(no subject)
Jan. 6th, 2020 10:52 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
shadowkat1. So, I've fallen in love with The Witcher series on NETFLIX. I think I may become fannish about something again. It's playing with my head. And it gets better and better the more I think about it.
Season 1 dropped with just 8 episodes -- and they are tightly plotted episodes, with great production, interesting metaphors, and some of the best drawn female characters that I've seen in a fantasy series. (I want more Netflix, please renew! If you can renew Stranger Things (which I think I've given up on) you can renew something I love.
I finished watching it on Sunday, and the more I think about it, the more it works and I love it to pieces. I may re-watch it -- which is something I rarely do. (I've only re-watched a handful of series in my lifetime. I'm not a re-watcher, too many shows, too little time. And I have insanely eclectic taste.)
It basically does everything that Game of Thrones did wrong, right. The Witcher washed the bitter taste that Game left in my mouth over the summer.
Here's a link to one of the meta's that I found online via Averil, I Love How the Witcher Proves How You Can Have A Sexist World Without Having a Sexist Story
Queen Calanthe – jfc, Queen Calanthe is how Daenerys Targaryen should have been handled. She’s a powerful woman, an unapologetically ambitious warrior woman, who falls and loses her throne and country – exactly the same way a King would have. Her flaws – her hubris, her selfishness, her unwillingness to let go of her granddaughter – lead to her downfall, but they do so rationally. She doesn’t go mad, or start making stupid irrational decisions, or have to be otherwise softened – she loses the battle. She was out-maneuvered, and her support was blocked, and she just failed. She just lost. Queens – any poweful woman, really – always go mad and have to be put down For The Greater Good, they never get to be a Tragic Hero in the classical sense – always Lady Macbeth, never Hamlet.
Exactly. We have a tragic story around a tragic Queen, whose story is told in reverse narrative order or not linerally.
That's another brilliant bit about this series -- it's not told in a linear or chronological manner. We are told it through flashbacks and out of sequence in places, and through various perspectives. And the focus is on the women here. The women are the central characters, with one male central character whose interactions with each of these women in some way or other change him and them, but not in a sexist manner.
I've never seen a fantasy series told in this way or done like this. Usually it's some guy's coming of age or hero's journey, but the Witcher kicks that to the curb early on. And I honestly thought Yennefer would be shown as a femme fatal or villain, but she's not and she could so easily have been shown in this manner.
There’s one single mention of rape, and that character does imply that this in part led to her not being a princess anymore – followed almost-immediately by the main character explicitly and pointedly calling her Princess, pointing out that it isn’t what was done to her that makes her monstrous, it’s what she herself does. Even so, it’s simply part of her backstory, she’s the one who brings it up, and there’s no gruesome flashback to “evoke sympathy” or whatever bullshit excuse to show women suffering.
It’s just. It’s so obvious that this showrunner is a woman. The comparisons to GoT are all over the place, and obviously – they’re both dark, gritty fantasies with a heavy political aspect – but the way this show treats its characters, and particularly its women, is just so refreshing. It’s not without its flaws, and while I’ll admit that there were a few moments where I was like, “did she really need to be naked here?” none of those moments were tasteless or predatory, and there was none of that gratuitous degradation of women that was such a hallmark (and turnoff) of Game of Thrones.
Exactly.
I need to find more meta or write it.
The female characters in this series blew me away. It's the first time that I've seen female characters drawn in this manner in a fantasy series. It was like my dream fantasy series come true. There's really only one central male figure, with a lot of powerful female characters, who are diverse, and powerful in various ways.
And the male character cares for women, he's not a misogynist.
Wow.
I've never seen anyone do a medieval fantasy series in this way. Usually it's well Game of Thrones. Most fantasy series are either Game of Thrones or Lord of the Rings. It's got to the point that I'd given up on medieval fantasy series. After Game, I thought, eh, that's it. Not torturing myself with this crap any longer. And then I tried this -- and was blown away.
Go watch if you have netflix.
2. Ah, the New Mutants Movie actually has an sir date!
"> New Trailer for New Mutants Film It airs in April 2020 and has a horror undercurrent. Maisie Williams is almost perfect casting as Rahn.
Season 1 dropped with just 8 episodes -- and they are tightly plotted episodes, with great production, interesting metaphors, and some of the best drawn female characters that I've seen in a fantasy series. (I want more Netflix, please renew! If you can renew Stranger Things (which I think I've given up on) you can renew something I love.
I finished watching it on Sunday, and the more I think about it, the more it works and I love it to pieces. I may re-watch it -- which is something I rarely do. (I've only re-watched a handful of series in my lifetime. I'm not a re-watcher, too many shows, too little time. And I have insanely eclectic taste.)
It basically does everything that Game of Thrones did wrong, right. The Witcher washed the bitter taste that Game left in my mouth over the summer.
Here's a link to one of the meta's that I found online via Averil, I Love How the Witcher Proves How You Can Have A Sexist World Without Having a Sexist Story
Queen Calanthe – jfc, Queen Calanthe is how Daenerys Targaryen should have been handled. She’s a powerful woman, an unapologetically ambitious warrior woman, who falls and loses her throne and country – exactly the same way a King would have. Her flaws – her hubris, her selfishness, her unwillingness to let go of her granddaughter – lead to her downfall, but they do so rationally. She doesn’t go mad, or start making stupid irrational decisions, or have to be otherwise softened – she loses the battle. She was out-maneuvered, and her support was blocked, and she just failed. She just lost. Queens – any poweful woman, really – always go mad and have to be put down For The Greater Good, they never get to be a Tragic Hero in the classical sense – always Lady Macbeth, never Hamlet.
Exactly. We have a tragic story around a tragic Queen, whose story is told in reverse narrative order or not linerally.
That's another brilliant bit about this series -- it's not told in a linear or chronological manner. We are told it through flashbacks and out of sequence in places, and through various perspectives. And the focus is on the women here. The women are the central characters, with one male central character whose interactions with each of these women in some way or other change him and them, but not in a sexist manner.
I've never seen a fantasy series told in this way or done like this. Usually it's some guy's coming of age or hero's journey, but the Witcher kicks that to the curb early on. And I honestly thought Yennefer would be shown as a femme fatal or villain, but she's not and she could so easily have been shown in this manner.
There’s one single mention of rape, and that character does imply that this in part led to her not being a princess anymore – followed almost-immediately by the main character explicitly and pointedly calling her Princess, pointing out that it isn’t what was done to her that makes her monstrous, it’s what she herself does. Even so, it’s simply part of her backstory, she’s the one who brings it up, and there’s no gruesome flashback to “evoke sympathy” or whatever bullshit excuse to show women suffering.
It’s just. It’s so obvious that this showrunner is a woman. The comparisons to GoT are all over the place, and obviously – they’re both dark, gritty fantasies with a heavy political aspect – but the way this show treats its characters, and particularly its women, is just so refreshing. It’s not without its flaws, and while I’ll admit that there were a few moments where I was like, “did she really need to be naked here?” none of those moments were tasteless or predatory, and there was none of that gratuitous degradation of women that was such a hallmark (and turnoff) of Game of Thrones.
Exactly.
I need to find more meta or write it.
The female characters in this series blew me away. It's the first time that I've seen female characters drawn in this manner in a fantasy series. It was like my dream fantasy series come true. There's really only one central male figure, with a lot of powerful female characters, who are diverse, and powerful in various ways.
And the male character cares for women, he's not a misogynist.
Wow.
I've never seen anyone do a medieval fantasy series in this way. Usually it's well Game of Thrones. Most fantasy series are either Game of Thrones or Lord of the Rings. It's got to the point that I'd given up on medieval fantasy series. After Game, I thought, eh, that's it. Not torturing myself with this crap any longer. And then I tried this -- and was blown away.
Go watch if you have netflix.
2. Ah, the New Mutants Movie actually has an sir date!
"> New Trailer for New Mutants Film It airs in April 2020 and has a horror undercurrent. Maisie Williams is almost perfect casting as Rahn.
no subject
Date: 2020-01-08 03:31 am (UTC)Interesting. Averil - who read the books in Russian back in the 1980s, and re-read them again, loved the series and felt it was exactly what she wanted and updated the books in a good way. I think that you're correct -- it depends on what your mental image of what should happen is. I mean - if your mental image fits the television adaptor's, it'll work, if it doesn't not so much.
But this is also true generally speaking of how we view television shows, books, etc. I mean, if you expect something like Game of Thrones when you watch the Witcher or Lord of the Rings, you will be disappointed. But, on the other hand, if you are hoping for something entirely different (for whatever reason) then you'll most likely be pleased.
I remember watching the series finale of Buffy with a friend, and he had high expectations. He knew exactly what he wanted. We had analyzed and discussed in depth. When it did not happen -- he was crushed. There was no way he would enjoy those last five episodes -- because it didn't fit what was in his head. I was more ambivalent, and when I rewatched it years later, I found I enjoyed it more -- because I didn't have those expectations attached.
It's the downside of writing fanfic -- when you write and read too much fanfic about a story that is in progress and hasn't been completed yet, and you start to want what you are reading to be reflected in the actual original story arcs...you're not going to be happy with it. It's why a lot of original creators, particularly novelists with works in progress, hate fanfic. Because the fanfic writer is in a way corrupting their audience or making their audience want something or expect something that they can't provide.
I mean, I didn't have any problems with GoT veering from the books up to a point, and in fact it wasn't the fact they'd veered that bothered me so much as the fact that GoT went in a direction that...well let's just say did not work for me at all for various reasons discussed ad naseum elsewhere. I was by a certain point no longer open to the story that the story-tellers wanted to convey. I didn't like nor was rooting for the characters the story-tellers were championing and focusing on, and the characters I preferred and found interesting -- they didn't. (It is a problem in long-running serials...where my interests and investment may not stay in line with the show-runner's throughout or line up. Usually when that happens, I jump ship. But, sometimes, I'll miscalculate and believe it will line up, and I will get blind-sighted and/or horribly disappointed and want to strangle the bastards. (Which is often why I embrace spoilers -- I no longer trust the writers not to disappoint me. And want to jump ship before they screw up colossally. Or at the very least be emotionally prepared for it. )
Jackson's movies up to a point were good -- but I admittedly was less invested in the Lord of the Rings. The Hobbit on the other hand is my favorite and I found his adaptation of The Hobbit to be unwatchable. I hated it. The animated adaptation by Ralph Baski in the 1970s was far superior.
no subject
Date: 2020-01-08 03:48 am (UTC)But yeah, Jackson's Hobbit is unwatchable.