Between the lesser of two evils; I'd rather not choose at all.
Adaptations have been on their evil dark path of ignominy of late. To the tune of, every single adaptation has let people down in some regard except for... I dunno... Sandman? I've heard good things about Sandman. (Still yet to watch it myself.) But aside from that? The Halo show, Resident Evil show, Lord of the Rings: The Rings of Power, Wheel of Time; it's as though people who either don't love, or in some cases actively despise, the source material are intentionally doing their best to set these fictional worlds on fire. Like that WB executive who hated Zack Synder so much he tried his utmost to kill his movie franchise off, only to give Zack the victimhood complex which his fanbase weaponised into kicking off a light-cult fandom movement that, in turn, managed to bully WB into rereleasing a movie that, ultimately, didn't even earn them much in the way of prestige or viewership when it finally dropped. Where was I? Oh that's right; adaptions are a mistake, stop them.
One adaptation that had a lot of buzz around it, both positive and negative, was that of The Witcher starring Henry Cavill. Based on the novels of the Witcher more than the games who popularized those models to the wider world, The Witcher was set to adapt the various stories about the titular monster hunter, Geralt of Rivia, as he tries to stick by his moralist philosophy in a corrupt and sodden world that seems to slowly ruin all those who survive in it. And beside the fact that The Witcher was popularised to a global audience by the video games, conventional wisdom would lead outsiders of the franchise to the books for their material because for one; there's more of them, and for two; the general public still aren't ready to accept video games as a legitimate form of intelligent art. Which, incidentally, is my explanation for why every adaptation turns out to be a dog's dinner.
Still, regardless of some unfavourable comparisons to the visual designs of the games, (physical prop armour is tougher to build and make look cool than digital game assets.) the show turned out to be quite enjoyable to watch throughout it's first season, due in large part to the starring role of Henry Cavill, a man known both for being a gamer and a lover of 'The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt'. His passion seemed to mirror the excitement of a fan wanting to see their favourite game franchise spread to a wider audience of viewers, and that positivity made it possible to look past the perhaps average costume design... and general graphical design. (I hate this show's version of the Wolf School pendant. It looks like a minimalist redesign gone horribly wrong.) I can even forgive the show for having it's single best fight scene in the first episode.
Season two was a bit more divisive I hear, with actual changes made to the source material causing head scratches for fans who were left, once again, wondering what the point is of adapting something and then veering off on your own path. (I don't know if the team have gone quite as off-the-rails as 'Rings of Power' has, but the threat is there.) Still we hold on for Henry, because Henry seems to believe in the property and thus became something of the fan's beacon to support this show even through it's potential woes. Like holding one of our own on our shoulders, hoping he'll succeed for the good of all our fandom. He's always been good at getting fans to like him, that Henry. Superman fans were begging for him to come back for so long that Dwyane Johnson slapped together a clunker of an outdated superhero movie just to bring him back into the DC movie franchise! Whatever would we do without Henry?
A pertinent rhetorical, given the times. For Henry Cavill, the lightning rod of a series that otherwise been called "Decent to mediocre" has hung up his swords and quit in favour of... one of the Hemsworths? (Which one? Urgh, not Liam!) It's a shocking and bizarre situation considering just how central to the marketing of this franchise Henry was, with his love of the game and respect for the books impassioning him to try and flesh out his character as much as humanely possible. Every time stories came out about how Henry was taking his role, we'd hear about his dedication to the source material and understanding of it. He wanted to try and bring out Geralt's inner voice into the breadth of the show, allow the philosophical aspects of Geralt to nestle into the audience's head so when he turns around and comes out with a speech about the line of good and evil, it comes out of the mouth of a man who you believe ponders these sorts of queries between his bouts of brutality. That's just an actor who cares.
Which if report are true, put him at odds with many of the writers and showrunners behind The Witcher. Henry had to fight to make the show how he wanted to make it and apparently didn't possess the power to make the necessary changes despite his star power and fan adoration. He made the very important choice to put his foot down over only continuing series 3 if the team agreed to stay more to the script of the novels, and now we find out he's leaving for 4. And I am pretty much on Henry's side here, not just because of how likable he appear to be. Rings of Power has shown us just how 'spectacle oriented' show writers become when untethered from the tight confines of their source material; disregarding the 'bigger picture' and 'important themes' in favour of empty flashes of dull excitement and 'member berries. (Remember the Balrog tease? What was the point of that?) When I hear reports of one former Witcher writer disparaging their former colleagues for laughing at the source material, I can't help but not only believe it, but assume that's how it is across the board with all of these adaptations. I'm not adverse to change in adaptation; I just think it needs to be respectable and worthy change.
Henry, for his part, is at least making sure he's hitting his dreams. The man has finally been welcomed back into the DC superhero franchise he helped kick off all those years ago, and if we're really being blissfully unawares; we could accredit this shift in leadership to Henry merely wanting to dedicate his full attention back to the Supes movies. (Of which he can't be doing for than a handful of months of work towards a year. Yeah... he could have fit in a TV show at the same... if he wanted to.) Liam has been respectful, and sensible, enough not to say anything here, but I think the consensus is the same; the man has the looks but lacks that level of performance required to take over a pivotal role which was the spine of a close-to-flagging TV series. Will he just try and copy Henry's voice, which itself was a working evolution upon Doug Cockle's Geralt voice; highlighting different aspects of the stunted emotions of a Witcher? Does Liam even recognise the significance of the work? I don't know... which leaves this show's fate in limbo.
Adaptations... shouldn't be this minefield that they appear to be. I hear time and time again that it's ego which sinks these projects, from people who want to make their mucky mark on established work and can't get the go ahead to make official additions onto the work. (Just look at Rings of Power; they lied about sticking to the confines of canon so they could tell their bad fan fiction.) And dropping Henry from the role, whether he chose to leave or was ousted, was a terrible move for a project riding his passion. Any competent showrunner would have run to Henry with compromises or stern words the second this possibility passed their periphery, and if that encounter did occur and still resulted in a walk away; then they've failed in this basic duty of keeping production together. Liam needs to be nothing short of a miracle worker to pull this switch-up off; and I'm not the optimistic 'route for the underdog' sort of guy myself...
No comments:
Post a Comment