Can we talk about Netflix's The Witcher (Season 2)?

Spoilers incoming, you've been warned.

To be honest I'm not exactly sure what to think about the Season 2.

I enjoyed the opening episode a lot. Good old adventure, Geralt and Ciri encounter a mystery which gets resolved in a satisfying bittersweet ending so typical of Witcher's dark-fantasy setting. Let me not here that this particular story was closely adapted from the books (with some justifiable modifications).

The further into the season we go - the more writers deviate from the books. Don't get me wrong, this is not necessarily a bad things in of itself. I didn't ask for a 100% faithful book adaptation - I got to experience that story already and it was great. However, I'd like the show to borrow good parts from the story, and it unfortunately failed to do that.

In my mind, the success of the Witcher's universe is rooted in two things:

• amazing, detailed worldbuilding
• interesting characters that act realistically (given their backgrounds and personalities)

Let's start with worldbuilding. There are dozen of rulers, mages, merchants and other important people of power in the Witcher's world. There are multitude of various fractions with varied levels of independence. In the books it's always clear where the action takes place, and how far it is geographically from other places. Despite the teleportation existing in the world, it's only available to the most powerful of mages, so Witcher and co. often find themselves on arduous trips, full of dangers and adventures. Questing through various locations, meeting locals, crossing rivers all contributes to the feeling of the world being alive and rich.

The show basically has cut the travel out of the story. If there are things happening in Kaer Morhen, characters will just appear there at the start of the episode. The world around Geralt seems like a backdrop for his adventures, rather than a complicated whirlwind of events that couldn't care less of what some lowly Witcher wants.

But even bigger problem I see with the character development. We first see Ciri in the books as a stubborn, energetic daredevil of a child, constantly getting in trouble for wanting things to go her way. After years of trainging with witchers, studying magic with Yennifer and general education in Temple of Melitele, it's easy to believe that she grows into a smart, decisive and dangerous teenager, who is much more that a plot device.

Probably for the practical reasons, Ciri was already a teenager in a show when she first met Geralt. And while we get to see a short "training montage" showing Ciri's power of will, that training would not be enough to win a swordfight with your average street thug. Credit where credit is due - showrunners recognized this and didn't try to make Ciri's character an amazing fighter she is in the books, or a powerful mage (she can't really control her great magical powers). But what this means is that Ciri's role in a store is much more passive than in the books. Things happening to her, and she's not equipped to handle them on her own.

Even worse off is Yennifer's character. I have no idea what the writers wanted to achieve with her story arc, but I found it really hard to empathize with her in season 2. Maybe I'm missing the point?

I like Geralt's character but I miss the chemistry between him and the rest of the witchers. You don't feel the long history those people supposedly share.

That said, season two of The Witcher is not bad, worth a watch. It's just so much less than I expected it to be.