book and in the game he almost always has its own benefits and tries not to intervene in situations which did not concern him. And then he makes a cranky face and still goes to good cause! Motivation Ian is also controversial. At first, she consciously goes to "process" of transformation, knowing the consequences, and then fanatically looking for a way to return the ability to have a child. Due to the asynchronous plot, a feeling that she began to do it as soon as she clean up the appearance. We are absolutely not explained in the story why suddenly she became so brave that went against her mentor, and powerful mages. Such changes are sudden and illogical. 7. Universe. She... like made from cous. I have never had the image of what looks like the world of the Witcher. Only some moments some. The focus is on characters and dialogue, but it is absolutely not worked out the background. Because of this in the TV series almost no atmosphere. If you look at the Lord of the rings or Carnival row as an example of fantasy, where the atmosphere is just gorgeous. You understand the world, it seems realistic! In the game as well, very good atmosphere! And in the series it is not there! 8. Dragon armor Nilfgaard. Here is a a terrible fail!!! How was it possible to put harsh Nilfgaardskogo an army that inspires fear in all those wrinkled tights? All this can be called armour? Matter what they just can't defend! The soldiers of the other factions armor somehow normal, and the great Ilfov glued cardboard! Well, the dragon in the 7 series just pathetic. Majestic and unique Golden dragon looks like a Wyvern polysevshy on a diet! You can talk about the budget, but the appearance of the 3D model of the budget not really depends! But here the failure was at the stage of concept! 4 out of 10 The series would be quite average if not the last series! It's so bad that it can show as an example of irrationality and mistakes.
Of all the series 2019, which I was expecting, this is the worst. For those who've read the books horrific screaming of a discrepancy between the images kill the series in the Bud. But for them to be clear what they mean and what do in every moment of time show. For those who never read the books, and the characters are ridiculous cheap contact lenses won't be SO terrified, will be in focus is not clear what he is shown, because a single timeline series has not, and the narrative jumping up and down from one time to another. It would seem just do the insert "our time", "20 years ago", "50 years ago", "hell knows when, but a long time" and all will become much clearer. But no, to the trivial, the authors "do not fall" and you'll just have to guess that between adjacent episodes, which are still with each other alternate to something here, in fact as much as 20 years! Boevka not super. Not the worst thing you can see but not the best. Magic no, not impressed at least some power. The changing nature of the characters shown at all cardboard, in 10 minutes time there is complete breakdown of a character with the changing nature, and in it do not believe, just telling you that it happened. Geralt turned out to be such a character for whom do not survive. Well, held it to his throat the sword, but somehow get away with it, because of this, no emotional volatilnosti is happening there at all, watching a cartoon, "paper", nothing more.
Here came the series of the Witcher Geralt. The story is not new and is under a cycle of novels, the Polish TV series and of course his fame in the world series of computer games, which in its genre has almost become the crown of creation at the time (something about the character and about the literary basis will not tell). A few years ago I read the book of Mr Sapkowski, after reading PLIO Martin and looking for a similar, then played in the game, we can say that the universe and storyline were introduced. Let's move to the series from Netflix. To describe the plot makes no sense, you can go directly to the point. First, from the beginning to the end of the season I did not understand for whom this show? For fans of the Witcher universe, or for the average man? Because I sit on both chairs the creators of the series clearly did not happen and for several reasons. The series does not introduce you to what's happening, dip in the events with the head, if you default already know the plot. No explanations about the world, no clarification about the time nor the message of the place of action taking place, not a hint at least, a glimpse of a world map, just a bunch of names, names of cities, places, kingdoms, kings, wizards, etc. but still it all starts with an event that seemed torn from the middle of the series and inserted in the beginning. This is not the worst, even fans of the series will get a headache from the form of the narration of the story, in three days without any hints about it! We never even tell the year, do not indicate the place of action, just somebody about it, casually mention, unless it was impossible to make a human being, to insert at least something like "the Kingdom Centre. 1242 a year." or something like that. Why are some attacked others, who are these wizards, nothing explains just throw pieces from different times. It means for the fans? If so, then why are so many simplifications of the plot, changes the characters, their motives, some moves with a hint of the deception of the viewer etc. if the prospective audience so everyone understands and it will not hold? It is not clear. For myself I would say that with this narrative not being familiar with the material would dump him immediately, my respect zasmotrevshis. Second. It seems that in the first series just dragged all the best in the series, so to say, for starters, because more and more sadder and sadder. We got to savor the main advantages of the series, good fights from Geralt, the clash of the two armies in the beautiful armor (of course it's not about nilfgaardian armor), good battle scene, the massacre in Cintra, etc. then all this will not be Sedensky Hill forced with sadness to remember the first episode. Then it will be extremely impressive Silentreatment. And all this just to remind discomycetes, especially at the end. Unfortunately this is the Scale of the ruble, a blow to the penny. We are all very uneven, great Stryga, it is sad Borja, the battle of Cintrol, and Sodden, the rubber ears of the elves, but then Doppler in the best traditions of Sijia, if the creators themselves do not feel their budget. Actors. No complaints. Everyone plays within their roles, and some even higher than expected, another thing is that someone they may not seem relevant to his character, but it's not their fault, such a casting. Of course, the casting of a sore subject in this series, ranging from issues of tolerance, ending banal discrepancy between the book image. It is possible to accept or to resist, to each his own. However, someone clearly can confuse dark-skinned elf, or Dryad, Fringilla that Geralt to be confused with Ian, etc., especially when in the next series we will show two representatives of the exotic countries, whose exoticism would be just the same skin color. All this diversity is evident just by the fact that it is deliberately, and not "because it happened", all and more. It is necessary to show how the product? Never. A whim of the creators? Yes. Minus? Definitely. Still can't help thinking that the creators do not understand the essence of what is happening. Every other character says about the Purpose, although from the TV series cut all the most important, what the double edge of this purpose. Orphaned, useless in this story Brooklyn (sorry, Brokilon), which is inappropriate without a meeting in this Geralt with CRIS. Events occur because they are in the book, but then why are they in the book come from the plot of the series just removed. Script adapted under itself, the source is very bad, breaking off part of causality, it was just a jumble of events. The only hope for a relaxed linear continuation, which should not cause the writers problems now. And again, the writers we are trying to cheat the story, constantly, invent some twists, but such that the uninitiated do not need, and a connoisseur never deceived. Why? For whom? It is a pity that pan Sapkowski loves money than his creation, and allowing it to flow downstream. To the quiet sea, or the cliff? It will be seen. If you put the first season, what to take into consideration? Pros: the actors, the fight scenes, music, scenery. Cons: the script and style of narration, the lack of experience, the roughness around from series to series, the misplaced desire for tolerance (so this work certainly do not need it), nilfgaardian armor (some kind of meme live), too much Ian (well, really, this story that's not about her and she's the cornerstone, though the name change from Witch to Witch). Is it a good show? Get away on time. The Killer's "Game Of Thrones"? Don, come on. Many times I had to put a hand to his forehead while watching and say "What.. . I have the honour to witness?"? Too much. 6 out of 10 Is the only way, I hope the following will not.
In principle, this series is alarming since those moments, it became clear that the main role will play Cavill. With his sweetness? Superman, romantic Bumpkin is his and not to build superfluous. In principle, this concern is entirely confirmed. Geralt looks ridiculous, like a mannequin or a doll. In cinema there is a concept "type". Everyone needs to be in place and not to break into the field of play that is allotted to others. Oh, it's whitewashed face, yellow lens, white wig. The role of a tough and strong characters not of that type, which has Cavill. Mush in other words there is simply no. His play is lame, he plays something different, and not what it should be, if you rely on the source. Makes terrible sight, silent and gives a few brave, harsh phrases that's the whole game. Look at Garolite from the game and on Henry's face. What's in common? Nothing. I don't think they have problems with the choice of actors. But Cavill was chosen because it is one of their Haimovich artists often glimpsed on the big screen, particularly in an expensive franchise. The decision to approve his role is a purely commercial move. What else needs to bulk product, which will clog the brain and make chewing sandwiches, stupidly staring at the screen? Of course, NC. It went off still in the "Game of Thrones", as far as I know. In General, about high art here it can not be a priori. This is a project for getting money, and nothing more. As for the entertainment part, then... the Script is boring, the actors are bland (there is no normal pretty face, on purpose, or what?). In addition to the appearance of lack, performers have no charisma and enthusiasm.. a Lot of pointless conversations with a hint of pseudophilosophy, torn scene. The atmosphere is pleasant. But there is a promotion of the project "support races". Looked good just the battle scenes. Overall, this is a very cheap project with a moral and intellectual point of view, but very expensive cost and return on investment. Sorry. 2 out of 10
The title of the review speaks for itself. When watching the first season of this series, I had the feeling that I'm reviewing the TV series of the late 90's early 00h. The story, costumes, dialogue, acting, and more like stand in the age of television. And it's not a compliment. Waited when will be Kevin Sorbo as Hercules or Xena by Lucy lawless. But unlike "the Witcher", the series looked quite organic to their time and budget. After the revelations of the past "Game of thrones" (with all its + and -) rail on the quality of the fantasy series has been set very high. And as for me, the series "the Witcher" it is not something that is conquered, he is during a jump broke the pole in three places. I really hope that Amazon is more serious about its project to the universe of VC. Not make mistakes the above adaptations. "The Witcher", in my point of view, was pretty mediocre, a passing show. 6 out of 10
The series... For those who haven't read the books (the first two) no more than 3-4 out of 10, and in comparison with the Thrones and less. Mediocre "creature" (literally from the first frame), mediocre costumes, mediocre interiors and decorations. the disregard for the geography and history of this world. No script a series of four do not understand, what, where, and when... Here's how the read and the series in General and the script in particular even beyond. Solid a minus. -1, -3, -5 out of 10, plenty of downside. So to mutilate the wonderful work... it's not that "the book is not respected," many examples of good "processing" of plots and characters. And here taken only the shell... Kinopiastes... Literally everything is fucked. And familiarity with CRIS and familiarity with Jennifer, and acquaintance with the world in General in the book are quite deep, well - "written" in detail, with the soul and, sometimes, wonderful umorina. And all of this is completely fucked. Wonderful and deep stories "the Edge","the Lesser evil", "the limit of the possible" hopelessly mutilated. And the final story "Something more" jewel of the first cycle and the gem in my throat... And the film is zero. To all of the above is added the complete defeat in any way at all. And it's not the elves-the blacks and the crowds of Arabs and Indians... the Characters are devoid of depth, flattened to third. The main character, of course, a little pull of the situation on the game. However, forget that he doesn't have to be Hollywood handsome. Conversely, Magicka with all the possibilities, just have to be straight after painfully beautiful (partly due to his past), is that "Hollywood" to Shine the film itself is quite average. And elves, are in all mythologies, just after genetically fine even some goblins. The prospects of continuing the series depressing, because I see premature emergence, reshaping and erosion on the plot of the books many key characters in the future and Vice versa, the disappearance of some Resuume sorry... Look Li... of course, to watch. But then, or after, a must-read. And better before and after if the first time meet). By the way, although the text is of course better, but there is not a bad audio version, the voice acting Kirill Golovin time to sit and read quietly with us, usually, not so much...