It’s becoming a bit of a trend now, isn’t it? Every few months, I discuss how the art of criticism is dying as films and series polarise the audience and critics. As expected, Netflix’s The Witcher continues this trend, as it sits on 56% critical approval on Rotten Tomatoes but a 93% score among the audience.
Proving that the audience isn’t disagreeing just for the sake of it, The Witcher 3‘s popularity on Steam has spiked since the release of the series. Make no mistake about it: Geralt of Rivia is a hit and Netflix’s The Witcher has only been out for a week.
The audience has grown tired of the bad reviews too, taking on the reviewers and publications. Entertainment Weekly came under a wave of condemnation after one of its writers admitted to skipping most of the show before rating it. Unfortunately, it’s unprofessional actions such as these that create a further divide between the audience and critics.
Of course, critics should look at series and films from a different perspective and not necessarily the “did I enjoy it or not?” angle. There are many factors they take into consideration when providing reviews and their thoughts on something, and it’s not always because they’ve got it out for a show or movie.
The problem is, with many publications being digital nowadays, it’s all about the clicks for the majority of them. And let’s be frank here: There’s no space for moderate and tepid views online. To get those eyes on a page, the review needs to say it’s amazing or a dumpster fire. It becomes a game of sensationalism where the writing is exaggerated to maximise views and stir up the fanbase.
But the audience is finally wising up to it. While there are still people who religiously check Rotten Tomatoes for a score to decide if they should watch something or not, most people don’t care anymore. If anything, they follow select publications they trust for recommendations.
The landscape changed. In the pre-internet era, only diehard fans cared about reviews, with the odd person checking the newspaper or magazine for a recommendation. Then, the internet gave rise to a host of new publications and online figures. Their word became gospel and fans hung onto every rating and score. Now, there’s another shift; a more discerning approach. Looking at how productions, such as The Witcher and Joker, have divided, criticism might be hanging onto its final ledge.
After a very successful first season, Netflix has announced a new six-part, live-action spinoff series, The Witcher: Blood Origin.
Loading ...
The reviews are the opinion of that person who watched. I believe in the I’ll make my own mind up about something instead of blindly following a review.
Does the audience ever believe what critics say? I usually go by what friends and family say, but ultimately I judge for myself. I am surprised that fans of the game are actually raving about The Witcher. I caught most of the series on Christmas. It kind of reminds me of the good old fantasy series we watched, just better. And, this is just me, way more fun than GoT.
This series is clearly a spin off of GOT, albeit an unimaginative attempt with laughably pathetic “monsters”.
@Collywob you are ‘laughably’ incorrect the Witcher is based on a polish novel series there are 8 books dating back to 1992 and 3 video game spinoffs all based on a centralized character and main protagonist Geralt of Rivia, a monster hunter. its already a well established franchise. Maybe some of the visual direction are influenced by Game of Thrones but in no way do they share anything else in common a simple Google search first before you make such ridiculous statements.
@Blair, Collywob may have a point. There are some alarming similarities. For example, both series contain people AND horses. There are no automobiles in either. Some of these people use swords, which are a fantasy weapon first imagined by L. Ron Hubbard in 1982 and which have no historical or factual basis. Another concern, The Witcher also has castles (which were not the brainchild of L. Ron Hubbard). If The Witcher wanted to be original, instead of a GoT clone, why wouldn’t the people of that fantasy world live in converted shipping containers decorated by IKEA or perhaps inside dancing mushrooms made entirely of decades old fruitcakes? It’s also clear that The Witcher simply copied GoT’s complex social hierarchy. Peasants and nobles? Whoever heard of such a thing? Why not shake things up with an egalitarian barbaric modality where the perfection of the hipster mustache would act as currency?
I hope not to upset you too much Blair, by pointing out these, pardon the pun, blaring similarities!