The D&D Movie Finds Its Director

Quickleaf · Apr 3, 2016

I'll be cautiously optimistic even though they're not giving us much reason to be.

I am far more optimistic, however, about the Witcher movie coming out 2017 sometime.

They've got a decent writer familiar with the genre: Thania St. John, who worked on Chicago Fire and Grimm.

They've got a talented director: Tomasz Bagiński, who directed the Witcher game cinematic trailers and several beautiful shorts.

While the producer, Sean Daniel (The Mummy), might not be who fans would want handling the Witcher creatively, he's working on production so the writer/director will be the main creative minds behind the film.

Jacqual · Apr 3, 2016

Arilyn said:
Considering that most of us have little hope for this movie, why would Van Diesel wish to be in it?

Vin Diesel made a promise to Gary Gygax that he would not be in a D&D movie unless he thought the movie would be a good movie. You can find confirmation of this by looking at interviews done by Vin in the past. I believe he made the promise due to his love of the game and the respect he had of Mr. Gygax.

Warbringer · Apr 3, 2016

Share the same sense of doom that others have shared.

At the heart, the whole approach to this movie makes no sense. There is a complete stable of successful D&D novels stretching back 30 years, and love the, or hate, Drizzt and Raistin, are characters that have an established base and would pull crossover.

Add tha Has to sound like they are trying to do this on the cheap, doesn't help the angst either.

Hand of Evil · Apr 3, 2016

The other problem I see is getting people to go see the movie, just have to worry about draw a D&D movie could generate. Everyone thinks Lord of the Rings but is D&D that respected as a brand?

Ryujin · Apr 3, 2016

Hand of Evil said:
The other problem I see is getting people to go see the movie, just have to worry about draw a D&D movie could generate. Everyone thinks Lord of the Rings but is D&D that respected as a brand?

Respected? Not by those who are outside its circle of influence. I would even say ridiculed. When the guys on "Big Bang Theory" play D&D on the show the audience isn't laughing with them, but at them. What it is, though, is a recognizable brand.How do you play on a recognizable but ridiculed brand in order to draw an audience? The only way that I know how, is to use parody and ridicule. Look at "Knights of Badassdom" for an example.

martinlochsen · Apr 3, 2016

Ryujin said:
Respected? Not by those who are outside its circle of influence. I would even say ridiculed. When the guys on "Big Bang Theory" play D&D on the show the audience isn't laughing with them, but at them. What it is, though, is a recognizable brand.How do you play on a recognizable but ridiculed brand in order to draw an audience? The only way that I know how, is to use parody and ridicule. Look at "Knights of Badassdom" for an example.

Or you could make something awesome and turn everyone's attitude around. It's been done. Not that I think that is what's going on here, though.

Ryujin · Apr 3, 2016

martinlochsen said:
Or you could make something awesome and turn everyone's attitude around. It's been done. Not that I think that is what's going on here, though.

You could, but then it wouldn't matter if it was based on a D&D property or not. Then we're back to the "Generic Fantasy #253" scenario.

martinlochsen · Apr 3, 2016

There are some small glimmers of hope though, to be fair. Consider these quotes from the Collider-article previously linked to on enworld:

Roy Lee

"everyone who’s involved with it now, especially the writer of the first draft is a fan from the very beginning starting with Chainmail, which turned into Dungeons & Dragons, so you’ll see things that are very faithful to the source material as well as new elements are being incorporated with help from Wizards of the Coast, who are giving a lot of input on the script.”

It's a bit cryptic, but it seems David Leslie Johnson didn't write the first draft for the script, and the guy who did is a D&D-fan, and a pretty hard core one if he even knew what Chainmail is. Also, input from WotC is a good sign, I think. They have people who understand what D&D is about. Seems Roy Lee really thinks being faithful to the source is a priority too, which is good.

It's also mentioned in the same article that it's to be an ensamble piece, which many people here, including myself, think is a good idea.

Not much, perhaps, but let's take the good news as it is.

martinlochsen · Apr 3, 2016

Ryujin said:
You could, but then it wouldn't matter if it was based on a D&D property or not. Then we're back to the "Generic Fantasy #253" scenario.

Not sure I agree. The brand would still get you attention and a core audience. It's probably easier to market, though perhaps a bit riskier.

Ryujin · Apr 3, 2016

martinlochsen said:
Not sure I agree. The brand would still get you attention and a core audience. It's probably easier to market, though perhaps a bit riskier.

I've said this before, in another thread about this topic: The core audience won't support this movie. To make money and have a hope for further productions, you need people who aren't already tied to the concept. The question is, "How do you do that, especially if the property still suffers from the 'nerd' factor?" Pop culture has co-opted many of the things that, a mere 10 years ago, would have been considered nerdy. They still refer to them as nerdy but when more people are involved in them than not, they're no longer nerdy. Pen & paper RPGs don't fall int he co-opted group.