I have commented out Malignant Plot Tumor on the main page, and would like to open a discussion about it. Here is what I wrote as my Editing Reason:
"Commented out Malignant Plot Tumor, since I'd argue it's not the trope. The plot with Voleth Meir serves to connect all storylines and major characters in Season 2, and it specifically introduces the Wild Hunt as a threat, while elaborating on Ciri's portal opening powers. In addition, it does all of this while maintaining the "folklore origin" elements of the show. The character being created for the show alone doesn't make it the trope."
Agree? Disagree? People using tropes to voice their displeasure with how the showrunners choose to adapt the book series (and I guess the games in elements) is a thing with The Witcher (2019) in general, but with Voleth Meir/The Deathless Mother it sticks out especially IMO, because the main reason this element is criticized really seems to be that the character and the resulting plot has been created for the show. I believe the reason this originally was added as a Malignant Plot Tumor was a misunderstanding of the trope - I would however argue that it doesn't fit the actual meaning of the trope, either, since the character is really embedded in the structure of Season 2. It's not just a minor plot that ate the rest - it mainly serves to carry the characters from Point A to Point B, and set them up for the next season.
Edited by hollygoolightly Hide / Show Replies
It's a really confusing trope but I think you're right that it doesn't apply here and was just an excuse for someone to complain. It looks like the Troper that moved it from YMMV to the main page also agreed judging by their edit reason.
Edited by NB2000
Dying in the college trenches
With the release of Nightmare of the Wolf, should we a) make a separate page for both the film and its character page, b) it would be ok to make a separate animation page for NOTW, but include its characters in the main series character page, or c) put in everything within the main The Witcher (2019) (trope page and character pages), and maybe making a Recap entry for NOTW instead?
Edited by Sagetsu Visible yet incomprehensible. Conversant yet isolated. Alone, but connected. Marginal, but invincible.
Tief girl with eartude
On Adaptational Ugliness, I've removed the following entries:
- Yennefer's beauty is significantly reduced in this version.
- Fringilla Vigo was once described as being similar looking to Yennefer, to the confusion of Geralt. It doesn't mean that Mimi Ndiweni is an ugly actress, but she’s definitely not to be called more beautiful than the original Fringilla.
- Cahir was a classic folk tale young knight with a fitting handsome face. Cahir in the show, however, has a very odd-looking angular face. Combined with Adaptational Villainy, it's a far cry from a typical young knight.
- Triss Merigold overall has a very ordinary face for an incredibly charming brown-haired sorceress as described in books.
- Well, the beauty is, of course, subjective, but the actor that portrayed Vilgefortz simply does not fit the description of the character in the books, who was a young (by sorcerers' measures), tall, well-built and very handsome sorcerer.
They all seem less about the trope, and more a backhanded way of complaining that the author doesn't find the actors attractive. Compared to the original entry, about a king going from a classically attractive character in the book to the character we see in the show (who's clearly not meant to be read as attractive).
TV Tropes's No. 1 bread themed lesbian. she/her, fae/faer Hide / Show Replies
You beat me to it. I was going to bring up the same point.
All of the descriptions in these entries are subjective in the extreme, and even by that standard grasping at straws.
Dying in the college trenches
Question: are we creating a specific character page for this series? There seems to be significant difference of focus from the novels and the games that just lumping them together in the original franchise character page might not be helpful for newcomers.
Visible yet incomprehensible. Conversant yet isolated. Alone, but connected. Marginal, but invincible. Hide / Show Replies
We already have an extensive character page, with dozens of sub-pages prepared. Personally, I think the best way to handle it is to put a buffer bar for each character, labelled "Netflix version" or something similar and keep the DIFFERENCES (and only differences) there.
So for example when we now have a folder for Dandelion, in The Witcher Main Characters, keep it as it is, but at the end of the folder make a buffer like this [[WMG:2019 series]] and keep there things that only exist within that specific series.
Again, this is how I would handle it. Launching a separate character page, where 3/4 of content is going to repeat anyway feels pointless, but I'm no mod and this is not my shot to call.
Edited by Dratewka
I am of the opinion that the situation should be treated the same as the A Song of Ice and Fire page and the Game of Thrones page, which is the closest analogy.
The show is an adaptation, and it doesn't share a continuity with the books or video games.
Better to split them up now rather than a few seasons down the line when the show and the source material have diverged even further. It will save a lot of work when the disentangling of both becomes inevitable.
Edited by AzureOwl
Doesn't share a continuity? I mean... are you kidding yourself or us right now?
I am being perfectly serious.
The show is an adaptation of the source material, not a continuation or spin-off. Therefore, it does not share the same continuity. The show may follow the general outlines from the stories, but it’s not bound to follow all the specifics.
Just from looking at the main page for the show, I can see that it features Adaptation Expansion, Adaptational Heroism, Adaptational Villainy and Race Lift.
And we can look forward to more divergences, according to this article
:
- "We realized that some of the storylines can be presented in many different ways, just like certain situations and characters," Baginski told Cinemablend in a recent interview, regarding how The Witcher series will compare to the books. "In the show, you need to give the characters backstories that will interest the viewers. The show can’t be exactly like the books. It’s an adaptation. It’s a version of this world and this story from Lauren [Hissrich, showrunner] and the writers."So while the writers will still use the books for guidance, they'll also be taking a fair amount of creative liberties with the storylines and character details. Typically, change can be a difficult thing for book readers to want to contend with, fearing that alterations could ruin the integrity of the original. However, it's worth noting that the author himself is aware of these changes and feels confident that it will still do the characters and story justice. "Sapkowski knows that some things are different than he wrote," Baginski explained in a separate interview with the Polish site Antyweb (translation via Redanian Intelligence). "But he trusts that it’s being worked on by professionals and that what will come of it will be very good."
This all amount to the show having it own continuity, separate from the books and games. Just like Game of Thrones had its own continuity separate from A Song of Ice and Fire, and the The Lord of the Rings film series has a separate continuity from Tolkien’s books (You’ll note that in both those cases, source material and adaptation have separate character pages.)
Edited by AzureOwl
If it helps, I'll begin making the placeholders for the characters for now. I'd appreciate help especially from those familiar with the original materials and what can be adapted from the original franchise character sheet.
Visible yet incomprehensible. Conversant yet isolated. Alone, but connected. Marginal, but invincible.
To even compare game of thrones with the Witcher shows your lack of knowledge of the source material. There's absolutely no relation with game of thrones because the Witcher books and stories were written (and finished) in the 90s. The only reason the book series and show were different in game of thrones is because the books haven't been finished so they had to make it up as they went along. Despite a few minor differences in characterization and a more fleshed out backstory because the books focus only on Geralt while the show shows Yennefer's story as well, there's nothing that contradicts or is different between book and series. So your game of thrones analogy doesn't work. Dratewka is right. So far there's not a single trope that's been averted or difference in characterization. Keep them separate if you want, but don't use game of thrones as an excuse because it's a completely different situation. LOTR is a closer analogy if you want but not GOT.
They should be completely banned, unless to compare things that had already appeared in the show to how they are portrayed in the books/videogames.
As a show-only watcher, I've already had a major plot point spoiled for me, that wasn't revealed or even hinted at during the first season of the show. And I am pissed about it.
And no, putting them in spoiler tags is not enough, because it would mean that tropers who have not read the books or played the games will not be able to edit the pages without risking running into spoilers.
Putting book spoilers in the show's pages would be akin to mentioning the Red Wedding in the Game of Thrones during the first season the show was on.
Another thing to consider, is that adding book details to the pages, even in spoiler tags, could run into Speculative Troping because the show runners are not obligated to stick to the books or the games. They can decide to change a character's backstory or personality. At this point, assuming characters and events will play out exactly as they did in the books is pure speculation.
Edited by AzureOwl
I just deleted some entries that spoiled an important plot point which hasn't been brought up in the show yet (regarding a certain character's identity, which I assume is what Azure Owl was talking about).
Not allowing information on future developments from the books sounds like a reasonable proposal, but we probably need a disclaimer on the main page. Otherwise, people will just keep adding the same spoilers over and over again.
Si tacuisses, philosophus mansisses.
Should me move the character-specific tropes to the characters pages? Some are on there already. Or just leave them on the main page too?
Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away.-Philip K. Dick Hide / Show Replies
Character-specific tropes can usually also be added to the main page. Other way around only works if they are character tropes.
People (Possibly) Not Understanding Tropes, Part II: I have just removed Anti-Nihilist from Geralt's character entry - tell me if I'm wrong about this one? From the description Geralt doesn't seem to be there yet by far, IMO, but, the trope seems to encompass a lot of character types.
Mostly I'm mentioning this, though, because the troper who added it described Geralt as The Pollyanna, which really makes me wonder if we've been watching the same series.
Edited by hollygoolightly