User reviews

first of all I'm sick of all the people who compare the book and everything regarding this material to Tolkien, which is absolute nonsense, is The Lotr trilogy the only fantasy you people know? it is VERY different, the books are much more realistic and modern. The characters are very real and they evolve with the story in a way which is not at all similar to The Lotr. When it comes to the film i must say it was a huge disappointment, I'm a huge Sapkowski fan, have read almost everything he has written to this day including his essays on modern literature and fantasy. That i guess is the main reason i didn't like the film, although there are some nice moments, like the man-on-man fights which look much more realistic than in most of Hollywood A movies( fights which do not involve the monsters because i consider them to be a joke). And of course Michal Zebrowski who has an incredible voice, imposing stature and has a palpable aura of presence whenever he is on the screen, which thank the authors is most of the time. Also there are a few funny moments and the scenery and music are also quite enjoyable. It is the dividing of the story, the timing and the complete change of story in certain parts that made me angry. A few episodes which are connected very weakly( in the movie, in the book the line of Ciri is much stronger and is given a lot of attention, it is after all the main topic of the saga) and i just didn't get the right feeling from it, thats all

This is actually a compilation of TV-series. A lot was left out, and maybe that's why it feels so inconsistent in places. Geralt was good, as was the little heiress. I'd say the TV-series was okay, the movie - not so good. Go for the books instead.

I love Polish cinema. I love Michal Zebrowski, he was awesome in Stara Basn or in Ogniem I Mieczem. I love the fantasy books in LOTR style. But this film killed nearly all my sentiments. What do we see here - very badly done video effects (the scene of the battle with a dragon is especially hilarious), pathetic play of all the cast and above it all - too much of Zebrowski - this time, blond, dirty, proud and uttering such laughing stock lines that it is hard to believe your ears. Nay, do not waste your precious time - this is a random mixture of the images of Sapkowski's books, badly filmed and with a laughable budget. Nothing of the good kind here - just a constant yawning disease all throughout the endlessly boring film.

When just days before the film's premiere, its screenwriter backs out of the project, and demands his name to be removed from the credits, you know that this does not bode well.

The books, on which "Wiedzmin" is based on, have great potential for a vivacious fantasy film – "Geralt de Rivia is a witcher; his sole purpose is to destroy the monsters that plague the world. But not everything monstrous-looking is evil, and not everything fair is good…" But all that didn't matter, when a polish film crew, with a low budget, and no, or little appreciation for Sapkowski's work, decided to make a 13-part mini-series out of it. The two-hour film is a by-product of their actions, to maximize the profits.

It's not hard to point out in this case, what makes people label this film as bad. Plot (incoherent, thanks to cramming it with too many stories), acting (below average, with exception of Zebrowski), dialogues (bland), editing (choppy), special effects (unbearable) and choreography (poor), add up to the film's overall bad experience. Only the soundtrack, done by Grzegorz Ciechowski, brings out the beauty of the world of "Wiedzmin", which was never brought to the screen. Even Poland's grandiose flora and fauna (where part of "The Chronicles of Narnia: The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe" was shot), a crucial element in almost ANY fantasy film, were not used up to their full potential. The more I think about this dead loss, the more I'm running out of words. At least, it's a comfort to know, that Marek Brodzki, the director of "Wiedzmin", has directed only one film ever since (in addition, in Germany).

For now, we're left with top-notch fantasy stories and a fantastic computer RPG (released in 2007) referring to the Wiedzmin books. But I'm sure that one day, justice will be done for the Wiedzmin saga, and we'll be treated with an equally good film adaptation soon enough.

Wiedzmin books (the first two volumes are stories on which this fatal movie is based) and five further volumes i.e. Wiedzmin Saga are perfectly written piece of fantasy literature. I can agree that their author borrowed a lot from Tolkien but he added so much his own spice that at least in my opinion

they are much more exciting that Tolkien's Middleearth Saga.

If only we(Poles) had someone like Peter Jackson to direct the movie based on Wiedzmin Saga (and enough money, but not so much as for LOTR) that potential movie would shake Hollywood.

But for now we can only cry in despair that someone spoilt such piece of great fantasy.

Kind regards, Paul Wiedzmin's(book version) fan

Well, for a start, I must say that, here, in Russia, a saga of Geralt of Rivia is known and loved. Andrzej Sapkowski - a gifted writer, or, maybe, even genius of some sort - created one of the most realistic, honest, cynical and God d@mn well written fantasy worlds in a history of literature. And when such amazing material gets in a right hands well, see RPG game "Witcher" and you will understand what I am talking about.

"Vedmak\Wiedzmin" is an excellent example of the opposite outcome.

Lack of budget. Lack of directing. Lack of good script.

These three whales of Disgusting Movie Making sunken this movie, ate it alive. Acting is good, sometimes even more than good but for god sake it can not save this project.

I still have some faith though. I still hope that someday a new Vedmak movies will be created and entire world will see magnitude and breathtaking splendor of Sapkowski's books. p.s. But before that a Uwe Boll must be eliminated. Just in case, you know

All Sapkowski fans in Poland waited loong time to see what was suppose to be "an epic tale". We've had it. Right there... I should say - as my friend had/ "I've seen a movie. Was called Wiedzmin. Period. End".

Great story from one of the best contemporary fantasy writers was killed by script writter, director and most of all - by costume designer. Who would think that Elves would wear rags and look like pueblo dwellers from seventieth century? Disaster - that's a word. Pathetic was trying to compare this pulp to LOTR - as producers of film tried to. Not a single word more. Anyone! Avoid it - read the books for Pete's sake. It is available in polish, german and few more languages. It was not, as far as I know, translated to English.

This is what i call "a really bad movie". If you haven't read the book, you won't know who is who and what or why is he doing. The movie looks like soap opera - photographer probably didn't know that he is shooting a fantasy movie and effects of his work are similar to "Bold and beautiful". But photography is a masterpiece when compared to editing or dialogues... Or costumes. Or acting. Or anything. Well, just don't watch this movie. Read the book instead. Or do something else. Oh, by the way, a game is being made, basing on the book "Wiedzmin" (The Witcher) and it looks great. An RPG game with Neverwinter Nights engine. Sounds good.

not many people outside poland have had an opportunity to become familiar with andrzej sapkowski's brilliant writings. he's very popular in poland for his fantasy short stories ( i believe none of them has ever been translated intrto english. alas!). to make a long story short, wiedzmin - the main character of sapkowski's books - is a traveling monster slayer, a man of extraordinary strenght and skill: he's pretty much your favourite tolkien-style cool guy. unfortunately, no one would figure this out after watching the film. 'wiedzmin' the movie is nothing but a collection of random scenes, featuring wiedzmin and other characters from sapkowski's writings, but not eben remotely resembling the plot and dramatic pace of the original. event the fact that some of the shots in the film show attractive naked women does not add any quality to it. the movie gets worse and worse with every minute, and does not even meet the requirements of 'so bad it's actually good' category. if you really are into fantasdy and want to learn something about wiedzmin, read the books instead.

Methinks the vicious slams against this film, made by hardcore fans of source author Andrzej Sapkowski, are a bit out of line. Sapkowski's books, very popular in Poland, are not available in English yet (a UK edition comes out in 2007), and I have not read them, so I watched the film with no expectations. There is some excellent film-making here, an unusual atmosphere (helped by a fine music score and great scenery), and, most memorable, the magnetic performance of Michal Zebrowski in the lead. In WITH FIRE AND SWORD, Zebrowski seemed merely ornamental (he is very good-looking); here, he truly claims the role of the lonely warrior moving through a broken world determined to find a higher moral code.

Comparison with Tolkien is largely misplaced, although this fantasy also clearly grows out of the catastrophes of the 20th century. In HEXER, we enter a world of vicious power struggles and atrocities. When a ruthless band resembling Teutonic Knights wipes out a sacred retreat of women, you can't help but think of the Nazi atrocities in Poland. The content also draws on older Polish history, such as the 17th century practice of impaling captives; you won't find that in Tolkien! The resonance of this exotic background and the seriousness of these themes give the film a welcome sense of gravitas that results in some haunting images and moments.

Regarding special effects, I grew up in the 1960s on Ray Harryhausen claymation, and while I appreciate the tremendous advances in FX, they don't make or break a film for me. The special effects here are certainly not Hollywood state of the art, but nor are they cheesy; they are respectable.

The film's biggest weakness seems to stem from the fact that a longer version appeared as a TV series in Poland, and this feature release was edited from that. Indeed, some developments seem too rushed and some characters pop up very abruptly; the story is not unintelligible, but does require a bit of concentration from the viewer. I would love to see the longer, more fleshed-out version on DVD someday.

Ridiculous. Only Poles find this film bad. It seems to be funny, but I'm proud, when I see, that our Film is compared to LOTOR by Peter Jackson. That was off production, made not by Hollywood. And in "Hexer" we can find no political mumble.

Of course FX is poor, should be better, but it was first film since Poland is sovereign country. Future will be marvelous. Sorry for my mistakes, and be more tolerant for form. Contents are much more important...

Yap

I think 5 is note, which should be good.

I don't understand why everybody says "the worst movie." I think these reactions are only from fanatic fans of A.Sapkovski. The movie tells us a DIFFERENT tale only based on the Sapkovski's novels and it's quite well. Actors are good too (exlude Yennefer). Yeah, special effects should be better but it's a TV movie with low budget. I like the movie.

The Polish adaptation of "The Witcher" is a pleasant nostalgic fantasy with a small budget and an average level of its development. The film tells the story consistently and clearly, so people who have not read the books can watch it. I would like to mention good actors and especially actresses, pleasant musical accompaniment (but vocals parts, I'm sorry, are bad). Modern problems (in particular, ecology) are interestingly presented in the setting of the Middle Ages. The film is freedom-loving and tolerant, but these ideas are not imposed. The graphics are funny and similar to "Heroes of Might and Magic" (omg, at the same time "The Lord of the Rings" was filmed!). Overall, the film left an even pleasant impression against the backdrop of low expectations from it. Nice, but not a must-see for non-fantasy fans.

Brodzki's creation is a great example of how NOT to make a movie. First there was a book written with a great humor. Book that has numerous fans who would be happy to supply help when producers for some reasons decided to employ people who hardly heard of the book in the first place. Then came a script as humorless and full of nonsense as possible. At the same time the script was written in a way to allow only those who actually had read the books to understand anything of the plot. Not that anything in this movie made much sense anyway(ex. "I'm like an ice shard. You can burn yourself" said Yennefer as a word of warning - warning that logic is something this movie seriously lacks). To add to that we have to mention that no matter the amount of money that was supposedly spent on the movie everything looks like an amateur production with two (2) computer effects one of which is a see-through dragon. Even the costumes look as if the were borrowed from a really poor theater. That is the better ones look this way. And to add to that we have a few 'naked scenes' put there only so they will be in the film because they have no explanation in what one may mercifully call plot. The movie has only one strength that can hardly make up for the rest - music is not bad. Though if I was to choose I'd prefer to have it separately. It sounds better if you don't have to look at this failure of super production.

He gives the expected Gerald of Rivia. And, for a person who do not knows the books or the video game, it is enough. It is enough for a reader of Sapkowski serie., as not the bad introduction in the atmosphere . Sure, the special effects are far to be great and the storytelling is not real inspired. But, for a not familiar with this fantasy universe, "Wiedzmin" represents the first step. And it is far to be a disillusion. But a travel , not always coherent, in few scenes real silly but sustained by a beautiful performance of Michal Zebrowski and giving a good kick to the book serie.

the movie is simply horrible (2/10). Although actors are trying their best (well sometimes that isn't much) special effects are ...let me put it this way it would be better if there weren't any.

The script is based on Sapkowski's prose, so it should be the biggest advantage of this movie. Sadly it's the opposite. There is nothing left of the original atmosphere. And it's all very chaotic. Maybe they just had too much material to show in 2h time.

Anyway if you would like to see this film I would recommend you to look for the TV series (same title, same actors, even the plot stays the same) that was made in the same time the movie did. It is so much better (9/10) and the story there actually make sense:)

I liked Michal Zebrowski as Geralt. He seems the only good thing about the film. Unfortunately, I haven't read Sapkowsky's books, but I have heard them to be something extraordinary. The film turned out to be a second-rate fairy tale and nothing else. Once again, what a waste! If not of the book then of Zebrowski's work.

Extremaly bad movie. It seems that actors knew that it is going to be bad and they look embarrassed saying those over the top lines and terrible, cheesy speeches. In fact, Daniel Olbryski seems to make fun of his very own character. Maybe Zebrowski was trying to do something about this abomination of nature, however he fails miserably. This film is an insult for every fan of the book and every fan of fantasy fiction. Thank god someone made a game based on a book and altered English title (from Hexer to The Witcher). The most punishing and painful memory, that i remember from watching this disaster is the scene when Dragon, the only special effect in the movie appears. He looks like he belongs to the video game from times of first PlayStation and Nintendo 64- just terrible. Considering everything written above, this movie should be considered to be a easiest, however most painful, way of committing suicide.

I don't want to add much more of bashing, but this IS a terrible movie. As some stated earlier, this is the series in fast forward, a condensation if you will, so much if not all doesn't make any sense.

Which is rather unfortunate. To me, they really put some effort in the it, concerning production values, and, yes, it is flawed, but you cannot compare it to grand-excessive-budget HBO series! But still -I found it, the series, quite enjoyable: it is actually pretty good.

The only thing I can say: get a copy of the series and watch that instead. The reviews are -rightfully so- much more favorable.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1070742/?ref_=fn_al_tt_3

a very mediocre film based on a superb series of stories and novels. I hope Somebody, someday will be able to film it the right way. In the meantime, look for the books (by A. Sapkowski), a very inteligent, postmodern fantasy. By now there should be a translation in english, there translations in german for sure.

This is not an impressive movie, and it is basically a compilation of the TV Series episodes (which I did find excellent, considering what was to be expected from the production).

Nonetheless, it was still quite enjoyable.

Both the series and the film made me really curious about the author's works and the original characters and stories.

I've voted the series with 9/10 because they are very good material, both acting-wise, choreography-wise, and in terms of script, as little, stand-alone stories, that have their own continuity. The only part they're lacking is special effects, and considering how well they relay the storytelling bit of Geralt's adventures, I'm not going to hold back due to that.

By contrast the film misses out on the continuity a lot. It's as if it's trying to relay the story of the series in its entirety, but ends up unable to do the same, so it has some naturally significant gaps. Nonetheless, the flak this movie's receiving is unbelievable.

If you're into fantasy stories with a more serious, less black-and-white context, and aren't waiting on your toes for special effects to thrill you, you're still going to enjoy the movie despite all of its flaws.

4/10 would've been my standard vote, but since the movie's taking so much undeserved slam, 5/10 to highlight that it's definitely a good watch for people who enjoy the odd fantasy low-budget movie.

The film of 2001 is something I watched recently. I've already seen the "Witcher" TV series by Netflix, so I'm planning to read the books. It's a very gritty and scary world, and even as a member of the viewing audience it feels tense watching it. You can sense the danger, from both nasty humans and the supernatural. I can't think which is worse, but there is the Hexer or Witcher (I suppose they are knights) and Geralt is the hero but he's an anti-hero, a mysterious figure who is trained to kill monsters.

I don't know why so many people on IMDB are slagging it off. They don't like any sort of fantasy films but they like giving negative reviews.

There are three main problems with the film. Or rather there are three reasons why it isn't even a contender worthy of more serious consideration.

Firstly, and this was always going to be true, it's not nearly as good as the books. However, at least we could have expected to reflect some of the Sapkowski's wit or depth.

Secondly we have the production. Fantasy movies are, in my opinion, the hardest to produce well. Everything from the props through costumes, scenery, stunts and (especially) CGI is substandard.

Finally, and this is many be very subjective, I just can't quite take the acting seriously. I wasn't brought up in Poland so I can't really judge- it may me my lack of familiarity with films in polish. All the same the lines seem very amateurishly delivered... The casting could be better as well.

In summation, the only possible redeeming feature of this film is the remainder of the plot shining through: not unlike a diamond ring on a rotting cadaver.

On a separate note I heard that the books are coming out in English. I haven't seen them yet but I can't imagine how one would even begin to translate them... I would ask the English-speaking reader to bare this in mind when judging the book.

I disagree that this movie is a waste of time - maybe if you know the book and have high expectations because you know the story, but if you just want to relax and see a nice movie I think it'll do the trick very nicely.

When I've seen it, I have noticed some slight technical problems, like scenes sometimes do not fade from one to another to well, some special effect are not done as well as they could be, but in general I am happy

I've seen the movie, and I am quite sad that it's yet another movie that probably would be appreciated in the US if this nation was a bit more opened to "not American" and would go through a bit more work to import stuff from Europe. Of course Poland should make it's efforts to advertise the movie to the West.

The acting, imho, has been quite good, mixing up serious, magic and funny points quite well. especially the main 2 characters were quite impresively played.

If you ever come across this movie, and you like Tolkien type of story, I really think it will not be time wasted.

Chris CSo, maybe the budget of this film was near to 20 dollars. But have you seen Jackson's Lord of the Rings. Yes, there are much animation, there are 11 Oskars... for what? Only the first part is close to book, and the rest... Tolkien should be disappointed. If you want to see not just FX - the movie is really great. It is humorous, like an authors books. Yes, budget is really small, but the plot is exciting. About actors - dear Chris C - show me people from street who can play better. Zhebrovski is very good. Remember his role in "Ognyem i myechem". There are no wooden dolls. Lyutik is great. The actress playing Yennefer is what I expected to see. Maybe Poland haven't Orlando Bloom and Liv Tyler for elves, but... Sapkovski isn't Tolkien. His world is different. So, for my opinion film is worth looking. Sorry for horrible English. Chris C - sorry for this comment. I just like Poland and polish films from "Chterey Panzerni" and "Pan Wolodyovski" till "Ognyem i Myechem" and "Wedzmin". And I think, that film is good enough to see it.