There has been speculation for months that Henry Cavill might show up in Deadpool 3, aka Deadpool & Wolverine, but … Continue reading "Henry Cavill Is Playing Wolverine In Deadpool 3"
Unfortunately he is just way too devoted to the source material, which they couldn’t really use for their show. So Cavill really has been shooting his own foot. He wasn’t willing to compromise, even though he knew the show wasn’t supposed to be 1 to 1 telling.
So how do you deal with someone who signed on for X and than tried turning into their own thing?
Where did you hear that? Thats not even remotely what happened.
Cavill reportedly badgered his agent to let him meet with The Witcher showrunner Lauren Schmidt-Hissrich as she recalls him being “really annoying” with his insistence on playing the lead role in the series that (at the time) she hadn’t even begun writing yet
Yeah, no the show had no intentions of telling the same story from the start. Cavill pushed himself into a show and badgered them to get what he wanted which was entirely different than what was planned.
The source material is what keeps it from just being another generic fantasy setting with stereotypical characters, which is what the writers were turning The Witcher into in the very first season, and I heard it got worse from there but stopped watching.
Great adaptations keep the important bits. Cavill trying to keep the important bits was the only reason the show wasn’t worse. The writers and producers were the ones who signed on for a Witcher project and tried to turn it into their own.
I think you are kind of assuming he was only keeping the important bits and wasn’t being stubborn. We actually have no idea what the dynamic was truly like and who was “right.”
We know Cavill wanted to do a Witcher show, we know the writer’s changed things significantly, and Cavill left the show. A writer that left was the one who brought up the other writer’s mocking the source material, so it wasn’t only Cavill that seemed to have an issue. Then there are the fans, who also did not appreciate the changes.
Why try to put the blame on one actor for being stubborn when the situation is the commonly seen Hollywood adaptation leaves out important details from the source?
I think you are kind of assuming he was only keeping the important bits and wasn’t being stubborn.
Since he has articulated the parts he likes about the Witcher that weren’t included, and fans who agreed with him complained about the same parts being left out, it is pretty safe to assume he wanted to keep the important bits.
Jumping the gun to saying he was stubborn is blaming him. Is wanting to make a show based on the source material being stubborn, or just being dedicated to the source material?
Once again, I did not blame him. I did not say he was stubborn. I’m saying it’s totally possible he was, just like it’s possible he was totally (or largely even) in the right and the parents for TW are just stubborn hacks who need to hear him out. But again, none of us actually know what was going on. Snippets we’ve gleaned from media is not sufficient.
Cavill reportedly badgered his agent to let him meet with The Witcher showrunner Lauren Schmidt-Hissrich as she recalls him being “really annoying” with his insistence on playing the lead role in the series that (at the time) she hadn’t even begun writing yet
Yeah, no the show had no intentions of telling the same story from the start.
Cavill messed everything up before even starting, this is entirely on him for pushing his way into a show and demanding what he wanted instead of what everyone else was doing.
Why make multiple video games that have nothing to do with the source material as well? Very few adaptations are 100% faithful to the source material, lots tell alternate ideas, it’s hilarious that people think this one should be the outlier. The other media in this universe already has nothing to do with the books already lmfao.
It’s called telling additional stories or fleshing out other stories.
The Witcher could be a vast universe with multiple stories to tell, why tell the same one multiple times?
There is a difference between telling different stories with the same settings and characters and changing the setting and characters enough that it loses the things that make the setting and characters unique.
The Lord of the Rings movies were a great adaptation even though the deviated from the source material to fit the mew medium. The Dark Tower was a terrible adaptation, and felt like some other movie pretending to be the Dark Tower.
He signed on for a Witcher adaptation. The TV show is original series inspired by the Witcher, not an adaptation.
Anybody sane didn’t expect a 1 to 1 retelling - that would frankly be a bad adaptation. And I did like some of the new stuff. But they took the spirit of the books and completely threw it out of the window.
Nobody has said anything about a 1:1 adaptation, and these things can have a sliding scale. It is possible to keep certain elements while rearranging and editing a story for different mediums. You do understand it is people who write these things, yeah? Theyre not like, handed down from on high and then filmed. Also: The Last of Us.
It is possible to keep certain elements while rearranging and editing a story for different mediums.
I mean yeah, that’s what I’m saying - a good adaptation, changing things to fit the medium, rearranging to tell the story better etc., that’s all good.
What Witcher did is they took the rough skeleton of the overall story and practically build original story on thay skeleton. Especially season 2 has almost nothing in common with the book they were adapting. The story started and ended in roughly the same spot, everything in between was made up.
Also I feel whatever they rearranged was for the worse and made the story make less impactful.
You do understand it is people who write these things, yeah? Theyre not like, handed down from on high and then filmed.
The difference is the games are an original story, that builds on the skeleton the books provided. This is what it was from the get go. It used the same characters and lore and built on what the books did.
The TV show is supposed to be adaptation of the story that is, and bringing it to different medium. But they decided to take the rough outline of the story and make a original story around it, while calling it an adaptation. At least they could’ve been honest about it - they could’ve take the world of the Witcher and make an original story out if it, but that’s not what they went for. They did so with Nightmare of the Wolf and I liked that one (despite it also taking major liberties with established lore).
Hard disagree. In my opinion as a fan of the games and books, the changes from the source material all negatively impacted the show, to the point that the star was no longer interested in participating.
Cavill reportedly badgered his agent to let him meet with The Witcher showrunner Lauren Schmidt-Hissrich as she recalls him being “really annoying” with his insistence on playing the lead role in the series that (at the time) she hadn’t even begun writing yet
Yeah, no the show had no intentions of telling the same story from the start.
No one cares what the show runner wanted to do with the Witcher property. The reality is Henry Cavill is a huge fan of the books and video games. There are several interviews of him discussing while filming how he used that info to create an accurate portrayal that worked on screen. It wasn’t until the show deviated from the primary story of the books that Henry decided to leave. And that shows in the viewership from when the news broke that he was leaving which was also around the time that Netflix released original stories on the witcher universe that bombed. The show runner made the show worse despite Henry cavills best efforts to keep it accurate and entertaining.
Unfortunately he is just way too devoted to the source material, which they couldn’t really use for their show. So Cavill really has been shooting his own foot. He wasn’t willing to compromise, even though he knew the show wasn’t supposed to be 1 to 1 telling.
So how do you deal with someone who signed on for X and than tried turning into their own thing?
Other way around.
He signed on to make the Witcher series, true to the books.
They moved it away from that, and audiences turned away from it.
Cavill was right.
Where did you hear that? Thats not even remotely what happened.
Yeah, no the show had no intentions of telling the same story from the start. Cavill pushed himself into a show and badgered them to get what he wanted which was entirely different than what was planned.
He fucked everything up before it even started.
Are you saying they intended for the show to be even further from the source material? Maybe don’t call the show “The Witcher” then.
The games are the exact same thing, and they are called the Witcher too. What’s your point?
The source material is what keeps it from just being another generic fantasy setting with stereotypical characters, which is what the writers were turning The Witcher into in the very first season, and I heard it got worse from there but stopped watching.
Great adaptations keep the important bits. Cavill trying to keep the important bits was the only reason the show wasn’t worse. The writers and producers were the ones who signed on for a Witcher project and tried to turn it into their own.
I think you are kind of assuming he was only keeping the important bits and wasn’t being stubborn. We actually have no idea what the dynamic was truly like and who was “right.”
We know Cavill wanted to do a Witcher show, we know the writer’s changed things significantly, and Cavill left the show. A writer that left was the one who brought up the other writer’s mocking the source material, so it wasn’t only Cavill that seemed to have an issue. Then there are the fans, who also did not appreciate the changes.
Why try to put the blame on one actor for being stubborn when the situation is the commonly seen Hollywood adaptation leaves out important details from the source?
I did not put the blame on him. I said we don’t know what happened.
Since he has articulated the parts he likes about the Witcher that weren’t included, and fans who agreed with him complained about the same parts being left out, it is pretty safe to assume he wanted to keep the important bits.
Jumping the gun to saying he was stubborn is blaming him. Is wanting to make a show based on the source material being stubborn, or just being dedicated to the source material?
Once again, I did not blame him. I did not say he was stubborn. I’m saying it’s totally possible he was, just like it’s possible he was totally (or largely even) in the right and the parents for TW are just stubborn hacks who need to hear him out. But again, none of us actually know what was going on. Snippets we’ve gleaned from media is not sufficient.
Yeah, no the show had no intentions of telling the same story from the start.
Cavill messed everything up before even starting, this is entirely on him for pushing his way into a show and demanding what he wanted instead of what everyone else was doing.
Why make a show called the Witcher that has nothing to do with the source material?
Why make multiple video games that have nothing to do with the source material as well? Very few adaptations are 100% faithful to the source material, lots tell alternate ideas, it’s hilarious that people think this one should be the outlier. The other media in this universe already has nothing to do with the books already lmfao.
It’s called telling additional stories or fleshing out other stories.
The Witcher could be a vast universe with multiple stories to tell, why tell the same one multiple times?
There is a difference between telling different stories with the same settings and characters and changing the setting and characters enough that it loses the things that make the setting and characters unique.
The Lord of the Rings movies were a great adaptation even though the deviated from the source material to fit the mew medium. The Dark Tower was a terrible adaptation, and felt like some other movie pretending to be the Dark Tower.
Are you serious? The games are basically unofficial sequels to the books. They absolutely have something to do with them lol wtaf.
So are they faithful to the material, or are they a separate story like the show was?
The games aren’t the books, the show wasn’t either, and people are mad about that, lmfao.
They’re continuations of the story. They take the established lore and expand on them, just like an additional book would.
Huh, just like what the show was doing…. What’s your point here again?
That one media can tell a different story than the books, but another can’t? Thats just asinine lmfao.
He signed on for a Witcher adaptation. The TV show is original series inspired by the Witcher, not an adaptation.
Anybody sane didn’t expect a 1 to 1 retelling - that would frankly be a bad adaptation. And I did like some of the new stuff. But they took the spirit of the books and completely threw it out of the window.
Nobody has said anything about a 1:1 adaptation, and these things can have a sliding scale. It is possible to keep certain elements while rearranging and editing a story for different mediums. You do understand it is people who write these things, yeah? Theyre not like, handed down from on high and then filmed. Also: The Last of Us.
I mean yeah, that’s what I’m saying - a good adaptation, changing things to fit the medium, rearranging to tell the story better etc., that’s all good.
What Witcher did is they took the rough skeleton of the overall story and practically build original story on thay skeleton. Especially season 2 has almost nothing in common with the book they were adapting. The story started and ended in roughly the same spot, everything in between was made up.
Also I feel whatever they rearranged was for the worse and made the story make less impactful.
Not sure what you meant by this.
Huh… Just like revered games did… funny how it’s fine there, but not on the show.
The games are fun though. That is not true of the show.
The difference is the games are an original story, that builds on the skeleton the books provided. This is what it was from the get go. It used the same characters and lore and built on what the books did.
The TV show is supposed to be adaptation of the story that is, and bringing it to different medium. But they decided to take the rough outline of the story and make a original story around it, while calling it an adaptation. At least they could’ve been honest about it - they could’ve take the world of the Witcher and make an original story out if it, but that’s not what they went for. They did so with Nightmare of the Wolf and I liked that one (despite it also taking major liberties with established lore).
Ah, sorry I misread. Seems we agree. Apologies.
No worries :)
Hard disagree. In my opinion as a fan of the games and books, the changes from the source material all negatively impacted the show, to the point that the star was no longer interested in participating.
Yeah, no the show had no intentions of telling the same story from the start.
No one cares what the show runner wanted to do with the Witcher property. The reality is Henry Cavill is a huge fan of the books and video games. There are several interviews of him discussing while filming how he used that info to create an accurate portrayal that worked on screen. It wasn’t until the show deviated from the primary story of the books that Henry decided to leave. And that shows in the viewership from when the news broke that he was leaving which was also around the time that Netflix released original stories on the witcher universe that bombed. The show runner made the show worse despite Henry cavills best efforts to keep it accurate and entertaining.
Im gonna need a detailed indepth explanation of why source material was impossible to use for an adaptation of said source material.
The same way the games didn’t, they were using the universe to tell an alternate story.
This isn’t a hard concept to grasp or anything.