The Witcher: Sirens of the Deep is here, bringing fans of Netflix's hit fantasy franchise back to the Continent for a new adventure during Geralt of Rivia's early days as a monster hunter. Set during the fifth and sixth episodes of The Witcher season 1, Sirens of the Deep sees Geralt and his bard companion Jaskier land smack in the middle of an escalating conflict between a seaside human village and a nearby kingdom of merpeople. Can they keep the tensions from bubbling over into all-out war?
This is the third spinoff in Netflix's Witcher universe, and it's easily the best. Part of that is because unlike Nightmare of the Wolf or Blood Origin, Sirens of the Deep has actual source material to work with. It's based on the short story "A Little Sacrifice," which appears in Andrzej Sapkowski's book Sword of Destiny. That was one of the shorts that the mainline Witcher show didn't have time to fit into its earlier seasons, and since it's a strong story, I'm glad to see it make the leap to the screen in this new movie.
However, it should come as no surprise to anyone who's read the books that Sirens of the Deep doesn't adhere strictly to the original short story. Netflix's Witcher franchise has always made deviations from the books, and Sirens of the Deep certainly doesn't break that trend, adding a bunch of new storylines, villains, and plot twists.
But the change that's most likely to rub book fans the wrong way happens right at the end of the film. "A Little Sacrifice" features a powerful, haunting ending that goes straight for the heart. Rather than adapt it directly, Sirens of the Deep made the bold decision to cut the final scene of the short story entirely, ending on a much lighter note as Geralt and Jaskier head of on their next adventure.
I really liked the ending for "A Little Sacrifice," but in my opinion, cutting it from Sirens of the Deep was the right choice. Let's get into FULL SPOILERS for both below, so we can talk about why.
How is the end of Sirens of the Deep different than the book?
There are two main ways that Sirens of the Deep alters the ending from "A Little Sacrifice." The first has to do with the lovers Agloval and Sh'eenaz. This human/mermaid affair sits at the center of the film, as their respective factions try to drive a wedge between them, since a human and mermaid can never truly be together. If that sounds familiar, yes, "A Little Sacrifice" is Sapkowski's take on The Little Mermaid. The short story ends with Sh'eenaz undergoing a procedure which gives her legs so that she can live on land with Agloval for the rest of her days.
Sirens of the Deep subverts things by having Agloval drink a potion which turns him into a merman instead, so that he can go live in the ocean with Sh'eenaz and her people. That's a deviation from the book, but it's fairly straightforward. I imagine some people will love it and others won't, but it doesn't take any great amount of analyzing to wrap your head around. (Also, Agloval is a duke in the book rather than a young prince; all of the stuff with his father and family in Sirens of the Deep is new.)
The other part of the ending deals with Geralt's romance with the bard Essi Daven. This romance happens in both the book and movie, and it's more or less the same. This is Geralt's first time with another woman since he was bonded to Yennefer of Vengerberg by the djinn, and she subsequently rejected him. The romance with Essi helps Geralt come back to himself after that rejection leaves him a wreck, mentally.
In both versions of the story, Geralt and Essi finally decide to spend the night together after they help settle the dispute between the people of Bremervoord and the merpeople. And in both instances, it's clear it's a doomed romance; yes, they can be together for that night, but they won't be able to remain together once dawn comes. Essi has her own life, and Geralt needs to keep traveling and fighting monsters.
The final pages of the story are told from Jaskier's perspective, and shift to a more omniscient style of narration which reveals that, years later, Essi died in a plague. Jaskier knows this because he was the person who discovered her body. He writes a song about the witcher and Essi's romance, but makes it sound more beautiful and dramatic than it actually was, thinking that no one would actually want to hear the real story and its sorrowful end, where they never saw each other again before her death. And then, in a final beautiful flourish, it's revealed that Jaskier never even played the song for anyone but himself; he wrote it solely to memorialize Geralt and Essi's time together, and remember his fellow bard friend.
It's a short, moving passage where Andrzej Sapkowski reminds readers just how well he can play the heartstrings. And it would have been weirdly off-putting to watch in the movie.
The end of "A Little Sacrifice" was perfect for a short story...but not a movie
The reason I don't think the end of "A Little Sacrifice" would have worked as well in Sirens of the Deep all comes down to the medium. The short story is a concise tale that keeps its focus firmly on the idea of lovers needing to make "a little sacrifice" in the name of their relationship, or to go their separate ways if they can't make that sacrifice. In a short story of a few dozen pages, there's not much room for multiple subplots or other ideas; short stories become too cumbersome if you add to many different elements. They buckle under the weight of it all.
By keeping the focus firmly on Geralt and Essi and capitalizing on the shifting bits of narration he does so well, Sapkowski was able to make this ending work. He often uses Jaskier as a pseudo-narrator of The Witcher Saga, referencing the bard's older years as he thinks back on his time with Geralt. Sapkowski establishes that well enough that readers became come comfortable with it, but the Netflix franchise has never gone that route with the bard. Switching to Jaskier's omniscient narration would have come out of nowhere.
Sirens of the Deep is an hour-and-a-half anime movie which features more action, more intrigue, more plot twists and more characters than "A Little Sacrifice." The short story's ending just doesn't fit the same way. Can you imagine if after watching these two gradually grow closer over the course of an entire film, we finally see them get together in the final 10 minutes of the movie...only for it to show us a montage of Essi dying years later? It might have still been poignant, but I have a hard time believing it would have made for a better movie.
Perhaps if The Witcher: Sirens of the Deep had adapted the short story to the letter and gone for a more subdued art-film approach, the short story ending would have worked. But with the tone and style Sirens chose, the sudden shift to reveal Essi eventually died would have probably felt out of place, or so off-putting that it totally undercut the rest of the ending.
That's why I think that Sirens of the Deep had the right ending for the story it was telling. And if you want to experience it the way Sapkowski wrote it, you can always read Sword of Destiny.
To stay up to date on everything fantasy, science fiction, and WiC, follow our all-encompassing Facebook page and Twitter account, sign up for our exclusive newsletter and check out our YouTube channel.