Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 25, 2019 23:22:17 GMT -6
Heh. It's a weird time we're living in, for sure: Some of the world's biggest brands (Star Wars, GoT, Star Trek, Vikings, Pirates, etc) just imploded - not "lost popularity", or "fell out of the zeitgeist", but "fell out of favor". Now, some attribute this to a supposed internet rage culture; personally, I (and most people, really) attribute this to bad writing and tonedeaf conceptual decisions. - I hope the Netflix crew, who after all delivered such gems as "The Last Kingdom", "Altered Carbon", "Daredevil", or that other samurai zombie show whose name I seem to have forgotten - I hope they learn from the errors of their predecessors, and manage to improve on them. I'm certainly not fan enough of ANYTHING to sit through ten hours of bad television, any more. Whatever remained there of my youthful enthusiasm, it died somewhere between "Shannara" being designed as a teen romcom, and Jon Snow saying "she's muuh queen".  |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 26, 2019 10:27:28 GMT -6
Heh. It's a weird time we're living in, for sure: Some of the world's biggest brands (Star Wars, GoT, Star Trek, Vikings, Pirates, etc) just imploded - not "lost popularity", or "fell out of the zeitgeist", but "fell out of favor". Maybe it's the big budgets, but now these niche franchises are attracting people who otherwise wouldn't care. For example, the woman who is the show runner for the Netflix Witcher series has never written fantasy before and, according to her own words in an interview, was never interested in fantasy as a genre. But the prospect of a high profile show with a similar appeal to Game of Thrones lured her in. It's still up in the air whether or not she will respect the source material enough to please the fans, or, indeed, if she even cares about pleasing the fans, but the trailer has several red flags (at least ones that I, with my limited knowledge, can spot). |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 26, 2019 11:27:04 GMT -6
What would those red flags be, in your estimation? - Like, what I remember is that it's more female-centric than the novels (which is a good thing, because the novels turn into pretty bad cheese in a few instances)... And, of course, the "Squirrels" are black, which seems to be the usual token sacrifice to the zeitgeist. Otherwise, I think they might be able to nail the tone of the novels, though, with the first episode appaerntly being set in Blaviken, and the second one apparently dealing with the Iola plot. (If the sources are correct, that is.) I am a bit sad that we didn't see Jaskier, but the glimpse we got at Duny is certainly promising.
...That said, I am fully prepared for this to suck terribly, especially if the directors try to turn this into the epic fantasy that it only becomes later on in the book series: In the beginning, the series is "Philipp Marlowe in a fantasy setting", not "Geralt the Chosen One defeats all evil". The games generally had that flair, but with the TV series, I can see this going the wrong way.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 14, 2019 15:51:29 GMT -6
How do you say in English...? - "Get hype."
|
|
|
|
Post by derv on Dec 15, 2019 19:33:37 GMT -6
I received a notice of this new Netflix series and watched the preview. Looks interesting and I generally enjoy the genre. I'll probably watch it. Otherwise I have no familiarity with the book series, the author, the video games, or comics. As I understand it, it began as a series of short stories in the 90's by the Polish author Andrzej Sapkowski.
I've decided to pick up the first collection of these shorts, The Last Wish. My question is does the stories flow or do they suffer from translation to English? Will I wrestle with mental stumbles as I read or did the translators do a good job capturing the authors intent?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 20, 2019 5:33:21 GMT -6
Lunchbreak time in Germany, and OOOOOOOF COOOOOOUUUUURSE I'm watching the first episode. If that one's an indicator we are in for a real treat. Perhaps the best fantasy series to grace TV screens since the first season of GoT, back in '11. - "Perhaps". If the other episodes maintain the promise of quality that this one is making, that is.
Funny enough, the show's problem is that the showrunners struggle with the portrayal of GERALT, of all characters. Just this much - his first meaningful lines are directed towards his horse. This could be... A problem.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 21, 2019 5:10:29 GMT -6
So, I'm through with the first season of the series. Didn't "binge" it, but, well it wasn't that long a series, anyway. My humble verdict is - this is easily the very best fantasy series we've ever had, almost casually rising to excellence. Think, how "The Fellowship of the Ring" impacted the fantasy genre back in 2001. The writing on this one is excellent, and also something which we have not in fantasy-related television, which is "witty", and not just "funny". That doesn't say the show doesn't have notable weaknesses: It covers a LOT of story ("stories", really, in this case) over just eight episodes. Some design decisions are a bit puzzling ("I guess they wanted to try something different), and the "diverse" casting that in the beginning had created such nasty polemics about the show honestly mostly seems a bit random, and hence unnecessary. The casting of Anya Chalotra was the BEST choice of the show, but Anna Shaffer who plays Triss has about as much to do with the book character as Tom Cruise's Jack Reacher has to do with book Jack Reacher. I understand that the show is getting a number of bad reviews, and I have to confess that I don't understand them, at all: Either those reviewers are the usual agents of The House of Mouse - you know, the kind of guys who told us hat "Princess Mononoke" was nuts, that video games from Europe turned our kids into serial killers. Or, more likely, they are faulting "The Witcher" for being its own thing, and not just the Netflix version of "Game of Thrones". My prediction: This one will become a classic. Ten to fifteen years from now, this is the kind of stuff people will talk about, the same way we still occasionally talk about "Robin of Sherwood" or about the original "Dark Crystal". Not perfect, but an excellent adaptation of its literary source, and, just simply, pretty entertaining TV. ...So, what did you think?  Anyone else watch this yet? |
|
|
|
Post by Finarvyn on Dec 21, 2019 8:07:05 GMT -6
It's on my "to watch" list when I get a chance. I was kind of hoping to read one of the books first so that I had a clue what was going on. I heard that "The Last Wish" is the best place to start. I put it on my Christmas list and put a big star next to the title, so if my wife is on the ball I should be able to start reading it soon.
Also, pardon if I missed this somewhere obvious but … why is he called a Witcher? Does it have anything to do with witches?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 21, 2019 8:27:58 GMT -6
It's on my "to watch" list when I get a chance. I was kind of hoping to read one of the books first so that I had a clue what was going on. I heard that "The Last Wish" is the best place to start. I put it on my Christmas list and put a big star next to the title, so if my wife is on the ball I should be able to start reading it soon. Also, pardon if I missed this somewhere obvious but … why is he called a Witcher? Does it have anything to do with witches?  |
|
|
|
Post by retrorob on Dec 21, 2019 13:50:18 GMT -6
The word "wiedźmin" was invented by Sapkowski. The male equivalent of "wiedźma" (witch) in Polish is "wiedźmak" (male witch), but this word is archaic, obsolete and almost forgotten nowadays. Sapkowski used it once as well.
|
|
|
|
Post by derv on Dec 21, 2019 18:33:05 GMT -6
So, I'm through with the first season of the series. Didn't "binge" it, but, well it wasn't that long a series, anyway.
What's your definition of binge watching? I've only watched the first three episodes with each of them an hour long.  So far I like the series. I would like to know a little more about Geralt's background and how the Witcher's came to be. They just kind of dance around it- He's a witch (apparently different than being a mage), not really or completely human, and he hunts monsters. BTW, I actually like the title "Witcher". It's evocative and different. What else would I like from the series- I'd like to see more monsters and how they fit into the story- it's alluded to that they came with the human usurpation of the elves. Anyway, MO MONSTERS. A clearer picture of what they mean by "Chaos". Is this a Ying and Yang thing? What I don't like- The weird colored eyes that everyone seems to have. To me it's distracting. The use of modern concepts in a pseudo-medieval setting. Things like references to reverse psychology- odd. What I like- The Solomon Kane vibe of Geralt. The larger story arc (so far) that is being weaved within the shorter narratives. I'm kind of second guessing whether I'll buy The Last Wish now. Supposedly it contains much of the setting information within it's pages. So, I may reconsider. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 22, 2019 3:39:02 GMT -6
Hehe. I hurt my patella tendon on Friday, shortly after writing my post about the "lunch break sneak peek", and consequently spent most of this immortal weekend lying on my back, panting like an old dog with a broken foot. - So, I had a little bit too much time for both the Witcher game, and for the series, I guess. --- Ooooh, beware the dreadful hags of Crookbag Bog! |
|
|
|
Post by Finarvyn on Dec 27, 2019 17:21:31 GMT -6
Got "The Last Wish" for Christmas and am around halfway through it -- an excellent read so far and I anticipate stalking the bookstore to obtain more once I finish this one.
Also watched episode 1 on Netflix (then promptly fell asleep through all of episode 2 so will need to "rewatch" it for the first time, again.) Loved episode 1, but I thought it was a little confusing and I'm not sure I would have followed the plot if I hadn't read the story in "The Last Wish."
|
|
|
|
Post by talysman on Dec 27, 2019 19:39:55 GMT -6
Finished the Netflix series last night. Have never read the books or played the games, but I did watch some let's plays of the games. Even so, the first couple episodes were confusing until I realized all the Geralt scenes are in the past leading up to the present, while the war scenes are the present that eventually joins with Geralt's story. There's no clear indication of this, so that's a flaw in the show's storytelling technique, but unfortunately it's a common flaw in a lot of fantasy shows these days, especially on Netflix. There's also a couple tiny details that aren't clear unless you've had some kind of experience with the material, or which have an explanation that's delayed until much later for no good reason.
Still, I liked it. I wouldn't call it the greatest fantasy series ever, but I'm not sure what I'd give that honor to, anyways. I will be watching it again.
|
|
|
|
Post by Finarvyn on Dec 27, 2019 20:09:51 GMT -6
the first couple episodes were confusing until I realized all the Geralt scenes are in the past leading up to the present, while the war scenes are the present that eventually joins with Geralt's story.  Yes, that would have been nice to know. I remember some confusing war scenes shortly before dozing off. In my rewatch I'll be less confused, and thank you for the info. Roughly what episode will join the two storylines? |
|
|
|
Post by talysman on Dec 27, 2019 20:27:46 GMT -6
the first couple episodes were confusing until I realized all the Geralt scenes are in the past leading up to the present, while the war scenes are the present that eventually joins with Geralt's story. Yes, that would have been nice to know. I remember some confusing war scenes shortly before dozing off. In my rewatch I'll be less confused, and thank you for the info. Roughly what episode will join the two storylines? Either end of episode 7 or beginning of episode 8. I didn't notice the nonlinear structure until either the 2nd or 3rd episode, when I noticed a character I thought was dead wasn't. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 28, 2019 7:47:06 GMT -6
Finished the Netflix series last night. Have never read the books or played the games, but I did watch some let's plays of the games. Even so, the first couple episodes were confusing until I realized all the Geralt scenes are in the past leading up to the present, while the war scenes are the present that eventually joins with Geralt's story. There's no clear indication of this, so that's a flaw in the show's storytelling technique, but unfortunately it's a common flaw in a lot of fantasy shows these days, especially on Netflix. There's also a couple tiny details that aren't clear unless you've had some kind of experience with the material, or which have an explanation that's delayed until much later for no good reason. I see what you mean - I had barely noticed that because I knew the books, of course. But, yeah, they could definitely have communicated that better. At least, this won't be an issue in future seasons - hopefully. Still, I liked it. I wouldn't call it the greatest fantasy series ever, but I'm not sure what I'd give that honor to, anyways. I will be watching it again. That's actually an interesting question. What is the best high fantasy TV series, ever? - Like, pretty much until the last fifteen years, fantasy TV productions were usually pretty terrible. "Xena" and Ralf Moeller's "Conan" might be up there for all-time-best contendership only because there was no serious competition in the genre until the start of the new milenium. If we exclude "magical realism" shows like "Highlander", alternate history shows like "An Englishman's Castle", and all the horror and superhero stuff, that is. Like, of course "Game of Thrones" has to be up there, but it kind of has developed a "Star Wars" problem - it's some of the best, ever, but also some of the very worst. Other shows might not have the same production values, let alone the following - but they do have a better and more coherent story. - But what do you and (the others) think? - Witcher, Carnival Row, perhaps the Beastmaster serial movies, perhaps Robin of Sherwood. But outside of those, not much out there that would be "premium title good". |
|
|
|
Post by derv on Dec 28, 2019 8:57:16 GMT -6
Finished the Netflix series last night. Have never read the books or played the games, but I did watch some let's plays of the games. Even so, the first couple episodes were confusing until I realized all the Geralt scenes are in the past leading up to the present, while the war scenes are the present that eventually joins with Geralt's story. There's no clear indication of this, so that's a flaw in the show's storytelling technique, but unfortunately it's a common flaw in a lot of fantasy shows these days, especially on Netflix. There's also a couple tiny details that aren't clear unless you've had some kind of experience with the material, or which have an explanation that's delayed until much later for no good reason. Yes, there's some confusion upfront in the first two episodes, but I think I recognized the merging/overlapping timelines by episode 3. It's not uncommon in film to start at the end and retell a story. It's lest common with television series, so was a little unexpected. Maybe the producers are anticipating some familiarity with the story. Still, I liked it. I wouldn't call it the greatest fantasy series ever, but I'm not sure what I'd give that honor to, anyways. I will be watching it again. That's actually an interesting question. What is the best high fantasy TV series, ever? - Like, pretty much until the last fifteen years, fantasy TV productions were usually pretty terrible. "Xena" and Ralf Moeller's "Conan" might be up there for all-time-best contendership only because there was no serious competition in the genre until the start of the new milenium. If we exclude "magical realism" shows like "Highlander", alternate history shows like "An Englishman's Castle", and all the horror and superhero stuff, that is. Like, of course "Game of Thrones" has to be up there, but it kind of has developed a "Star Wars" problem - it's some of the best, ever, but also some of the very worst. Other shows might not have the same production values, let alone the following - but they do have a better and more coherent story. - But what do you and (the others) think? - Witcher, Carnival Row, perhaps the Beastmaster serial movies, perhaps Robin of Sherwood. But outside of those, not much out there that would be "premium title good". My family thoroughly enjoyed Merlin. It was entertaining and a nice retelling of the Arthurian story. I would also add that it can actually be considered a family friendly show. I never know what I'm going to get with the rating system on Netflix and am a bit gun-shy when viewing with my kids. Merlin would definitely by on my list of great series. Witcher does not meet my criteria in that regard. |
|
|
|
Post by talysman on Dec 28, 2019 14:25:16 GMT -6
Finished the Netflix series last night. Have never read the books or played the games, but I did watch some let's plays of the games. Even so, the first couple episodes were confusing until I realized all the Geralt scenes are in the past leading up to the present, while the war scenes are the present that eventually joins with Geralt's story. There's no clear indication of this, so that's a flaw in the show's storytelling technique, but unfortunately it's a common flaw in a lot of fantasy shows these days, especially on Netflix. There's also a couple tiny details that aren't clear unless you've had some kind of experience with the material, or which have an explanation that's delayed until much later for no good reason. Yes, there's some confusion upfront in the first two episodes, but I think I recognized the merging/overlapping timelines by episode 3. It's not uncommon in film to start at the end and retell a story. It's lest common with television series, so was a little unexpected. Maybe the producers are anticipating some familiarity with the story. It wasn't so much the nonlinear approach that bothers me, but I think The Witcher didn't signal it right. The old-fashioned approach is to have a caption or VO saying something like "10 years earlier". A less crusty approach is to signal it in dialogue in some way. But at the very least, there's a common "language of film" that says jump cuts mean happening simultaneously or nearly so, soft cuts might mean a minute's difference, and dissolves and fades represent longer jumps in time. I will have to rewatch, but I don't remember there being anything special about the transitions to indicate we were watching a story unfold nonlinearly. That's actually an interesting question. What is the best high fantasy TV series, ever? - Like, pretty much until the last fifteen years, fantasy TV productions were usually pretty terrible. "Xena" and Ralf Moeller's "Conan" might be up there for all-time-best contendership only because there was no serious competition in the genre until the start of the new milenium. If we exclude "magical realism" shows like "Highlander", alternate history shows like "An Englishman's Castle", and all the horror and superhero stuff, that is.
Like, of course "Game of Thrones" has to be up there, but it kind of has developed a "Star Wars" problem - it's some of the best, ever, but also some of the very worst. Other shows might not have the same production values, let alone the following - but they do have a better and more coherent story. - But what do you and (the others) think?
- Witcher, Carnival Row, perhaps the Beastmaster serial movies, perhaps Robin of Sherwood. But outside of those, not much out there that would be "premium title good".
My family thoroughly enjoyed Merlin. It was entertaining and a nice retelling of the Arthurian story. I would also add that it can actually be considered a family friendly show. I never know what I'm going to get with the rating system on Netflix and am a bit gun-shy when viewing with my kids. Merlin would definitely by on my list of great series. Witcher does not meet my criteria in that regard. Merlin was one that occurred to me as a possibility, but I couldn't commit to it. The few seasons I saw of Once Upon a Time were pretty good as well. I'd probably rank Game of Thrones above The Witcher. A lot depends on how narrowly you define "fantasy". If you're going with pure medieval-themed heroic fantasy, that eliminates at least 95% of all fantasy shows. I could agree not to count anthology vs. continuing storyline. Otherwise, Twilight Zone wins hands down. Maybe even drop stuff set in space. Not so sure about anything with sci-fi elements, or everything that is history + fantasy/sci-fi, or horror, because you get a lot of crossover in just about any fantasy series... including The Witcher, which has a touch of sci-fi and horror in it. I think a more meaningful distinction is: are the fantastic elements a focus of the storyline, or are they incidental, or just a gimmick? For example, we can exclude Quantum Leap because it's really just historical anthology with a time travel gimmick to set it up and unify the story. Beyond that, I might distinguish different series by mood or feel, but I don't feel that's worthwhile for defining hard genre boundaries. |
|
|
|
Post by derv on Dec 28, 2019 16:31:40 GMT -6
It wasn't so much the nonlinear approach that bothers me, but I think The Witcher didn't signal it right. The old-fashioned approach is to have a caption or VO saying something like "10 years earlier". A less crusty approach is to signal it in dialogue in some way. But at the very least, there's a common "language of film" that says jump cuts mean happening simultaneously or nearly so, soft cuts might mean a minute's difference, and dissolves and fades represent longer jumps in time. I will have to rewatch, but I don't remember there being anything special about the transitions to indicate we were watching a story unfold nonlinearly. Yeah, off hand I can't think of any real ques that were offered. I do remember Yennefer making a comment in one of the scenes to the effect that decades had past for her character. Anyway, it all becomes quite obvious once we are taken back to Queen Calanthe's court with the marriage of her daughter. I'm not sure what episode that was though. Pretty far along. I think the fantastical should at least be a primary element of the setting that the story is found in. I also think that a criteria might be the widest audience appeal. I mean this is what makes movies, like the Wizard of Oz, classics that people are willing to watch again and again. So, another vote of mine for television series would be Land of the Lost. Maybe a bit campy for some, but I use to love watching this Krofft Bros. creation on Saturday mornings. Not to mention that every body knows about Sleestaks. That has to count for something. |
|
|
|
Post by makofan on Dec 30, 2019 11:19:40 GMT -6
Watched the first three episodes last night. It's the best fantasy series I have seen, even with the gratuitous-nude GoT-type scenes and some slow or confusing parts. The main character reminds me of Elric
|
|
|
|
Post by Finarvyn on Dec 30, 2019 13:57:42 GMT -6
The main character reminds me of Elric Agreed. I wasn't sure anyone could pull off playing Elric before I saw the Witcher, now I have hope. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 31, 2019 2:58:11 GMT -6
Isn't Elric, especially "late-saga" Elric, way more frail and vampiric than crafty Cavill's Geralt? - An Elric show is also in pre-production, apparently: I sure hope the character will be portrayed in a way that doesn't retro-engineer him into a surrogate Elric - or even into a male Daenerys. As to fantasy shows - as you say, @talisman, "if you're going with pure medieval-themed heroic fantasy, that eliminates at least 95% of all fantasy shows". - This is precisely why I'm asking: I'm hoping for some worhty recommendations! "Merlin", I watched, back in the jolly days of '05 (or when it was that the series premiered), but being a lifelong fan and collector of Prince Valiant comic books, I kind of never quite connected to it. - Like, my Arthur and my Camelot just look a different way. I can perfectly see the appeal of this show to people - it was indeed a bit in the "for the whole family" area, but that is hardly a flaw. Returning to the Witcher, I think what I like most about it is that, in difference to Game of Thrones, it's mostly self-referential in its humor. With GoT, many jokes and lighter moments boiled down to something like "lol, he said 'cock'", which wasn't as funny as an in-universe joke as it was a break through the fourth wall. With the Witcher, it's all about attention to in-story detail, even on a low-fi level: Like Geralt being annoyed by the content of Jaskier's songs. Their relationship in the books is quite different as well - not "the captain of the football team being frenemies with the gay musical star" -, but the point is, it's based on how these characters might react to a situation, not based on what joke a modern commenter might make. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 31, 2019 3:09:37 GMT -6
(I realize the clip is pretty terrible; I just couldn't find any other.)
|
|
|
|
Post by bestialwarlust on Dec 31, 2019 17:25:00 GMT -6
Overall I liked the fist season. I've played the games and read one of the books. I agree that the time jumping could be confusing if you aren't paying close attention and aren't familiar with some of the stories. So a "10 years Earlier" would've helped. They took some liberties with the stories of Yennifer, Triss and Cidri but I can overlook some of that as it was a fun show. Henry Cavil did a good job as Geralt and I liked the interaction between him and Jaskier. Hopefully they can keep it as good into the second season.
|
|
|
|
Post by increment on Dec 31, 2019 19:05:24 GMT -6
I enjoyed the show. I played some of the games, but haven't read the books, and I found it pretty easy to follow (once the time-jumping became clear). My expectations for it were pretty modest, based on the advance reviews here in America, but I think they did quite well overall.
Not sure I'm on board with the casting of Yen, though. Didn't work for me.
|
|
|
|
Post by Finarvyn on Jan 1, 2020 15:52:38 GMT -6
Finished reading "The Last Wish" and enjoyed it quite a bit. I've been trying to decide what it reminds me of the most and I'm thinking maybe Leiber's Fafhrd & Grey Mouser, in style but not in characterization. Still pondering this.
I ordered the second book of short stories through Amazon. "Not shipped yet" they say, even though it's been 4 days. Argh.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 6, 2020 23:21:19 GMT -6
www.washingtonpost.com/video-games/2020/01/06/the-witcher-is-biggest-tv-show-world-heres-how-get-more-geralt-rivia/WaPo sums up the series nicely, and gives a few good ideas on how to continue with the universe past the show. - The important takeaway from this is something else, though: "The Witcher" TV series has been an overwhelming and worldwide success, and, together with the games, established itself as the de facto successor to "Game of Thrones" as the world-wide fantasy flagship title. Apart from my own feelings about the show, this is noteworthy, because "The Witcher" is a profoundly oldschool, almost overly traditionalist fantasy tale. The world has turned its attention to a tale from a time when 1e AD&D was the thing everybody talked about, and "Prince of Chaos" and "Scions of Shannara" were the books people were waiting for with breathless anticipation. As fantasy is entering everyday mainstream, and even moving away from being the subject of prestige productions only, I think this is going of some significance: Three "epic fantasy" series are in production, right now. "House of the Dragon", the GoT prequel, is the big unknown. But both Amazon's "Wheel of Time", as well as their LotR show are essentially shaping up to be very teen-oriented shows. The Witcher, at least so far, isn't, and if it establishes itself as an equally successful long-term brand, then I hope we're going to see more stuff like it - fantasy movies "d'auteur", so to speak, gearing towards an audience that, well, is more like us, and less like the generation born in 2007. - 2007. I roll my tongue as type this.  |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 4, 2020 17:29:32 GMT -6
|
|
|
|
Post by talysman on Mar 5, 2020 0:28:14 GMT -6
Saw that earlier, thought it was pretty funny. I'd been watching a lot of the Honest Trailers recently, so YouTube immediately suggested it.
|
|
Anyone else watch this yet?
Yes, that would have been nice to know. I remember some confusing war scenes shortly before dozing off. In my rewatch I'll be less confused, and thank you for the info.
