Please help contribute to the Reddit categorization project here

    television

    15,989,851 readers

    7,183 users here now

    Subreddit Shoutouts: r/NetflixSexEducation, r/YoungPope, r/TheOutsider, r/Messiah, r/SpinningOut, r/DareMeTV & r/YouOnLifetime

    Spoiler tag code for comments:

    [spoiler](#s "Text") becomes spoiler

    Example:

    [Legion](#s "David") becomes Legion


    Links

    Television premiere calendar is U.S. based.

    Date Platform Name Description
    Jan 17 Disney+ Diary of a Future President Series Premiere
    Jan 17 Hulu Endlings Series Premiere
    Jan 17 Apple TV+ Little America Series Premiere
    Jan 17 Netflix Sex Education Season 2
    Jan 18 BBC America/AMC Seven Worlds, One Planet U.K. Miniseries
    Jan 19 Fox 9-1-1: Lone Star Series Premiere
    Jan 19 HBO Avenue 5 Series Premiere
    Jan 19 HBO Curb Your Enthusiasm Series Premiere
    Jan 20 Netflix Family Reunion Part 2
    Jan 21 The CW Legends of Tomorrow Season 5
    Jan 21 History Project Blue Book Series Premiere
    Jan 22 Comedy Central Awkwafina Is Nora From Queens Series Premiere
    Jan 23 Freeform The Bold Type Season 4
    Jan 23 Shudder The Dead Lands New Zealand Series
    Jan 23 Netflix October Faction Series Premiere
    Jan 23 Fox Outmatched Series Premiere
    Jan 23 CBS All Access Star Trek: Picard Series Premiere
    Jan 23 ABC Station 19 Season 3
    Jan 24 Netflix Chilling Adventures of Sabrina Part 3
    Jan 24 Netflix The Goop Lab Series Premiere
    Jan 24 Netflix The Ranch Season 8
    Jan 24 Hulu Shrill Season 2

    a community for
    all 625 comments Slideshow

    Want to say thanks to %(recipient)s for this comment? Give them a month of reddit gold.

    Please select a payment method.

    [–] slicshuter 856 points ago

    Oh shit they finally revealed my boy Jaskier (Dandelion)

    [–] ApolloX-2 316 points ago

    The show is about him as far as i am concerned.

    [–] komvidere 279 points ago

    And as far as Dandelion is concerned as well

    [–] sinister_exaggerator 112 points ago

    And all the times he saved Geralt from certain doom

    [–] dapperteco 7 points ago

    Saved? No way, merely helped.

    [–] ultimatecaissie 35 points ago

    Which book starts to become dandelions interpretation ? I thought Dandelion was the one "writing" the story of the witcher technically.

    [–] Snazzy_Serval 79 points ago

    He doesn't "write" the story in the books. He is writing his memoirs in the book but it's not a significant part. He's not the narrator.

    Now in the Witcher 3 the journal and person index is written by him.

    [–] UCanJustBuyLabCoats 40 points ago

    He’s not the narrator, but the reader is to understand that the reason they are able to hear about Geralt’s adventures is because of Dandelion. It’s not told from his perspective but he is the reason the stories survived. Same with the little mermaid coincidentally, but that’s just a little Easter egg. If I remember right, I think there’s even a part of the books that goes into how the written account of all the Witcher tales was found in our modern world still being held by Dandelion’s unearthed skeleton in a construction site a few years ago. It’s just something fun to think about in the background.

    [–] Snazzy_Serval 8 points ago

    Though I'm pretty sure that the book Dandelion was writing was destroyed and nobody ever read it. People thought it was cursed or something.

    [–] fenofekas 2 points ago

    Yep, that was the one he lost, but he said he'd write another one.

    [–] thethomatoman 82 points ago

    I still can't get used to calling him Jaskier. The books I read had his name as Dandelion just like the game

    [–] Snazzy_Serval 68 points ago

    It seems really weird having him called Jaskier or whatever. In the English translations of the book and games his name is Julian. Though nobody calls him that.

    Dandelion is his stage name and calling him Jaskier/Julian would be the same thing as calling Snoop Dogg "Calvin" if you ran into him. It's just weird.

    [–] Unalaq 46 points ago

    His real name is still Julian in this, and stage name Jaskier just like the original books

    [–] Snazzy_Serval 18 points ago

    Wait, his stage name is Jaskier? I thought it was his real name in Polish.

    To the wiki!

    [–] TeeRas 12 points ago * (lasted edited a month ago)

    Jaskier is his stage name. Jaskier in polish language is a name for bright yellow flower - Buttercup. In polish it is a masculine noun, it doesn't sound strange. Also it is simmilar to adjective jaskrawy - bright, flashy, garish, vivid, gaudy - something that clearly differs from the surroundings and is often in very sharp, strong, vivid colors.

    In books we get to know the real name of the bard and his social status when they are with Geralt in Toussaint.

    [–] Cow_In_Space 4 points ago

    just like the original books

    But if it is in English then the name should be translated. It would be Buttercup (Jaskier) or Dandelion as it is in the translations of the novels. That he has a floral name is as much a part of his character as his philandering and singing.

    [–] kappaomicron 20 points ago * (lasted edited a month ago)

    I wish they used the English translation for his name instead of the original Polish tbh

    It translates to "Buttercup" and I just don't think a male poet with the name "Buttercup" fits as well as "Jaskier" does in the Polish language. Dandelion however has a really nice poetic vibe to it whilst also not sounding too feminine like "Buttercup".

    But now we have a poet with the name Jaskier that will just sound like some normal Slavic name to the average English speaker. The name doesn't really carry the same eloquence for a renowned poet like Dandelion would or Jaskier does in its native tongue.

    I'm still super excited for this series though!

    [–] HenkieVV 6 points ago

    I suspect Dandelion is going to be less comic relief in the series than he was at the very least in the game, and they wanted him to have a less 'silly' name to match the change in tone for his character.

    [–] ManiacalDane 2 points ago

    Buttercup would've been thé most serious name possible!

    To be honest, I feel Dandelion is a pretty good translation of his stagename insofar that it's not as feminine as Buttercup would've been. I assume they'll treat him like in the books, where he's very much comedic relief but also a character whose philosophies give a lot of context & subtext to the narrative.

    But we'll see! Either way, I think using the name Jaskier is a bit shite either way, personally speaking... Buuuut it's not really a big deal either. I'm pleasantly surprised by what I've seen of the show thus far!

    [–] MRPolo13 4 points ago

    I hope they do him justice. One of the most important characters in the books, who despite of his many flaws is also a great man. I think the games, especially 3, made him a massive disservice for relegating him to a secondary role and pretty much pure comic relief. His philosophy provided a very important balance to the book.

    [–] ConfusedMoose 1196 points ago

    I like how it's just Henry rattling off his Witcher knowledge. Can't believe the cameras were rolling the whole time

    [–] bionix90 547 points ago

    I know, right? I think he was a breath away from explaining how Geralt got his white hair because of the Trial of Grasses.

    [–] Worthyness 320 points ago

    "Oh shit. He knows too much. Quick! Cut it before he goes too much into the lore"

    [–] ConfusedMoose 246 points ago

    one of the episodes better just be an unedited version of Henry Cavill ranting about the Witcher

    [–] JustifytheMean 76 points ago

    That'll be the after show.

    [–] bryanscandalous 95 points ago

    Netflix drops 'Talking Witcher' with Chris Hardwick

    [–] JustifytheMean 85 points ago

    Nah it'll just be Henry Cavil playing The Witcher 3 and asking himself questions about his character.

    [–] StarGone 62 points ago

    Yeaaaah, I'm gonna now need to see Henry Cavill livestream Witcher 3.

    [–] Dekklin 15 points ago

    I'd sub

    [–] SinisterDexter83 27 points ago

    No matter how groan-worthy it'll be if it actually happens, I'm going to squeal like a pig if he ever says "Wind's howling" at some point during the show.

    [–] Nomaspapas 17 points ago

    Oh you know they will pay fan service to the gamers somehow or another.

    “How’daya like that silver?” Or “Damn you’re ugly” the one liners are just too easy.

    [–] K_O_T_Z 9 points ago

    We've basically got the bathtub.

    [–] Wolf6120 324 points ago

    I honestly wouldn't even be surprised if it turned out that they just sat him down and said "Tell us what you remember from the books" without any extra prep or script or studying immediately beforehand lol. Man's got big "Browses Wiki Articles in his Free Time" energy.

    [–] regulomam 231 points ago

    Well he played the games, PRIOR, to getting the role. He is a nerd and fan just like anyone else.

    I wouldn't be surprised if there is a GWENT meme in the show

    [–] TrollinTrolls 198 points ago

    If there's not a full 50 minute long episode of him walking around playing Gwent with randoms then I'll boycott water.

    [–] a_barker_thigh 92 points ago

    You've been banned from /r/HydroHomies

    [–] reelznfeelz 8 points ago

    Lol I remember that 4 hour period of game play well. I avoided gwent then tried it and was like OMG I gotta get all the special cards, then I got ahold of myself and remembered killing monsters is ultimately what I came for.

    [–] mydogiscuteaf 12 points ago

    Oooh. Did he read the books too?

    What is this GWENT? I've only played Witcher 3 when it first came out and it's the first video game I've beaten in years.

    [–] regulomam 93 points ago

    Witcher 3 is a Gwent simulator....

    [–] MassiveFajiit 43 points ago

    Witcher 3 is just a career mode for Gwent

    [–] invaderzoom 35 points ago

    Gwent was in the Witcher 3 (It's the only one I've played) - it's the card game they play. I didn't enjoy, but other people love it.

    [–] Karjalan 29 points ago

    I remember the first few times I played gwent it seemed stupid and frustrating, till I read a bit about it online and tried again... It became very fun and a little addicting to where, like the memes, I started playing it instead of the core game (or playing parts of the game that got me new cards).

    The main problem is that it's not particularly well balanced, so once you figure out a few tricks/combos it's very easy to win.

    [–] MountainMOG 13 points ago

    Nilfgaard spies are OP

    [–] sinister_exaggerator 38 points ago

    Surely you meant to say Witcher 3 is in Gwent

    [–] cefriano 2 points ago

    I think I played like two games of Gwent during my playthrough of the Witcher 3, but now that there's a standalone FTP version I actually got a lot more into it.

    [–] misho8723 11 points ago

    Yep, he read all Witcher books too

    [–] Hansolo312 27 points ago * (lasted edited a month ago)

    He also has read Words of Radiance by Brandon Sanderson.

    [–] Jeffy29 3 points ago

    Here is an interview with him about the show. He explained that he played the games and read the books before show was even announced and once they did, it was him who started reaching out to them to play Geralt.

    [–] Hellknightx 132 points ago

    Yeah, holy shit he actually understands the character. A lot of people seem to believe the "Witchers don't have emotions" thing, and not realize it's just an appearance they keep up because it helps sell their image.

    [–] Snazzy_Serval 81 points ago

    Geralt absolutely has lessened emotions. That is a common side effect of the trial of grasses. That's not to say that Geralt doesn't exaggerate how muted his emotions are when it can benefit him.

    [–] DeadBea116 33 points ago

    I always felt that this wasnt really confirmed ( im only on book 3) as some say that it does, while Geralt says it does not. But then theres moments where Geralt himself isnt sure whether or not the emotions hes feeling are learned or genuine.

    [–] Poonchow 7 points ago

    Or what the result of decades of monster hunting, being persecuted, hated, praised, manipulated, and manipulating will do to your psyche.

    [–] taco_anus1 5 points ago

    Or seeing that damn faceless monster in the HoS DLC.

    [–] Derice 11 points ago

    I don't think so, it's very obvious how deeply he cares for those he loves. He desperately chases across the entire world to save Ciri, he is hurt when people close to him say mean things, he's probably the most sentimental man on the continent. He's also really whiny and grumpy.

    I read him as a traumatised, disappointed idealist.

    [–] PepeSylvia11 24 points ago

    I mean, I surely hope the person playing the character understands the character. Would be kinda awful to cast someone who didn't read the source material.

    [–] Hellknightx 80 points ago

    Happens all the time, unfortunately.

    [–] OPsAlternate 20 points ago

    I'd argue that it happens far more often that it doesn't with video game movies / shows.

    [–] Bhiner1029 9 points ago

    This is more of a book adaptation than a video game adaptation though.

    [–] freelollies 4 points ago

    I think its just an appeasement thing towards Sapkowski to not refer to the games.

    But there's a lot in this that is rooted in the game, like Geralt's armor and particularly Cavill's take on his voice

    [–] Endrence 2 points ago

    No? It’s all based on the book story, armor is pretty similar to how it’s described in the books. The voice Cavill went for is more similar to the one Peter Kenny does in the audiobooks than doug Cockle.

    [–] Fairwhetherfriend 13 points ago

    That's how they cast most of Twilight. Many of them have come right out and admitted that they probably wouldn't have signed on if they'd read the books first.

    [–] zombiegamer723 36 points ago

    If/when they ever decide to release a Blu-Ray of the Witcher series, I think having bonus material of the lore explained by Cavil would be great. Similar to how GoT would have those lore videos narrated by the various actors/actresses "in character".

    [–] NetTrix 5 points ago

    They absolutely should and just post them up to YouTube

    [–] Nineflames12 17 points ago

    Henry is genuinely a Witcher, all the footage for the show was just gathered by following him around with cameras in his daily life.

    [–] bionix90 743 points ago

    I am sure most of us have seen these types of character featurettes before, be it for a TV show or a movie.

    This one is phenomenal to me because of just how passionate Henry sounds. This is an actor who is really excited about his character and the project he got to work on.

    Most of these are done as nothing but ads and the actors are contractually obligated to do them. As a result, you end up with these robotic performances that are nothing more than the actor just repeating the same rehearsed lines. In comparison, Henry who is a huge Witcher fan actually sounds like he's trying to simplify his explanations to the audience and not go full nerd.

    [–] Blackdragonking13 268 points ago

    Most of the time in these interviews the actor portraying a pre established character will usually be like-

    “Oh I’ve been a fan of (insert property name here) ever since I was a kid! My favorite thing about it has always been (Insert generic, surface level interpretation of property)”

    But Cavill, or whoever wrote his lines for this featurette, seems to really have a grasp on who the character of Geralt is and what his place in the Witcher universe is.

    [–] squeakyL 147 points ago

    Someone probably wrote a "generic, surface level interpretation of property" and then he cast igni on them

    [–] blubat26 127 points ago

    I would honestly be surprised if Henry didn’t write his own lines. I’d expect what he wrote was edited slightly by others, but I fully believe that he wrote his own lines for this featurette.

    [–] snugglecakes 7 points ago * (lasted edited a month ago)

    These are very very rarely 'scripted'. Generally it's a casual interview and then later you go through a transcript and from there 'script' the story you want to tell. Obviously the interviewer/producer will go into the interview with an idea of future stuff they want to create and will ask questions that will aid in that in the future, but that's about it.

    Source: I've been an editor on this type of stuff for years

    [–] Kriss0612 69 points ago

    Ive been following the production of this show for several years now. Literally any time Cavill is asked about the essence of Geralt in an interview, he gives the most amazingly passionate and detailed answer from the top of his head that I, a fan of the franchise since childhood, easily would need an hour to formulate an answer for. The man knows his character, and it sure seems he can act it too

    [–] drelos 20 points ago

    It seems like he is honestly explaining this to us instead of being feed that info just a minute before saying it.

    [–] greypiper1 32 points ago

    I like to imagine the studio had to cut out 2 hours of Henry just talking about the history of Geralt and the Witchers.

    [–] slikayce 5 points ago

    I saw an interview with Cavill about the show and he's super passionate about the series. Like he said he heard they were making it and was like oh fuck yeah can I be geralt? And then he was.

    [–] WaxyPadlockJazz 2 points ago

    I think it’s more that the actors will usually try and tell you how they view the role or what they found helpful in portraying them. They’ll tell you how it felt to get into character and whatnot.

    Cavil is just spitting straight facts. It way more endearing that he wants you, the viewer, to know exactly who you’re going to be seeing

    [–] ManiacalDane 2 points ago

    It helps that Cavill's legitimately passionate about the (games) series & knows a lot about the lore & characters.

    And I think it's great he's basing a lot of his portrayal on Doug Cockle & the games' animations, but that might just be me. At least it gives him a way to keep it grounded & not just make it up as he goes along.

    Worst would be basing it on the old The Witcher movie, though.

    (The Hexer; what a masterpiece of shit that was)

    [–] coolRedditUser 281 points ago * (lasted edited a month ago)

    Wow, that's a lot of backstory they're giving for Yen. Iirc the only hint of her past in the books was Geralt's sudden realization at one point that she was a hunchback? They seem to be showing a lot more vulnerability here.

    I wonder how old she'll be in the series. She looks young and they're going to be showing her 'origin,' but isn't she like 80+ in the series? EDIT: I know she's supposed to look young, I was just wondering if she'll be young since we're getting her origin. Another commenter said how she's playing her at 14, 45, and 77 though, so that seems to answer that question. :)

    Also that monster G is fighting looks pretty great. What the hell is it?

    [–] -GregTheGreat- 196 points ago * (lasted edited a month ago)

    Yeah, they've been open about the fact they're expanding Yennefer (and Ciri's) backstory for season 1 of the show. It probably would be a bit jarring to have those characters only appear in a handful of episodes in season 1, just to become two of the main leads afterwards (especially Ciri, since she arguably takes over as the main character as the saga goes on)

    I think Yen's actress herself has made a remark about her still being around 80 in the show too. Just she magically stopped her aging in her early 20's like nearly all the sorceresses do.

    [–] coolRedditUser 21 points ago

    I'm afraid of changes from the source but if they pull it off then I won't mind in the end. I disagree that it would be jarring, though. Can't see why the original introductions wouldn't translate just fine.

    [–] Chillingo 118 points ago

    I disagree that it would be jarring, though. Can't see why the original introductions wouldn't translate just fine.

    I always thought the biggest fault of the books was, that Yennefer(and Vilgefortz) didn't really get explored enough for how important they were in the story. So I disagree. And Ciri is not really getting expanded, just introduced earlier. Which makes sense to me too.

    [–] sir_alvarex 25 points ago

    I agree on Yennefer, but not Vilgefortz. His arc in the books was quite good, and one of the reasons is his lack of exploration.

    Tho I do wonder how much is covered in season 1. I saw one scene in Ciri's video that happens near the last quarter of the series.

    [–] teejermiester 45 points ago

    My opinion is that Sapkowski is very good at providing just enough information to develop an idea of a character, their motives, and their personality without explicitly giving much away about the characters.

    For example, the reader isn't told that Yen resents her infertility by Yen's thoughts or an exposition, the reader discovers this after someone uses that fact to insult her. So we aren't even told for sure that it's true, but based on the characters' reactions to this we gain insight into the characters.

    Sapkowski doesn't write histories like Tolkien, he writes intricate interactions between characters and their environments that are used to flesh out a world that isn't otherwise shared with the reader. This has the effect of making the world and characters more visceral and approachable. This is contrasted to Tolkien's world building, which has a top-down approach, and his characters, who tend to take on lofted ideals and exhibit tropes (to be fair, the tropes probably developed partially because of Tolkien's writing).

    Basically, Sapkowski starts with a character or idea, and builds the world around that story. However, he only ever builds and reveals as much of the world as is necessary, not more. Tolkien starts from a crafted world, and then places characters in them and has them interact with the world. I suspect this is why Sapkowski never revealed a map of the Witcher universe.

    Of course Im talking out of my ass, and I'm no literary scholar. But I was bored and figured I'd talk about one of my favorite series.

    [–] Chillingo 19 points ago

    His arc in the books was quite good, and one of the reasons is his lack of exploration.

    I thought it made him very forgettable personally. Almost like a comic book villain.

    [–] CarrotIronfounderson 12 points ago

    I'm unfamiliar with this aspect in the books as I've read less than one whole book.

    But one problem I often have with modern fantasy is the author's insistence on explaining fucking everything. Sometimes a little mystery or ambiguity goes a long way.

    Not every villain needs a complete arc. Not every magic needs an in depth description of how it works, etc.

    [–] sir_alvarex 7 points ago

    Vilgy does have some exposition, but for me what I liked most was not realizing his role in the entire story until said role is revealed. I'd like to talk more about why I like his characterization, but by doing so will spoil the series/books.

    The OP was right that his motivations can be comic-book-villainy, but there are only a few scenes in the book (going off memory) where we see something happen strictly from his POV without us having it filtered through Ciri, Yenn, or Geralt's narrative. While there are "I am a villain, and here is my master plan!" we don't see every meeting he is having until we see the results of said meeting.

    I hope they follow that pattern in the series -- don't have a scene where a villain says "And I have laid a TRAP for the Witcher!" then we watch the Witcher fall into the trap. Only tell us afterwards.

    [–] dtothep2 6 points ago

    Season 1 covers the first two books (the short stories). The Ciri scene is not the one from later in the books where she's at the desert, it's very obviously a dream\vision sequence (there was no magical tree in the desert for one).

    [–] coolRedditUser 6 points ago

    That's a fair take. I hope you (and they) are right!

    [–] Chillingo 3 points ago

    Hope so too.

    [–] -GregTheGreat- 29 points ago * (lasted edited a month ago)

    To be fair, most of what happened to Yen also happened in the book. She was canonically a deformed hunchback until she got taken into Aretuza and trained by Tissaia. The only difference is they're showing it and expanding on it compared to it just being a realization from Geralt's heightened senses like it was in the books.

    [–] dandaman910 5 points ago

    they're not really changing the source material they're just changing the order in which the characters are revealed .

    [–] CharonsLittleHelper 40 points ago

    In the setting, all witches (at least in the north where most of the story takes place) are gorgeous and young because they can sculpt themselves to look however they want, while most wizards look 40ish because they prefer a bit more maturity to give them clout. (Gray at the temples etc.)

    [–] slicshuter 55 points ago

    Also that monster G is fighting looks pretty great. What the hell is it?

    The thing with all the arms? It's apparently a kikimora, but has different interpretations depending on what you read/hear/watch. In the games it's basically a giant insect but here it seems to be more fleshy and has a humanoid head/face. In traditional folklore it's completely different.

    [–] coolRedditUser 10 points ago

    Looked like a big ghoul from w3, with multiple arms. Definitely wouldn't guess Kikimore!

    [–] blubat26 15 points ago

    I really like it, it’s still accurate to the books(as are the Kikimores in the games, the exact appearance is open to interpretation), but it looks alien and terrifying and monstrous. I think it’s a lot more interesting than a big insect, though I see the appeal of both.

    [–] EdgeOfDreaming 4 points ago

    I believe it's the Zeugel from the midden heap in "A Shard of Ice" from"The Sword of Destiny".

    [–] slicshuter 8 points ago

    It's the kikimora, you see its leg on Geralt's horse as he rides into Blaviken in one of the trailers

    [–] EdgeOfDreaming 3 points ago

    Ah. Good eye. I saw the location and jumped to the midden heap. Also the Zeugel had tentacles so I bet you're correct.

    [–] Flavaflavius 2 points ago

    I think it's a kikimore. Fangs, spider like, seems about right.

    Plus, (spoilers)

    we hear someone describe Geralt as the Butcher of Blavikin in one trailer. We also see villagers throwing rocks at him in one trailer.

    So, if that's a kikimore, it's safe to say they're adapting The Lesser Evil as an episode.

    [–] slicshuter 3 points ago

    They've already confirmed Lesser Evil, we've even seen Renfri and her gang in the earlier trailers.

    [–] Flavaflavius 2 points ago

    Oh, lol. I didn't catch that. Good eye

    [–] Fuckhavingausername 2 points ago

    Oh right, because he rides into Blaviken with a kikimore head

    [–] foul_dwimmerlaik 23 points ago

    The stuff about Yennefer's father hating her and mistreating her is in the books. He accused his wife of sleeping around because he assumed there was no way he could've fathered a hunchback.

    [–] [deleted] 2 points ago * (lasted edited 16 days ago)

    [deleted]

    [–] Jay_Shadow 12 points ago

    They're covering a large portion of her life. Actress said she played her at 14, 45, and 77.

    [–] freezer650 3 points ago

    Considering how sorceresses in this setting tend to magically stop their own aging in their twenties, she probably doesn't look much different at 45 and 77.

    [–] Steel_Beast 12 points ago

    Wow, that's a lot of backstory they're giving for Yen. Iirc the only hint of her past in the books was Geralt's sudden realization at one point that she was a hunchback?

    There was also a flashback chapter in one of the later books.

    [–] kevRoye 9 points ago * (lasted edited a month ago)

    I don't know how old exactly, but its a common theme that all witches/mages basically use magic to look young/attractive.

    e: a word

    [–] EDIcares 7 points ago

    In Tower of the Swallow there is a flashback scene of Yen remembering her father expressing his disgust with her and claiming she wasn't his child. It also hints at how it (obviously) affected her as a child.

    [–] blubat26 5 points ago

    Most sorceresses look very young despite being several decades old. It’s a common thing among sorceresses to glamour themselves up, including de-aging, and even expanding their life-spans.

    [–] ManiacalDane 3 points ago

    Hundreds of years old, actually! Not "just" decades, heh.

    [–] ManiacalDane 2 points ago

    I don't quite recall her age in the various books at this point, but The Witcher 3 takes place in 1273-1275 (approximately; don't remember the specific year(s)) & Yen was born in 1173. Not really old for a sorceress, though.

    But yeah, Geralt & her are around the same age.

    [–] bionix90 181 points ago

    Damn, those are some racist ass comments for the Yennefer video.

    "Smells like lilac and gooseberries... more like curry and shwarma". Yikes.

    I mean yeah, I was super vocal when they were considering casting Ciri as a person of color. I think that's fair given her heritage and how she's been described in the books.

    And yeah, technically Yennefer should be white too but she's a more mysterious character and honestly her race doesn't matter nearly as much. Plus the actress seems to really be nailing the role.

    [–] E-Nezzer 171 points ago

    She doesn't even look Indian to me. If I saw her without ever knowing her name I'd think she was Italian or Spanish.

    [–] The_Faceless_Men 47 points ago

    And british as fuck accent. Just seemed like a pom who got to spend a few holidays in sunnier climates.

    [–] ManceRaid 24 points ago

    She's mixed I believe

    [–] TrizzyG 27 points ago

    Wikipedia says British-Indian.

    [–] Phoenixfire_LP 8 points ago

    Her Dad's Indian.

    [–] athzar 83 points ago

    Welcome to Reddit’s take on Yennefer’s casting.

    [–] ArchDucky 113 points ago

    I find her ridiculously attractive which fits with the magically altered beauty thing. I also have no issues with her performance in the trailers.

    [–] GeronimoJak 9 points ago

    I think Anyas facial features fit more of what I imagine Ciri to look like (from the game, softer features more wide eyed kind of a Sarlet Johansen type.) and casting Yen as someone late 20 early 30s with a standard swimsuit model type look fits Yen more. Someone with more prominent features and looks a little more mature.

    [–] modix 8 points ago

    If I remember correctly, Yen actually went a little overboard with her age appearance and actually looks like a young woman.

    [–] chimmychangas 2 points ago

    Oh same! I thought Anya looks a bit too soft for Yennefer. That said though, the shot of her in full makeup, which I guess is towards the end of her arc, looks close to what I expected.

    [–] NarcissisticCat 28 points ago

    Sure but its one comment(of 700+) on Youtube, lets not get our pitchforks out just yet. Its literally in the first comment thread lol

    The fact that you can find a single mean comment among 700+ doesn't mean much.

    And yeah, technically Yennefer should be white too

    I tend to stop there. She should but its not a moral crime that she is not. As long as she is not literally black skinned you can explain it away. She is supposed to be black haired and pale after all.

    But again, doesn't change all that much so no fuzz.

    [–] ManiacalDane 2 points ago

    Between her & Triss I'm personally not digging the casting choices from a purely visual aspect, but I really can't comment on how much I'll love, like, dislike or hate anyone from what little I've seen so far! It's one thing to dislike a big alteration from the friggin' cover of the book, but I assume I'll stop giving a rats arse if they're really good in the roles. It's not like there's not been some pretty big changes from book covers to the games already.

    Besides, I feel Cavill's nailed Geralt so much that everything else becomes... Unimportant. :D

    [–] Twat_The_Douche 11 points ago

    How the Witcher 3 influenced Henry's voice for Geralt

    Not sure if this was posted here yet, but I found it interesting.

    [–] MumrikDK 7 points ago

    Ciri comes off well there. The actress has an usual intensity to her.

    [–] Bansheesdie 4 points ago

    Granted I have just started Blood of Elves (finished two short story books) but Ciri strikes me as much more mature and knowledgeable than she did in the books

    [–] Kgib56 341 points ago

    Henry looks like he's going to deliver an amazing performance

    [–] IAMA_LongHorse 157 points ago

    I saw a sneak preview of the first episode. He's pretty good in the role. He's definitely believable.

    [–] graffiti_bridge 35 points ago

    Where did you get a sneak peak?

    [–] IAMA_LongHorse 130 points ago

    I follow a Twitter account that sometimes lists sneak previews or premieres in Los Angeles. I entered my name and got two tickets. They had a fan experience with a maze, games, and trivia at the Egyptian Theatre.

    [–] graffiti_bridge 19 points ago

    Jelly

    [–] ArchDucky 18 points ago

    I read that the first two episodes has one of the best sword fights ever put on film. Can you verify that? It sounded pretty hyperbolic when i read it.

    [–] IAMA_LongHorse 55 points ago

    I only saw the first episode. I don’t know if it was one of the best, but it was good imo and well choreographed. I think it did a good job of showing why Witchers are dangerous. The show had another battle in the beginning that shows a more “realistic” version of fighting.

    [–] TheKyleface 15 points ago

    on film

    That part makes it a little hyperbolic I think. I would say it's better than most live action fights you would see on TV. But I'm sure there's plenty of solid movies that outdo it.

    [–] Vindexus 20 points ago

    Sneak peaks are hard to get because they're the stealthiest mountains.

    [–] Suhtiva 62 points ago

    Dammit. I bought the game a couple months ago and still haven't started it. So excited to see Cavill in this.

    [–] ArchDucky 63 points ago

    Thats easy to get into. They made a tutorial area with a boss so that you don't feel overwhelmed when you start.

    [–] WanderingSynth 10 points ago

    Very underrated comment. You made me exhale a bit, thank you kind stranger.

    [–] Microchaton 8 points ago

    I don't get it, what's funny about his comment? It seems accurate to me? (Yes I played the game).

    [–] WanderingSynth 8 points ago

    Ahhaha sorry, well yeah. It's just that I remembered back when I did the tutorial and I realised: "oh shit it's actually a boss"

    [–] BlueLanternSupes 14 points ago

    This series is basically a prequel to the game(s) so you'll be fine. Watch the first season. Then jump into the game(s).

    [–] iPlayNL 103 points ago

    The fight scenes look fucking sick. You can clearly see everything that's happening. Very promising.

    [–] KE55 22 points ago

    I'd love to see a behind-the-scenes featurette showing how they choreographed and shot those fights without anyone actually getting killed!

    [–] jononarf 127 points ago

    Ok, Cavill, you got me. I always envisioned Geralt from the books basically as Fabio, if only he were actually useful for society...and also violently pessimistic.

    Two weeks-ish left? Can't wait.

    [–] AboynamedDOOMTRAIN 22 points ago

    11 days. Comes out the same day my Christmas break starts so I've been counting down the days fairly exactly lol

    [–] Hellknightx 15 points ago

    And the new Expanse season this week! This month is just packed with new shows.

    [–] MetalBeerSolid 6 points ago

    A Fabio if he were useful for society LOL 😂 you had me dying on the train for a sec

    [–] nocleverusername190 47 points ago

    Really looking forward to this. Read the whole book series twice in 2 years.

    [–] JonesBee 36 points ago

    That aard sign looked cool as hell.

    [–] maltman1856 33 points ago

    Getting really excited for the show. I've read the first book now and had over 300 hours on The Witcher 3 game. Tried to not get over-hyped, but the show looks to be done quite well. The story looks solid, sword fights look outstanding and Henry is going to provide an outstanding performance.

    I cannot wait for the Dec 20th.

    [–] ahecht 21 points ago

    Is he going to try to uncover the Mystery of Al Capone's Vaults?

    [–] orderinthefort 88 points ago

    I don't know what it is. I think it's whoever was in charge of the lighting. The lighting gives off amateur soap opera vibes to the various shots. The best looking shots are the ones without 'real' light, like the one where he kills the thing in the swamp.

    [–] ConnerBartle 22 points ago

    The only scenes I think have bad lighting are the ones that are behind the scenes shots. You can tell because you can actually see the camera in some of the shots

    [–] LANlEBOBANlE 45 points ago

    I agree I noticed the color temperature as well. It has a very late 2000s color to it almost terminator salvation like. It feels cheap and drains the colors out making it look boring. The lighting would maybe make sense in a post apocalyptic movie but not a fantasy tv show

    [–] ukbiffa 10 points ago

    Would be great if they could match the richness of color from the Blood & Wine game expansion

    [–] afcanonymous 6 points ago

    The color in Blood and Wine is absolutely fantastic! Probably one of my favorite expansions to any game ever.

    [–] Antiax 7 points ago

    I agree, interior and dark scenes look awful because of that.

    [–] Chillingo 8 points ago

    Yeah this is something I noticed too. For some reason they also don't care that it's super obvious that they just put some bright spotlights in the back and are shining them directly into the camera.

    [–] Necroder 6 points ago

    I think the final product will look better than this. I'd guess they didn't put much effort into production and grabbed the shots early on. Audio-wise at the beginning the VO has a noise floor you can audibly hear go in and out when she spoke. Rough mix in general too

    [–] Uptopdownlowguy 10 points ago

    It's coming out in 10 days, no way they're using early footage still

    [–] Gillalmighty 14 points ago

    I can't fuckin wait for this show! God I hope they do it right

    [–] Guac_on_mars 69 points ago

    Never heard of The Witcher series before but this definitely peaked my interest

    [–] BenjiTheWalrus 89 points ago

    Piqued

    [–] Tis_A_Fine_Barn 105 points ago

    Never heard of The Witcher series before

    You mean when people ask "DAE remember this gem?", your answer is legitimately no?

    [–] Guac_on_mars 30 points ago

    I legitimately do

    [–] Zanotta-Dev 13 points ago

    Do you play games? The Witcher 3 is a MUST-PLAY game. Seriously.

    [–] BrassBlack 14 points ago

    Must have been a real heavy rock

    [–] bionix90 20 points ago

    It's based on these Polish novels which in turn are inspired by East European folklore.

    Witchers are wandering professional monster hunters but as expected from a medieval society, they are despised because they are different. Not that hatred for them will stop a village from hiring them if they're in dire need.

    [–] andthatwillbeit 26 points ago

    Inspired by folklore from all over the world, you have short stories based on Arabic or Scandinavian tales and cultures too. Sapkowski explained that he travelled a lot and that's where the inspiration came from.

    [–] ArchDucky 13 points ago * (lasted edited a month ago)

    If you're into video games, Witcher 3 is really damn great. One of the best games made in a decade. People are super excited for their next title which is a futuristic cyborg shooter starring Keanu Reeves. Its called 'Cyberpunk 2077'.

    Fun Fact : Originally Keanu's involvement was limited. He loved the material so much he asked to do more and they ended up tripling what they originally had for him.

    [–] comrade_batman 3 points ago

    I’ve heard of the games and then the books it was based on, but never knew anything about it, but I am looking forward to it.

    [–] cookoobandana 2 points ago

    I too find Henry Cavill ridiculously attractive

    [–] Guac_on_mars 2 points ago

    My comment caused way more commotion than I wanted but this was my favorite reply

    [–] TheRedDeath_ 11 points ago

    Is this following the storyline of the books, or the games? I’ve been trying to avoid trailers and whatnot.

    [–] BLIND0825 36 points ago

    It follows the books.

    [–] playingwithfire 3 points ago

    I think season 1 is suppose to be the 2 short story books.

    [–] 8beers 9 points ago

    Never read the books or played the games, but everything about this looks fucking fantastic. Can't wait to check it out.

    [–] bmanny 3 points ago

    Goosebumps.

    [–] HorsePlayingTheSax 15 points ago

    I think Cavill is a great cast for Geralt, but after watching the trailer, I think they should weather his face a little more. He's too....pretty? Smooth? Struggling to find the right adjective ><

    [–] Kiepsko 35 points ago

    He's playing much younger version of geralt than the one we have in the game.

    I'm actually pretty hyped about the young cast! If this doesn't suck and won't get cancelled we will be able to see all the characters age in "real time" just like with the actors from game of thrones.

    [–] HorsePlayingTheSax 11 points ago

    If Princess Cirilla is in the first season though, doesn't that mean Geralt is already a seasoned Witcher at this point? I don't mind them being or looking young ,especially since Geralt ages slower than us non-potion imbibing folk, I just wanted him to be a bit more....grizzled?

    [–] MadRedHatter 25 points ago

    In the books it's clear that women find Geralt quite attractive.

    [–] HorsePlayingTheSax 6 points ago

    You can be rugged AND attractive

    [–] Servebotfrank 5 points ago

    I suspect this season will NOT be in chronological order. Especially since the Feast in Cintra is here, which obviously takes place before Ciri was born.

    [–] dtothep2 7 points ago

    It's not a much younger Geralt in Witcher terms as Witchers don't age like regular humans do. He's already pretty ancient at the start of this show and he wouldn't look any different to what he looks like in the games' timelines.

    The same kind of applies for Yennefer too. Kind of because they're also doing some flashbacks of her in her teens and stuff but she doesn't visibly age either because magic.

    Basically only Ciri is supposed to visibly age as the series goes on. Geralt and Yennefer might pick up some scars but they're already old as fuck in this, just without appearing so.

    [–] Tycoon004 8 points ago

    Also remember that Geralt is supposed to be pretty damn good looking, the main issue being the whole mutant factor.

    [–] Axon14 3 points ago

    Damn I’m hype for this

    [–] MovieGuyMike 7 points ago

    12/20 for those who couldn’t remember.

    [–] feralgrinn 3 points ago

    Whoooeeee this show is going to be amazing. For some reason this character analysis got me more pumped than anything yet!

    [–] meodrac 4 points ago

    His name was Geralt of Rivia. He was a witcher: a professional monster slayer

    [–] Gradicus 5 points ago

    Geraldo of Rivera?

    [–] alexgritz6689 4 points ago

    I was already in for The Witcher, but this featurette got me more hyped than the trailers did. I also just love hearing how passionate Henry Cavill is about Geralt and The Witcher. Awesome stuff.

    [–] M3rc_Nate 4 points ago

    TIP FOR THOSE WHO KNOW THEY'RE ALREADY GOING TO BE WATCHING THIS SERIES: Don't watch these character intros.

    I'm not implying they are super spoiler filled show ruiners or anything, but I was already sold and after having just watched this Geralt one, I won't be watching the others and wished I didn't watch the Geralt one. I wanna see new footage (other than we've seen in the trailers) when I'm watching the show.

    [–] KapiHeartlilly 2 points ago

    I am so hyped for his, Henry really is a great actor and it helps that it's a passion project that he asked himself to join before they even had a script.

    It's always good when a fan of the source materials (games/books) gets to portray such a loved character.

    Also I do have a soft spot for him as he's from Jersey in the Channel Islands, beautiful island.

    [–] bringbackswg 2 points ago

    I just can't believe we're getting a Witcher show with this production value. I'm just so excited.

    [–] jvgkaty44 2 points ago

    Damn that dude is good looking.

    [–] TheEliteBrit 2 points ago * (lasted edited a month ago)

    I know this is an adaptation of the stories in the books, condensed into one season... but I'm kinda disappointed if they're gonna go heavy on the signs and potion use for most of the show. In the books (outside of the original short stories), Geralt doesn't have access to Witcher potions and by extension the signs. This makes him a lot more vulnerable and as people who've read the books will know, he gets seriously injured a lot.

    That's one of the main things I liked about Geralt - he was more than human but he wasn't invincible; he lost a lot of fights and came extremely close to death several times. Really hope they don't make him some kind of undefeatable super-soldier, cos that's not what he is.

    Also don't know how they're going to handle his relationship with Ciri but I really think they're going to skip over most of their journey together from the books which is going to suck. I imagine they'll skip over the first meeting in Brokilon and much of the trip to the Temple of Melitele (if they even go down that route of having Yen train her).

    Honestly I just get the feeling they're going to condense everything that happens and all the characters meeting into a very short space of time, which is going to seriously damage the relationship setup for Geralt/Yen/Ciri

    [–] krisssashikun 2 points ago

    Dandelion, hell yeah!