cimorene: Woman in a tunic and cape, with long dark braids flying in the wind, pointing ahead as a green dragon flies overhead (fantasy)
There's a post on Tumblr talking about how since the other witchers in s2 are regular guys in that nobody else is a bodybuilder and nobody else is wearing custom magically elastic goth fighting leathers, the ONE in-verse plausible explanation for those things about Geralt disappears. His physique isn't the result of the Witcher magics that make him superhuman, so he must be doing bodysculpting (when?) or using magic cosmetically for it. His clothes aren't just Witcher standard, so he has to be putting effort into being this fucking Danaerys goth princess Fabio. Which, fine, and in fact GREAT, because that's HILARIOUS, and why not? I'm sure lots of goths (and let's be real, metalheads) who like masculinity and um, D&D? And Nightwish? - would present themselves in that way if they had the magic; I'm just surprised that it's paired up with Geralt given the other stuff about his character.

There's another whole rant about how much more sensible the costume philosophy/approach behind Merlin (and Legend of the Seeker for that matter) is compared to the Witcher, but for now let's just say that IF the rest of the show broadly speaking is a vaguely Merlin sort of reality, Geralt is plopped in the middle there like Legend of the Seeker going "What's up?" only nobody acknowledges anything, or perhaps notices anything. Like the one human in cast of muppets, only he's the one Magical Girl Goth Fantasy Pinup Beefcake in a sea of generic colorful pg-rated Renfaire.

By the way, Wax finished series 2 obviously, and from what I saw, there were a FEW things that were a lot better this series, but overall the costume design is still terrible for all the same reasons as before.
cimorene: Woman in a tunic and cape, with long dark braids flying in the wind, pointing ahead as a green dragon flies overhead (thattaway)
I really enjoyed that Twitter thread that Wax read the other day (so I assume it's been going around but I also don't know who wrote it) about how a fantasy show, specifically the Witcher, can still be historically inaccurate, and it was completely right in its focus on the fact that Geralt's very tight pants couldn't look like that without elastic fibers because natural materials don't do that and the whole thing about how industrialization would have to exist in the society for those to happen. And as the tweeter pointed out, you COULD make up an explanation using the magic in this world for the technically impossible fabrics and constructions, but that requires assumptions about the way the world works and they didn't bother to write those bits.

I'm willing to postulate a fairly simple explanation for the new season 2 tight pants that were the amusing subject of her (again, correct) rant, though: as long as we only see Witchers wearing them, we can say they wear fighting outfits with special enchantments to prevent seam splitting on them.

In verse, it's obvious that the enchanters or sorcerers or whatever they're called are making their clothes with magic at least some of the time, so it's not the physical impossibility of their wardrobes in the first season that was so irritatingly historically inaccurate so much as the fact that the designs were all obviously modern because they borrowed from both modern and pre-modern fashion elements kind of at random, as opposed to telling a somewhat coherent visual story about the garments' cultural backgrounds. (Karolina Zebrowska has a great video about them that contained pretty much all my thoughts on the subject and a little more - which her videos usually do - although I think she maybe came to a different overall verdict.) Fashion has only started to do that in the modern era, and it's not even plausible without a lot of factors, not least the faster garment creation and the faster communication of the modern era. I mean, you could just imagine that the sorcerers have a little self-referential culture where they are each other's fashion audiences and they are also creating all the garments with magic, I guess, but. This still sounds dubious to me. Especially given how geographically separated they are. And that wouldn't make sense of all the other things that were historically incorrect about the fashion of series 1.

So I hated the costuming of series 1 passionately enough that I was quite hopeful when I saw they had switched costume designers for series 2, and I admit, the first images of Geralt's armor gave me great pause because they are, obviously, silly as hell - much sillier than before, really - but at least they showed signs of being silly in a different way. Wax is on episode 2 now, and thus far it still looks possible that series 2 will be coherently silly, albeit obviously not possible that it will be 'historically correct' exactly. But so far, I would say it has presented a look that is coherently sort of Shelley Duvall's Faerie Tale Theatre meets Fabio-style romance novel covers (which are the 200% obvious source of Geralt's looks). I will be interested to observe.

(It remains to be seen whether the writing as revealed in subtitles will look un-irritating enough for me to ask Wax to remove her headphones and turn the sound on. The dialogue was absolutely unbearable for me in series 1.)
cimorene: closeup of Jeremy Brett as Holmes raising his eyebrows from behind a cup of steaming tea (eyebrows)
are kind of terrible, but they weren't really trying to be good - they were clearly aiming sort of in the neighborhood of Merlin or Xena and Hercules or A Knight's Tale or OUAT, and they didn't have the budget to do them seriously obviously. (I won't say I don't blame them, because there are a lot of egregious things I could name, starting with all of Yennefer's edgy prom dresses and not failing to mention how they not only took 'historical inspiration' from periods spanning a millennium, they didn't even bother to have a coherent notion of 'fashion' in a single location... .) But anyway, given the budgetary restrictions and the clear tone/register/subgenre/solemnity level, I felt mostly okay about the whole thing even though I hadn't sat down and written up my complaints in an itemized list.

And I'm still not going to do that, because I just do not have that kind of patience.

...But I've just seen a post on Tumblr of 'costume appreciation' with 9000 notes and tons of comments from people who apparently unironically thought they were good, or even especially good. Standout. Words like "brilliant" were used. ...Which shouldn't surprise me, I know, especially given that people tend to reblog mostly things they agree with, but still, my eyes bugged out a bit. There were even multiple people saying the showrunners were "dumb" [sic] to fire the costume designer after the first season, which is... a piping hot take.

However, they were the bearers of glad tidings! And I googled it, and they've replaced him with Lucinda Wright, which I'm inclined to say is bound to be a step in the right direction except I haven't actually seen anything on her CV except some Doctor Who episodes from 2005, so I can't be ENTIRELY sure. There are stills from historicals on IMDb, like Vanity Fair, which looks credible, and 2014's "New Worlds", which looks costumewise even sillier than the flashbacks in The Vampire Diaries or Sleepy Hollow, but maybe that wasn't her fault. At least she has done Henry VIII, so perhaps they're planning to aim everything a liiiiitttle bit more 16th centurywards? (Not a surprise. I can tell they're very attached to Jaskier's puffs and slashings, not without cause.)

Profile

cimorene: cartoony drawing of a woman's head in profile giving dubious side-eye (Default)
Cimorene

June 2025

S M T W T F S
12 3 4 5 67
8 9101112 13 14
15 16 17 18192021
22232425262728
2930     

Syndicate

RSS Atom

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

  • Style: Practically Dracula for Practicalitesque - Practicality (with tweaks) by [personal profile] cimorene
  • Resources: Dracula Theme

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated 18 Jun 2025 10:56 pm
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios