Thanks. Frustrating seeing that kind of stuff. Gotta wonder how much further they'll take it. Feels like Cavill no longer being attached is the beginning of the end for this show, which is unfortunate. A lot of wasted potential.

In the writer's room defense I read the Witcher books earlier this year. I don' think I've ever read book so interested in telling the story of everyone but the protagonist.

Quad Dog said:

---

In the writer's room defense I read the Witcher books earlier this year. I don' think I've ever read book so interested in telling the story of everyone but the protagonist.

---

Clearly you haven't read Harry Potter.

Both authors take the same approach with the protagonist. They write them bland in order to maximize the audience seeing the world through the protagonist's eyes. The more character traits in a character, the more audience you lost to people that doe not relate to that perspective.

hunter2012 said:

---

Quad Dog said:

---

In the writer's room defense I read the Witcher books earlier this year. I don' think I've ever read book so interested in telling the story of everyone but the protagonist.

---

Clearly you haven't read Harry Potter.

Both authors take the same approach with the protagonist. They write them bland in order to maximize the audience seeing the world through the protagonist's eyes. The more character traits in a character, the more audience you lost to people that doe not relate to that perspective.

---

Except Geralt is barely in the last few books.

ABATTBQ11 said:

---

rhutton125 said:

---

https://www.ign.com/articles/netflix-the-witcher-some-writers-actively-disliked-books-games-claims-former-producer

Showrunner for the upcoming X-Men animated series revival:

Quote:

---

"I've been on shows - namely Witcher - where some of the writers were not or actively disliked the books and games (even actively mocking the source material)," DeMayo explained. "It's a recipe for disaster and bad morale. Fandom as a litmus test checks egos, and makes all the long nights worth it. You have to respect the work before you're allowed to add to its legacy."

---

His X-Men team had to be comprised of fans, first and foremost. I dig it. And I'm glad this quote has been getting attention because a lot of the first two seasons of Witcher seemed like the writers thought they could do better than the books. There's a lot of brand new material in there, much of it hit-or-miss.

---

I feel like any writer adapting someone else's work should immediately check their ego at the door. If you're adapting it, it's because a) it is successful enough to have an audience and warrant a budget for an adaptation, and b) you aren't writing anything original worthy of producing, hence your adapting of someone else's work. Ipso facto the original author has created something you did and could not, so you should not think you're somehow better or smarter. Anyone in that writing room deriding the source material should ask themselves what they've personally created that warrants books, video games, and a streaming series. Oh... Nothing? Well then STFU and maybe you'll learn a thing or two.

---

Ok sure...

• The Shining
• Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory
• Forrest Gump
• Blade Runner
• Mary Poppins
• There Will Be Blood
• First Blood

are all trash movies because they didn't follow the original creator's vision.

This is such a low-effort take and honestly I can't fathom how anyone could even begin to come to this TexAgs-HOF level of dumb conclusion.

Even source material with massive built-in fanbases can be rejuvenated by wholly original takes that are not aligned to (or fly in the face of) the original material.

Adaptions are not inherently "less than" nor do they indicate that the person doing it isn't capable of doing something "worthy of producing".

Please tell Francis Ford Coppola that The Godfather will never live up to it's literary counterpart so he just shouldn't try. Go ahead and let Hitchcock know that Psycho will be a complete failure as well while you're at it.

I will say this, I don't think a script writer needs to be a 'fan' of the source material. They should be passionate about it, but I would think a fan would be less likely to make the right choices

While I 100% agree with your premise and you gave a lot of great examples, the Godfather screenplay was cowritten with the author, so that one doesn't quite fit with the others.

When does S3 come out?

YouBet said:

---

When does S3 come out?

---

Last I saw was mid 2023

The Debt said:

---

Let's take for instance Benioff and Weiss. They stuck to the books 95% for 6.5 seasons. And it was excellent.

Yet the latter half of S7 and all of S8 were pure rubbish...and it nearly killed the franchise. The storyboard was shtt, the dialogue was shtt, even the lighting was shtt. They had no idea how to give payoff, or even how to do suspense.

We had been waiting for Jon to have some meaningful confrontation with the night King, instead he's running around doing nonsense. Other than stabbing Dany in the back, he had ZERO role in the concluding season. Have him die saving someone he loves. Have him betrayed by someone he loves. Do SOMETHING with him. "Nah he's gonna fk off beyond the wall."

This is what happens when producers/directors do what they want. If they were talented at writing stories, they probably would have done that instead.

---

Jon not having that confrontation with the Night King is completely on brand for the way GoT, particularly in the source material, completely subverts the expected result. There are plenty of issues with the final seasons, particularly with that entire battle against the Night King, and the showrunners were absolutely to blame, but that's definitely not one one of them.

This is also not really a good parallel to the Witcher issue. The Witcher series is a complete set of books that has a definitive ending, while with GoT, there was the unenviable task of writing an ending to a beloved series with only a hazy outline to go on. Unfortunately, D&D proved to not be nearly as good writers as GRRM is, but that's even more on GRRM for not getting his ass in gear and finishing the damn things. Otherwise, they stuck very closely to the books, with a few exceptions that were more along the lines of production decisions you usually see in adaptations than any real *******ization of the source material.

I do hope that they see that this drove their star away and make the necessary changes to the writing room. Reading interviews from the showrunner, she seems to actually be passionate about the book series, but she needs to get things in order, or this will end in disaster.

It's amazing how many writers/producers/directors have destroyed what works because of their egos and ridiculous changes.

I still can't fathom what idiot came up with the changes to Half-Blood Prince.

I also still can't forgive what they did to the Dresden Files. Abomination that had nothing to do with the original story and character other than having the same name.

Maybe writers are forced down this route a lot to change things up, but why does Hollywood always insist on making large changes from a really successful source material.

Oh, it's definitely one of them.

Building up Jon as the prophesized savior, and having this massive reveal of his true parentage, only for none of it to play any role except in killing Dany, is pure crap.

If you really expected Jon to be the savior and sit on the throne, then you weren't paying attention. Like I said, they got a lot of thing wrong, including a lot of what they did with Jon, but that's not one of them.

Madmarttigan said:

---

Maybe writers are forced down this route a lot to change things up, but why does Hollywood always insist on making large changes from a really successful source material.

---

Budget, time, actor availability, pacing, content (looking at you, It). There are dozens of reasons it doesn't translate exactly as it was written, a lot of them completely reasonable and understandable. The problem with the Witcher, of course, it that if the rumors are true, it's almost malicious.

Even if he doesn't have a confrontation with the Night King, he needed some role in the fight of Winterfel. Instead he was evading the ice dragon.

They could have had him directing troop deployments, riding a dragon, or leading men in a hopeless front while Arya makes the kill. But instead he's just running around trying not to die. No heroism, no role either.

THEY DIDNT KNOW WHAT TO DO WITH HIM, so he did nothing.

They were not writers. They were salesmen. They sold the idea to HBO a decade ago and rode GRRM much of the way. When if was time for them to write, they couldn't rub neurons together and deliver a coherent thought.

One thing GRRM learned from Twilight Zone is effective pacing and act breaks. Most folks nowadays say "I have 8-10 hours of content to create, I have plenty of time to develop characters and plots." But you see folks who were tied to old TV weaving 1 hour chunks, 3 episode arcs, and season-long narratives into each episode. For instance the guy that did Supernatural and now does The Boys. I can storyboard the plot easily in The Boys and each episode has payoff, plays with a subplot, and deals with the meta narrative. Think back to Translucent, those were gripping single episodes but the mini arc got payoff, the meta narrative advanced as well. Nothing was wasted, the audience was never going down a blind alley.

The benefit of good writing with good pacing is that the audience is following a character through trials; the producers followed "show, not tell." And back to the Witcher, I think S1 yennifer had just as much screen time as Geralt. It was good and got sympathy for the character, and we saw her evolution and motivations. S2 was just impossible to watch. They needed her to quest for her magic, but damn it was boring to watch. And the even the bard couldn't save us from the snoring.

bluefire579 said:

---

If you really expected Jon to be the savior and sit on the throne, then you weren't paying attention. Like I said, they got a lot of thing wrong, including a lot of what they did with Jon, but that's not one of them.

---

Nobody said sitting on the throne. Just playing a significant role.

Madmarttigan said:

---

I also still can't forgive what they did to the Dresden Files. Abomination that had nothing to do with the original story and character other than having the same name.

---

How dare you even mention this!!!

Kampfers said:

---

ABATTBQ11 said:

---

rhutton125 said:

---

https://www.ign.com/articles/netflix-the-witcher-some-writers-actively-disliked-books-games-claims-former-producer

Showrunner for the upcoming X-Men animated series revival:

Quote:

---

"I've been on shows - namely Witcher - where some of the writers were not or actively disliked the books and games (even actively mocking the source material)," DeMayo explained. "It's a recipe for disaster and bad morale. Fandom as a litmus test checks egos, and makes all the long nights worth it. You have to respect the work before you're allowed to add to its legacy."

---

His X-Men team had to be comprised of fans, first and foremost. I dig it. And I'm glad this quote has been getting attention because a lot of the first two seasons of Witcher seemed like the writers thought they could do better than the books. There's a lot of brand new material in there, much of it hit-or-miss.

---

I feel like any writer adapting someone else's work should immediately check their ego at the door. If you're adapting it, it's because a) it is successful enough to have an audience and warrant a budget for an adaptation, and b) you aren't writing anything original worthy of producing, hence your adapting of someone else's work. Ipso facto the original author has created something you did and could not, so you should not think you're somehow better or smarter. Anyone in that writing room deriding the source material should ask themselves what they've personally created that warrants books, video games, and a streaming series. Oh... Nothing? Well then STFU and maybe you'll learn a thing or two.

---

Ok sure...

• The Shining
• Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory
• Forrest Gump
• Blade Runner
• Mary Poppins
• There Will Be Blood
• First Blood

are all trash movies because they didn't follow the original creator's vision.

This is such a low-effort take and honestly I can't fathom how anyone could even begin to come to this TexAgs-HOF level of dumb conclusion.

Even source material with massive built-in fanbases can be rejuvenated by wholly original takes that are not aligned to (or fly in the face of) the original material.

Adaptions are not inherently "less than" nor do they indicate that the person doing it isn't capable of doing something "worthy of producing".

Please tell Francis Ford Coppola that The Godfather will never live up to it's literary counterpart so he just shouldn't try. Go ahead and let Hitchcock know that Psycho will be a complete failure as well while you're at it.

---

Speaking of low effort takes and HOF level dumb conclusions...

I never said any of what you've thrown in here. Checking your ego at the door doesn't mean you have to completely adhere to the source or follow the original creator's vision. It means you have to respect it, especially if it has a huge following.

Adaptations will always have their differences from the original, and there's nothing inherently wrong with that. What IS wrong is a writer coming in to do an adaptation who actively dislikes and derides the source material, which is what DeMayo describes had you bothered to follow everything quoted and gotten some context. I guarantee you that none of the writers in any of the films you mention looked at the original material and said, "This is complete ****. I can do so much better." I can almost assure you they looked at the original and said, "This is a great story/These are great characters, but how does this work best cinematically?"

I'm not a huge GOT fan and only read some of the first book, but I think their problem was getting ahead of the books and needing to create content. It was difficult for them because even GRRM didn't know exactly where he'd end up or how. It's impossible to start true to or positively adapt source material that doesn't even exist yet.

The Witcher prequel Blood Origin dropped on Netflix. I didn't see a thread on it so I thought I'd bump this one.

Just started it, so no pithy comments yet.

Yeah it didn't need its own thread.

Has anyone watched it? I have a bit of morbid curiosity, but not enough to make me set aside anything else in my queue