|
Post by Jordan Williams on Oct 7, 2020 0:32:40 GMT
Well I, for one, don't really see the problem with it. Sure, it's leather with metal studs. But it looks perfectly functional - you've got a pair of typical vambraces, a set of entirely decent pauldrons, and a basic breastplate (and presumably a backplate as well). Plenty of people, historically speaking, went into battle wearing armor that gave the exact same coverage - or even less. EDIT: Looks like Le Mal already brought up what I was thinking. Yeah peasants went into battle with less, not elite warriors bois. It's like chrome tan or veg tan leather, you could cut through his set with a kitchen knife if you really wanted.
|
|
|
Post by legacyofthesword on Oct 7, 2020 0:43:59 GMT
Well I, for one, don't really see the problem with it. Sure, it's leather with metal studs. But it looks perfectly functional - you've got a pair of typical vambraces, a set of entirely decent pauldrons, and a basic breastplate (and presumably a backplate as well). Plenty of people, historically speaking, went into battle wearing armor that gave the exact same coverage - or even less. EDIT: Looks like Le Mal already brought up what I was thinking. Yeah peasants went into battle with less, not elite warriors bois. It's like chrome tan or veg tan leather, you could cut through his set with a kitchen knife if you really wanted. I agree that it's tanned, unhardened construction is terrible. As for how much armor was worn by who, it depended. Generally the rich who could afford full suits of armor wore it on the battlefield. If Geralt here isn't planning on fighting in a pitched battle though, then it makes sense for him to be wearing less than full armor. Gerald of Wales (in the late 12th century) talked about the difficulty that fully armored English knights had on campaign against lightly armored or entirely unarmored Welsh fighters. Sometimes, protection was sacrificed for mobility, and you can bet that no one worn full mail or plate around all day long if they could help it.
|
|
|
Post by Jordan Williams on Oct 7, 2020 0:58:14 GMT
Yeah peasants went into battle with less, not elite warriors bois. It's like chrome tan or veg tan leather, you could cut through his set with a kitchen knife if you really wanted. I agree that it's tanned, unhardened construction is terrible. As for how much armor was worn by who, it depended. Generally the rich who could afford full suits of armor wore it on the battle. If Geralt here isn't planning on fighting in a pitched battle though, then it makes sense for him to be wearing less than full armor. Gerald of Wales (in the late 12th century) talked about the difficulty that fully armored English knights had on campaign against lightly armored or entirely unarmed Welsh fighters. Sometimes, protection was sacrificed for mobility, and yiu can bet that no one worn full mail or plate around all day long if they could help it. What he's got on looks way way less comfortable than a padded jacket or even a decently heavy gambeson, and by FAR less protective or moveable than chain mail or the padding. It's just more fantasy armor set up for fashion without any thought given for story.
|
|
|
Post by RufusScorpius on Oct 7, 2020 1:04:41 GMT
You are all missing the point; it's not leather armor, it's not steel armor, it's historic or even fantasy armor, it is genuine 100% PLOT ARMOR. It will stop, or allow, any weapon depending on the needs of the plot at the time. We should all be so adequately appointed.
|
|
|
Post by paulmuaddib on Oct 7, 2020 2:07:41 GMT
You are all missing the point; it's not leather armor, it's not steel armor, it's historic or even fantasy armor, it is genuine 100% PLOT ARMOR. It will stop, or allow, any weapon depending on the needs of the plot at the time. We should all be so adequately appointed. Thank you Rufus. It’s Hollywood. It’s not going to be ‘historically accurate’ no matter what anyone wants. I know I’m going to be somewhat disappointed in the Dune movie. But I’m going to try to enjoy it for ‘hopefully’ the best interpretation so far. Honestly, shouldn’t be that hard. The other two sucked. Anyway, Rufus, I like the way you just distill things down to the bare basics.
|
|
|
Post by Cos on Oct 21, 2020 13:17:08 GMT
Fantasy show about monsters and warlocks, who gives a care what skin color the cast is and who they're banging? The battles/fight choreography was cringy, but that's kinda status quo.
|
|
|
Post by MOK on Oct 21, 2020 15:38:30 GMT
Are the character's skin color, hairdo or fantasy-expy-ethnicity significant to their characterization or narrative in some way? If not, really the only way it should matter is in terms of audience identification...
But either way, on a more official note: if people could please just take a little bit of extra care when expressing complaints about that kind of thing I would be very relieved, because even valid criticisms about casting calls can all too easily come across as having very unfortunate implications when expressed in these terms.
|
|
|
Post by RufusScorpius on Oct 21, 2020 16:43:23 GMT
I gave up on any modern fantasy series except for "Ice Fantasy". which is 100% Chinese mythology with a 100% Chinese audience in mind.
Modern fantasy just breaks the illusions because they try to force modern thoughts and concepts into the stories. I'll stick with the classics. Give me the purple hair girls of SHADO moonbase, thank you very much.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 21, 2020 17:02:25 GMT
The actress who portrays Yennefer is named Anya Chalotra. She is British. Her mother is English, her father is Indian. I did not know she had Indian ancestry until I saw her name in the credits and looked her up. Having said that, I found her performance to be excellent and she did it with real zeal. I look at the photo below and have no trouble suspending my disbelief.
|
|
|
Post by Dandelion on Oct 21, 2020 17:12:34 GMT
The actress who portrays Yennefer is named Anya Chalotra. She is British. Her mother is English, her father is Indian. I did not know she had Indian ancestry until I saw her name in the credits and looked her up. Having said that, I found her performance to be excellent and she did it with real zeal. I look at the photo below and have no trouble suspending my disbelief. Anya steals the show; Henry steals the show. Ciri is very good casting, have to see more of her though. Vilgefortz is the arabic guy from Marco Polo (on of Khublais adopted sons) - i can live with that. The other usual quote ethnics were/are unavoidable in a modern production. Triss is very good as well; one should not compare her with the t*t wonder from the darn video games; that "lady" has nothing to do with the book charakter. Overall, the video games should be completely ignored - the show refers to the books, and it already has some problems with that fact. But there are a lot of very good scenes and impressions and epic moments as well.
|
|
|
Post by Dandelion on Oct 21, 2020 17:16:54 GMT
Fantasy show about monsters and warlocks, who gives a care what skin color the cast is and who they're banging? The battles/fight choreography was cringy, but that's kinda status quo. Choreography was mixed IMHO; there was a lot of round-and round, the unavoidable reverse grip and some other silly stuff, but also some cool disarming, infight techniques and the Witcher fighting style was displayed fine. Tod's swords design was a BIG relief!
|
|
|
Post by Cos on Oct 21, 2020 17:38:58 GMT
Fantasy show about monsters and warlocks, who gives a care what skin color the cast is and who they're banging? The battles/fight choreography was cringy, but that's kinda status quo. Choreography was mixed IMHO; there was a lot of round-and round, the unavoidable reverse grip and some other silly stuff, but also some cool disarming, infight techniques and the Witcher fighting style was displayed fine. Tod's swords design was a BIG relief! It didn't bother me that much, and Henry Cavill did move very well. It's more the big battles I didnt care for. I am not a fan of the swords. I understand there are reasons for the designs, but the all look way off to me. Hate the medallion in the guard, the grips look way to round and thin. Jut my personal aesthetic though.
|
|
|
Post by Dandelion on Oct 21, 2020 20:50:52 GMT
Fantasy show about monsters and warlocks, who gives a care what skin color the cast is and who they're banging? The battles/fight choreography was cringy, but that's kinda status quo. It's not about whether I personally care or not, It's about about how far away it is from what fans know these characters to be like and look like, etc. As far as the other part of the question. You have to admit that scene in the dungeon with the conjured up "audience" was terrible. Regardless of the pairing but especially with the character being a virgin? Does this seem like an identifiable scene for the audience? Are the character's skin color, hairdo or fantasy-expy-ethnicity significant to their characterization or narrative in some way? If not, really the only way it should matter is in terms of audience identification... But either way, on a more official note: if people could please just take a little bit of extra care when expressing complaints about that kind of thing I would be very relieved, because even valid criticisms about casting calls can all too easily come across as having very unfortunate implications when expressed in these terms.No offense or unfortunate implications intended. Still, I wonder if you would feel as equally dismissive of these changes if it was the other way around. Just an observation. I wonder if the audience identification would be more important then. I gave up on any modern fantasy series except for "Ice Fantasy". which is 100% Chinese mythology with a 100% Chinese audience in mind. Modern fantasy just breaks the illusions because they try to force modern thoughts and concepts into the stories. I'll stick with the classics. Give me the purple hair girls of SHADO moonbase, thank you very much. Pretty much. The actress who portrays Yennefer is named Anya Chalotra. She is British. Her mother is English, her father is Indian. I did not know she had Indian ancestry until I saw her name in the credits and looked her up. Having said that, I found her performance to be excellent and she did it with real zeal. I look at the photo below and have no trouble suspending my disbelief. Eh, maybe bro. Definitely looks different enough to me. But this one is probably the least jarring part of it. I would agree at least she looks somewhat close. Keep in mind that in the book she is repeatedly referred to as "Pale" over and over. I believe that since you chose to pick this part to address that you somewhat agree with my other criticisms? Anya steals the show; Henry steals the show. Ciri is very good casting, have to see more of her though. Vilgefortz is the arabic guy from Marco Polo (on of Khublais adopted sons) - i can live with that. The other usual quote ethnics were/are unavoidable in a modern production. Triss is very good as well; one should not compare her with the t*t wonder from the darn video games; that "lady" has nothing to do with the book charakter. Overall, the video games should be completely ignored - the show refers to the books, and it already has some problems with that fact. But there are a lot of very good scenes and impressions and epic moments as well. Just Fyi but I am not talking about Vilgefortz I am talking about Istredd, because he was the one in that scene. So ok you don't like Triss from the games but which one do you think is the more physically, accurately depicted based on the source material? Actress in the netflix adaptation doesn't even have the blue eyes for one(They could use contact lenses for this). Described as "Cornflower blue". ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Personally guys I don't really care too much and will probably finish the season anyway, anything with monsters and swords and I am in. 👍 Did Daenerys Targaryen have violet eyes? Silver hair? Wasnt much of a issue right? No, seriously, i like the show Triss WAY more than the game one; no problem with the eyes. Yes Istredd... dont like him, Not because of ethnics, the actor sucks IMHO. One of my main problem was/is: why the HECK cast midgets (i dont know any better term, sorry mods) for dwarfs? Why not cast smaller, stocky guys instead? Old polish witcher series made the same mistake... Other man problem: Cahir (actor good, role behaviour crap - or it has to be turned in the following seasons) and Fringilla (complete desaster). Nilfgaardian troll scr*tum armour... yes... enough of this. Swords again: top design work from Tods Workshop; oval grip on steel sword, rectangular on silver one. Good length, no hindering Longswords. I like them a lot! What else... Yens background story - great! The timeline idea - cool (took some time though...)! Sztryga episode is WHOOOAHH!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 21, 2020 21:12:16 GMT
I think some physical traits are important depending on the narrative. It's a bugbear of many a Harry Potter fan that Daniel Radcliffe isn't depicted with green eyes; he has blue eyes. He was cast as the role due to his talent and likeness to the character, minus the eyes. They attempted to have him wear green contact lenses, but he had an allergy to them. They also attempted to make them green via CGI, but the effect was unnatural looking. So, when it came time to cast his mother, who has the same green eyes, they cast an actress with blue eyes. On one hand, the likeness between the two was achieved, but on the other hand, they failed to include the two pairs of green eyes. Why is it important? Well, there's a connection between Lily Potter's green eyes and the author Dante. Dante had an unrequited love affair for a green eyed beauty named Beatrice. He described her as being his salvation. Beatrice was to Dante what a certain tragic character in Harry Potter is to Lily. Does the viewer know this? Not really, only a few people make this connection. So, returning to my point, I don't think these characteristics matter until they do. In the case of Daniel Radcliffe's eyes, it didn't matter. In the case of Yennefer being a shade darker than what is described in the book... gimme a break.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 21, 2020 22:12:26 GMT
.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 21, 2020 22:16:29 GMT
I hate to embody the cliche of the new guy posting controversial opinions, but I'm OK with Netflix hiring actors of color. Welcome to the forum!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 21, 2020 22:23:15 GMT
.
|
|
|
Post by Cos on Oct 21, 2020 22:34:30 GMT
I hate to embody the cliche of the new guy posting controversial opinions, but I'm OK with Netflix hiring actors of color. Absolutely, but why not, instead, for new characters? Or possibly characters that don't already have established aesthetics and appearance connected to them that are near opposite. If they came out with a new star wars movie that depicted Chewie with completely white fur and a pink nose, I would expect to see possibly even worse outcry. In fact, I bet the SW fans would be far more brutal about it. I can understand that when you have a perception of a character it can take you for a loop, but in this case I think it's fairly unimportant. It's fantasy, and if you let it go you will enjoy the show a lot more. The author consults on the show and if its good enough for him then I'm OK with it. Also, book vs game there's a lot of difference in character looks. I take more umbrage with the changes on character actions, specifically, how Foltest is portrayed and with how Dandelion is. For what its worth, SW has the most toxic fan base.
|
|
|
Post by Dandelion on Oct 22, 2020 4:29:10 GMT
I hate to embody the cliche of the new guy posting controversial opinions, but I'm OK with Netflix hiring actors of color. Absolutely, but why not, instead, for new characters? Or possibly characters that don't already have established aesthetics and appearance connected to them that are near opposite. If they came out with a new star wars movie that depicted Chewie with completely white fur and a pink nose, I would expect to see possibly even worse outcry. In fact, I bet the SW fans would be far more brutal about it. There is nothing more that Disney could do worse with Star Wars; it just would make no difference. They killed it.
|
|
|
Post by Dandelion on Oct 22, 2020 4:38:10 GMT
Absolutely, but why not, instead, for new characters? Or possibly characters that don't already have established aesthetics and appearance connected to them that are near opposite. If they came out with a new star wars movie that depicted Chewie with completely white fur and a pink nose, I would expect to see possibly even worse outcry. In fact, I bet the SW fans would be far more brutal about it. I can understand that when you have a perception of a character it can take you for a loop, but in this case I think it's fairly unimportant. It's fantasy, and if you let it go you will enjoy the show a lot more. The author consults on the show and if its good enough for him then I'm OK with it. Also, book vs game there's a lot of difference in character looks. I take more umbrage with the changes on character actions, specifically, how Foltest is portrayed and with how Dandelion is. For what its worth, SW has the most toxic fan base. You are kind of right with the fantasy thing, but considering how loud that Hissrich b*&§%! talked about "staying true to the books" on a lore which has a slavic background in location and mythology, i think she cheated us. Badly. On the other hand, it doesnt matter anymore. See all that other fantasy shows, especially the ones with King Arther and Camelot: black people everywhere. Just doesnt make sense. My killing shot already came some years before: Idris Elba as Roland! ROLAND! I LOVE Idris, especially for his Luther show, but, but... no. Just no. Afro-ethnic people are a real RARE thing in Midworld, exist, but rare. I would have had less problems with a black Bond. Why not?
|
|