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"
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.
You can’t tell the difference between an adaptation and a sequel? The show was not a “different story”, it was a poorly-made adaptation that they didn’t want to make. They wanted Game of Thrones using an unrelated existing IP. If they really wanted a different story entirely, they should have avoided using the characters and events from the books.
They are both doing the exact same thing, expanding on existing lore. It’s extremely weird that you think there’s a difference here.
Why is one more acceptable than the other, when they are doing the exact same thing? You can of course make excuses like you did to defend it, but it’s still the same exact thing in the end. Arguing otherwise is just asinine.
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.
You can’t tell the difference between an adaptation and a sequel? The show was not a “different story”, it was a poorly-made adaptation that they didn’t want to make. They wanted Game of Thrones using an unrelated existing IP. If they really wanted a different story entirely, they should have avoided using the characters and events from the books.
They are both doing the exact same thing, expanding on existing lore. It’s extremely weird that you think there’s a difference here.
Why is one more acceptable than the other, when they are doing the exact same thing? You can of course make excuses like you did to defend it, but it’s still the same exact thing in the end. Arguing otherwise is just asinine.