view the rest of the comments
Ask Lemmy
A Fediverse community for open-ended, thought provoking questions
Please don't post about US Politics. If you need to do this, try !politicaldiscussion@lemmy.world
Rules: (interactive)
1) Be nice and; have fun
Doxxing, trolling, sealioning, racism, and toxicity are not welcomed in AskLemmy. Remember what your mother said: if you can't say something nice, don't say anything at all. In addition, the site-wide Lemmy.world terms of service also apply here. Please familiarize yourself with them
2) All posts must end with a '?'
This is sort of like Jeopardy. Please phrase all post titles in the form of a proper question ending with ?
3) No spam
Please do not flood the community with nonsense. Actual suspected spammers will be banned on site. No astroturfing.
4) NSFW is okay, within reason
Just remember to tag posts with either a content warning or a [NSFW] tag. Overtly sexual posts are not allowed, please direct them to either !asklemmyafterdark@lemmy.world or !asklemmynsfw@lemmynsfw.com.
NSFW comments should be restricted to posts tagged [NSFW].
5) This is not a support community.
It is not a place for 'how do I?', type questions.
If you have any questions regarding the site itself or would like to report a community, please direct them to Lemmy.world Support or email info@lemmy.world. For other questions check our partnered communities list, or use the search function.
Reminder: The terms of service apply here too.
Partnered Communities:
Logo design credit goes to: tubbadu
I reckon you've been downvoted for the agenda comment, but you're absolutely right about it being bullshit. They fucking ruined it. Imo it's less about 'agenda' and more about the arrogance of the directing team.
Literally all they had to do was replicate the stories for the screen, but they couldn't resist putting 'their stamp on it'. What a missed open goal.
Don't really care, if people can't see that the director is pushing her agenda into the thing and kinda forgets about actually adapting the source material, it's their problem, not mine.
The Witcher books talk about a lot of issues that are relevant today (like racism, the price of being neutral, colonialism and many more), I personally also love the medieval politics bit (you can see that Sapkowski really loves history in those parts) and I think it deserves a proper adaptation, not this hacked together bullshit that just likes to push every modern agenda in there.
You (the general you) can dislike my opinion as much as you want, that's really up to you, but IMO one of those things lines pretending it works with societal issues, while the other one truly presents them as such.
I've never read the books, huge fan of the game series. I love reading, but what's put me off is Sapkowski's reputation for being an arsehole. I dunno, I've always been a bit resistant to consuming media if I don't like the creator.
Like, I can enjoy Michael Jackson songs, but if I discovered him today with all the baggage attached I might never have formed an attachment to his music. Think I'll see if I can find any Witcher books in the library and then if I don't enjoy, I've not wasted any money.
Well, he is an arsehole a bit, but not on the level I'd consider turning away from his books. I probably wouldn't want to be friends with him, but he's not such a big arsehole that I would lose sleep over supporting him financially. I truly recommend the books, though I've heard that the English translations leave a lot to be desired.