Witcher -- Book 1
having enjoyed The Witcher on Netflix, I bought the first of the books. I finally after watching S2 got round to reading them. The same story but also quite different. It is interesting to see what the scriptwriters kept in and left out. One thing to go are the humorous (well, at least to me) asides that bring in a new take on some fairy tale. One that struck in my mind—and may have very well inspired the movie versions, to some extent—is the take on Snow White. And there are others.
What to make of the differences?
Well, the mediums are different. There is both less and more that can be conveyed on the two. Certainly, on screen, the above anecdote would require a bit of screen time and a raison d’etre for including in the relevant episode that actually related to the plot at this point in time. On the other hand, things such as monsters or people that have to be described are simply shown on screen and this is both quicker but, equally, leaves less to the imagination. Yes, the monsters are described in some detail but one still needs to imagine them. And this will be largely based on how one might conceive a dragon, or a beast of chaos, or whatever.
Is the one better than the other?
Well, not in my book (no pun intended). They do things differently and for good reason. Do I mind that the interactions of the characters are somewhat different in the books versus series? No, not really, I can enjoy them both.
Would I have preferred the books if I’d read them first?
This is a difficult one to answer. I thoroughly enjoyed both S1 and S2, in some ways S2 more than S1 given it was a lot more coherent without having read the books. I’ll fess-up that I had to read an explanation of S1 by a cognoscenti to understand how it all fitted together. But as a fantasy fan, the aesthetic of the series and the way certain things were portrayed (example: fighting and magic) really grabbed me. That said, I might have been less effusive of the series if I’d read the books first. The books shed light on the series and add depth and alter one’s perspective in a good way.
Should one always go movie/series first or the other way?
It depends on what you come to them with. I really enjoyed the Dune books and while it was a flawed effort, the David Lynch adaptation and as I’ve written on this blog, the recent Villeneuve version. Are they superior to the books? No. But as with The Witcher they bring something else to the story. I guess, I’m with Peter Jackson who labelled his version of LOTR as his interpretation. And Villeneuve, a Herbert fan, says the same about his version of Dune.
The same, but different.