Soldato
- Joined
- 28 Oct 2011
- Posts
- 8,562
The Witcher: Babysitter Edition.
The Witcher series (Netflix)
- Thread starter Devrij
- Start date
Soldato
The problem is, because he's a man, he's not allowed to disagree with the women otherwise it's toxic masculinity...
If they write a **** show, and it tanks, it's not their lack of talent, its simply because we're all sexist and they have bewbs...
If they write a **** show, and it tanks, it's not their lack of talent, its simply because we're all sexist and they have bewbs...
Soldato
Apparently over 60% drop in viewers for season 3. That's some drop.
I'm sure the showrunners will blame toxic male basement dwellers
I'm sure the showrunners will blame toxic male basement dwellers
Soldato
- Joined
- 28 Oct 2011
- Posts
- 8,562
They never get tired of taking L's it seems.
Soldato
I am happy with the Yenfier show like she was in season 1 though
Yes, that'd work for me, but obviously men arent allowed to perv over women, but women over men, well, that's a different bucket of crabs...
Havent read the books and most likely wont - could not care less if its got a diverse cast, strong women etc as long as what is on screen is good.
Unfortunately too many modern shows these days have writers that care 100% about ticking boxes and force feeding their agendas to the audience and seemingly 0% interest (or maybe talent) in actually making a great show with a damn good story.
I do also have a problem with a show called The Witcher demoting that character to a supporting character. Plus if they really want the show carried by 2 female leads then they really need to fill those roles with quality actresses of the level of Henry Cavill not 2 unknowns who have very little screen presence.
There are very good female actors around as well as very good black actors - so why employ people who would have a fight getting a lead role down at the local village hall am dram ?
Unfortunately too many modern shows these days have writers that care 100% about ticking boxes and force feeding their agendas to the audience and seemingly 0% interest (or maybe talent) in actually making a great show with a damn good story.
I do also have a problem with a show called The Witcher demoting that character to a supporting character. Plus if they really want the show carried by 2 female leads then they really need to fill those roles with quality actresses of the level of Henry Cavill not 2 unknowns who have very little screen presence.
There are very good female actors around as well as very good black actors - so why employ people who would have a fight getting a lead role down at the local village hall am dram ?
Last edited:
I don't have a problem personally if less time was spent on Geralt if the purpose was to expand on the greater world building and the bigger story - there is lots of intrigue, politics and interesting stuff there I actually quite enjoy it when it leverages that, but sadly that isn't the underlying motivation for diluting Geralt's presence in this season.
This season, like Good Omens season 2, I've found sadly to mostly be big fat nothings with far too much time spent on ticking boxes and force feeding agendas than first and foremost making the story development the best it could be.
Personally think the actress playing Yennefer is good, the problem is the actress playing Ciri neither has much to work with a lot of the time or more than mediocre talent - a bad combination.
Caporegime
What agendas exactly?
Soldato
Not sure if you're trying to troll here or not, its clearly turned into a show thats not about, as the title would suggest, The Witcher...
Its helmed by women, that want to make sure that strong women get leading roles, because women deserve it, because men have ruled for ages and its just wrong..
However, the problem is, these aren't strong women, or indeed women that can produce a good show, but, rather than accepting that they are out of their depth and have ruined what could have been a very good show, they instead blame all of the issues, on men, because we're all full of toxic gamer masculinity and its entirely not their fault at all....
Caporegime
Have you read the books? Because the leading women roles are main characters in the books. The Witcher saga is as much Ciri's story as Geralt's, in fact arguably more so hers because it's all about her destiny. This isn't something that has been created by the showrunners, it's something from a book series that was written almost two decades ago. They haven't diminished Geralt's role in the story at all.
Last edited:
Soldato
I haven't read the books, or played the games...
Jesus why is it such a big deal that there are multiple women in leading roles in the show?! I readily concede that I haven’t finished season 3 (lost interest) but I’ve never once thought that the show was ‘anti-man’.
Yes I’d have liked more Geralt - he’s clearly the best bit of the show - but that doesn’t make me jump to this ‘anti-man’ stance. Henry Cavill wanting it to be a more book accurate show (and wanting a more sophisticated Geralt) doesn’t make it ‘anti-man’ either. Nor is it ‘anti-man’ to have a show with many women that has flaws and could have been better.
The very last thing I remember in the show is a bunch of women all pining over the Witcher and trying to seduce him, presumably on the basis he’s absurdly handsome. Everything about the character on screen suggests ‘strong male’. How ****ing strong and male does he have to be?!
For goodness sake! 
Is this actually a thing for The Witcher show? Regardless, if the writers actually are saying that people are whining because some people seem to mindlessly project all of their pre-established ‘Hollywood hates men criticism’ onto it… then based on some (not all) of the comments on here they probably have a point.
I’m sorry to perpetuate this sort of discussion, but this ‘anti-man’ card is so overplayed at the moment that it’s counter intuitive: people are going to be insta-dismissive of ‘anti-man’ complaints when you actually do have a fair point to make.
Just turn down the turbo dial already…
Yes I’d have liked more Geralt - he’s clearly the best bit of the show - but that doesn’t make me jump to this ‘anti-man’ stance. Henry Cavill wanting it to be a more book accurate show (and wanting a more sophisticated Geralt) doesn’t make it ‘anti-man’ either. Nor is it ‘anti-man’ to have a show with many women that has flaws and could have been better.
The very last thing I remember in the show is a bunch of women all pining over the Witcher and trying to seduce him, presumably on the basis he’s absurdly handsome. Everything about the character on screen suggests ‘strong male’. How ****ing strong and male does he have to be?!
For goodness sake! Is this actually a thing for The Witcher show? Regardless, if the writers actually are saying that people are whining because some people seem to mindlessly project all of their pre-established ‘Hollywood hates men criticism’ onto it… then based on some (not all) of the comments on here they probably have a point.
I’m sorry to perpetuate this sort of discussion, but this ‘anti-man’ card is so overplayed at the moment that it’s counter intuitive: people are going to be insta-dismissive of ‘anti-man’ complaints when you actually do have a fair point to make.
Just turn down the turbo dial already…
People have already stated, many times, that a show with 'multiple women in leading roles' isnt an issue, the issue is that the story's written to compensate for the shifting the focus away from the main character are always god awful.
Yes, covered in this thread but leaks started appearing around s2 where writers and people on set were complaining about Cavil being a "misogynistic gamer bro", and then you've had the writers mocking the source material and churning out the usual rubbish when a series 'flops' by blaming racism, toxic masculinity, all the usual tropes.
Maybe instead of self-inserting themselves into whatever IP they've managed to fluke their way into they should just concentrate on producing something good instead.
Personally found the books to be average at best, maybe something was lost in translation. Wouldn't recommend them on their own as it were, only if someone was a big fan of the game series, and even then with caveats
Soldato
I guessed it would be her, I had no idea how it would be her, but I knew it would be.
You want to be a writer on the show then?.
Yes some comments make this clear and my post was not aimed at those comments.
Other comments however are quite focussed on this ‘anti-man’ rhetoric (for example - here).
My question was aimed at whether the show runners have ‘blamed the fans’ for the poor reception to the show - the part in bold.
I think there currently is a massive oversensitivity towards shows being anti-men, that then gets compounded by people saying things like “writers […] churn out the usual rubbish when the series flops…”.
Who has said what, specifically in relation to this show? Not asking to be difficult, I’m asking because it’s relevant. Are writers actually saying anything about the show, beyond click-bait and gossip? As far as I can tell from a quick google, comments from those involved cite their love of the source material or defend the show. I’m not seeing a theme of ‘blaming the fans’.
I’m also seeing acknowledgements that they had to simplify the nuances of the source material for the wider audience. But again, that’s not ‘blaming fans’.
This ‘self-insert’ fantasy point tends to be made in relation to people putting ‘perfect women’ into shows that are only held back because of the restraints imposed upon them by others. In the Witcher, I’m pretty sure that Yennifer (sp?) is intentionally troubled, conflicted and downright unlikable at points. Yes she has strong powers and often succeeds, but she has had some struggle and is definitely not supposed to be ‘out and out likeable’. Ciri isn’t perfect either. So I’m not really sure how the ‘self-insert’ criticism applies to the Witcher show.
Maybe I have misunderstood you and you are making a different point.
Last edited:
Soldato
Jesus why is it such a big deal that there are multiple women in leading roles in the show?! I readily concede that I haven’t finished season 3 (lost interest) but I’ve never once thought that the show was ‘anti-man’.
Yes I’d have liked more Geralt - he’s clearly the best bit of the show - but that doesn’t make me jump to this ‘anti-man’ stance. Henry Cavill wanting it to be a more book accurate show (and wanting a more sophisticated Geralt) doesn’t make it ‘anti-man’ either. Nor is it ‘anti-man’ to have a show with many women that has flaws and could have been better.
The very last thing I remember in the show is a bunch of women all pining over the Witcher and trying to seduce him, presumably on the basis he’s absurdly handsome. Everything about the character on screen suggests ‘strong male’. How ****ing strong and male does he have to be?!
Is this actually a thing for The Witcher show? Regardless, if the writers actually are saying that people are whining because some people seem to mindlessly project all of their pre-established ‘Hollywood hates men criticism’ onto it… then based on some (not all) of the comments on here they probably have a point.
I’m sorry to perpetuate this sort of discussion, but this ‘anti-man’ card is so overplayed at the moment that it’s counter intuitive: people are going to be insta-dismissive of ‘anti-man’ complaints when you actually do have a fair point to make.
Just turn down the turbo dial already…
Its not an issue at all, if its done well, if its done well doesn't matter if a show is ran by a man, a woman, straight, gay, trans, whatever, but when a show sucks, and happens to be helmed my women, and those women cant accept that they are out of their depth and have screwed up an existing IP, and instead thrown the blame around to others that are 'anti-xyz' group they happen to be in, that's where the problem is..