General / Off-Topic The Witcher, Netflix version!

That's what I said about Netflix, but they have to be serious because feeding Cavil 40k calories a day and covering his team of trainers so he can be the most ripped vagabond in all of fantasy medieval not-Poland cannot be cheap.
In all fairness he could still be in Superman/Justice League shape. Maybe that's why Netflix picked him. Pick a guy already in shape or spend a bunch a money turning some noodle arm into a witcher.......hmmm
 
In all fairness he could still be in Superman/Justice League shape. Maybe that's why Netflix picked him. Pick a guy already in shape or spend a bunch a money turning some noodle arm into a witcher.......hmmm
I have no doubt that Cavil is a very rational choice from the studio's perspective and that they will get their money's worth out of him.
 
Well not having read the books,
played much of the witcher 3 game

I enjoy the trailer and looking forward to watching more.
Yeah- exactly my same feeling. Curious.
Also the battle looked better staged than that disaster in the last season of Game of Thrones.
 
I think Cavill, in the trailer, actually looks very much like the young Geralt. A tad overbuffed, but still very believable. The sorceresses on the other hand...
 
I think the book author's hate for the video game has influenced his ok-ing of character changed from the book. He has made it clear he wants as little influence from the gamesbon the show as possible.
 
I think the book author's hate for the video game has influenced his ok-ing of character changed from the book. He has made it clear he wants as little influence from the gamesbon the show as possible.
Well it's all about money, as much as i love the saga of the witcher, it's very transparent that the author is a greedy person, because there was a time he loved the game until there was a money dispute.
 
Well it's all about money, as much as i love the saga of the witcher, it's very transparent that the author is a greedy person, because there was a time he loved the game until there was a money dispute.
We want authors of our favourite books, games and films to be nice people. We imagine them so based on the product we love.
As much as it pains me to say it, Sapkowski is not just greedy. He's an altogether unlikable (swear filter) person altogether. He's incredibly arrogant and thinks himself to be the best fantasy writer on the planet. He was alright as long as people loved his books. The problem he has with the games is not just that he didn't get paid enough. After all, he got his due, eventually. (After a lot of screeching, kicking and general arsehattery). His main problem with the games is that the general notion switched from "Ah, The Witcher, amazing book series" to "Ah, The Witcher, amazing games based on that nice book series".
His books play the second violin in public opinion, now and he can't stomach it.

So I think he jumped at the Netflix adaptation as something that will overshadow the games and something he can, once again, have his name on.
The way it's going though, I'm not sure if that's what is going to happen.
 
Well it's all about money, as much as i love the saga of the witcher, it's very transparent that the author is a greedy person, because there was a time he loved the game until there was a money dispute.
He didn't love games at any point I believe. He openly expressed arrogant and demeaning attitude towards gamers and computer games in general. And the only reason there even was a dispute is because he's got his head stuck up his backside.
 
I don't think Sapkowski is particularly greedy. He's just a grumpy old fart with poor business sense who was so dismissive of video games as a medium that he seriously undersold himself and later had regrets. He felt entitled to more than the pittance he originally agreed to and soured on CDPR when he had to fight to get it. Not remotely a surprise that he doesn't want anything to do with them or their interpretation of his work.
 
I don't think Sapkowski is particularly greedy. He's just a grumpy old fart with poor business sense who was so dismissive of video games as a medium that he seriously undersold himself and later had regrets. He felt entitled to more than the pittance he originally agreed to and soured on CDPR when he had to fight to get it. Not remotely a surprise that he doesn't want anything to do with them or their interpretation of his work.
I tend to agree with this assessment.
 
I don't think Sapkowski is particularly greedy. He's just a grumpy old fart with poor business sense who was so dismissive of video games as a medium that he seriously undersold himself and later had regrets. He felt entitled to more than the pittance he originally agreed to and soured on CDPR when he had to fight to get it. Not remotely a surprise that he doesn't want anything to do with them or their interpretation of his work.
You know they offered him more, right? More than once, actually. AND a revenue share, not just one time payment. He refused every time out of spite and only when he started needing the money (because like R.R.M. he lives off of a bygone fame) he suddenly remembered they "owe" him.
"Soured on CDPR when he had to fight to get it" - yeah right. It's CDPR's fault, isn't it. :rolleyes:
 
You know they offered him more, right? More than once, actually. AND a revenue share, not just one time payment. He refused every time out of spite and only when he started needing the money (because like R.R.M. he lives off of a bygone fame) he suddenly remembered they "owe" him.
"Soured on CDPR when he had to fight to get it" - yeah right. It's CDPR's fault, isn't it. :rolleyes:
My understanding is that he refused revenue share offers because he didn't think the franchise would be successful. And yes, he soured on CDPR after they wouldn't give him more than they had agreed to, once the franchise took off.

Not sure where I implied any fault other than with Sapkowski for making a bad deal in the first place. As far as I know CDPR was well within rights, legally, as well as within the bounds of my subjective ethical interpretation, to tell Sapkowski to sod off. Doesn't make Sapkowski's bitterness any less understandable. Even Sapkowski readily acknowledged his fault in making the agreement he originally made. He thinks his work is worth more than what he agreed to sell it for. There is no contradiction here.
 
My understanding is that he refused revenue share offers because he didn't think the franchise would be successful. And yes, he soured on CDPR after they wouldn't give him more than they had agreed to, once the franchise took off.

Not sure where I implied any fault other than with Sapkowski for making a bad deal in the first place. As far as I know CDPR was well within rights, legally, as well as within the bounds of my subjective ethical interpretation, to tell Sapkowski to sod off. Doesn't make Sapkowski's bitterness any less understandable. Even Sapkowski readily acknowledged his fault in making the agreement he originally made. He thinks his work is worth more than what he agreed to sell it for. There is no contradiction here.
In that case I probably misunderstood your previous post. Sorry.
 
I believe Sapkowski was offered a choice of a large lump sum or royalties on the video game sales. He went with the single large lump sum of money believing his statement that video games will never be a popular or good medium for story telling.

Witcher 3 does insanely well, praised for it's story and writing (none of it his) misses out on the royalty. Get embittered and grumpy over it. CDPR offers more money, refuses because he is a grumpy old sock.
 
So it's out, I was worried, I'm now more worried, no I'm terrified! everything is wrong here, or am i just over sensitive? do I need my safe space, my cuddling bear....

It looks garbage...couldn't even get his bonce right. The hair in the video games looks better. It'll tank.
 
Top Bottom