L
lowkey13
Guest
*Deleted by user*
D&D Movie/TV (Yet another) D&D Movie Speculation thread.
Mercurius
Legend
One more thing, as to why I think they should go all in on Dragonlance. This isn't DC, where you (presumably) get multiple chances to find the right formula. A D&D movie has to work the first time out of the gate, otherwise there likely won't be a second one. The Dragonlance Chronicles (& Legends) are your best card, in terms of story and scope, evocative characters, etc. You don't want to lose the game with your best card in hand - got to start strong.
Oh yeah, perhaps the most important thing: NO VIN DIESEL! Dwayne Johnson, yes (although he doesn't fit into Dragonlance; Verminaard?), Joe Manganielo (Sturm? Gunthar?) sure; Deborah Ann Woll, also yes (Laurana?). But Diesel is not a good actor, and he's quite annoying. I suppose you could let him play a secondary character, or someone who hides beyond a mask.
Oh yeah, perhaps the most important thing: NO VIN DIESEL! Dwayne Johnson, yes (although he doesn't fit into Dragonlance; Verminaard?), Joe Manganielo (Sturm? Gunthar?) sure; Deborah Ann Woll, also yes (Laurana?). But Diesel is not a good actor, and he's quite annoying. I suppose you could let him play a secondary character, or someone who hides beyond a mask.
This is a fun review of the 2005 movie and some discussion of D&D movies in general...
[video=youtube_share;zjCZAcneUII]https://youtu.be/zjCZAcneUII[/video]
The acting looks so incredibly wooden, and the camera work seems very static making the whole thing seem quite lifeless. The improvements to CGI should be a big help in whatever they're cooking up. But you can't fix bad directing, bad acting, a bad script and bad cinematography with CGI.
[video=youtube_share;zjCZAcneUII]https://youtu.be/zjCZAcneUII[/video]
The acting looks so incredibly wooden, and the camera work seems very static making the whole thing seem quite lifeless. The improvements to CGI should be a big help in whatever they're cooking up. But you can't fix bad directing, bad acting, a bad script and bad cinematography with CGI.
L
lowkey13
Guest
*Deleted by user*
Henry
Autoexreginated
Crazy idea, but asking in all seriousness:
What about a 'reboot' using the Dungeons and Dragons cartoon for inspiration, going all "Connecticut Yankee?" Maybe even have Eric, Diana, Sheila, hank, etc. but fleshed out as actual late-teens with problems, teen romances, all that jazz? Kind of "Runaways meets D&D"? I can see a dozen different ways it could fail, but a few ways it could succeed -- all of them having to do with making them likable characters with a strong story of learning to stand up for who they are.
Of course, Dungeon Master comes off as a right bastard, no matter how you frame it, so you don't include him. Instead they luck into the magic items, and you have a sage who explains to them that, "sorry, kids, you're all we've got, that demon dude with the horns over there is trying to devour everyone's soul" and they're on a quest to destroy the things properly. In the middle we've got teen angst, drama, Eric betrays them to Venger only to have a last minute change of heart, (or in a twist, he DOESN'T have a change of heart and gets flambéed) -- very Lord of the Rings, but in one movie instead of three.
What about a 'reboot' using the Dungeons and Dragons cartoon for inspiration, going all "Connecticut Yankee?" Maybe even have Eric, Diana, Sheila, hank, etc. but fleshed out as actual late-teens with problems, teen romances, all that jazz? Kind of "Runaways meets D&D"? I can see a dozen different ways it could fail, but a few ways it could succeed -- all of them having to do with making them likable characters with a strong story of learning to stand up for who they are.
Of course, Dungeon Master comes off as a right bastard, no matter how you frame it, so you don't include him.
Instead they luck into the magic items, and you have a sage who explains to them that, "sorry, kids, you're all we've got, that demon dude with the horns over there is trying to devour everyone's soul" and they're on a quest to destroy the things properly. In the middle we've got teen angst, drama, Eric betrays them to Venger only to have a last minute change of heart, (or in a twist, he DOESN'T have a change of heart and gets flambéed) -- very Lord of the Rings, but in one movie instead of three.
Henry
Autoexreginated
The only problem with Dragonlance is that parts of it (first book, for sure) feel VERY derivative of Lord of the Rings. Running from Dragonarmies, escaping via the Crystalmir Lake water crossing, journeying to elven territory where they are tasked with a quest, then entering Dwarven ruins via a secret passage, etc. It's not a carbon copy to be sure, but I'm sure plenty of parallels would be drawn in movie reviews; it's like a pastiche, copying all the 'cool' parts of the LOTR. The second two books are much more their own thing, though.
Completely disagree: the Marvel movies are successful precisely because the have put real effort into making the movies "good" and not just entertaining. I really don't think there's any more to it than that, or any deeper secret behind Marvel's success with the MCU. It's not a function of zeitgeist or star-power or nostalgia or shared continuity. They simply decided, early on, that they weren't going to exploit their fan-base by pumping out low-budget schlock with a recognizable brand-name, and instead they tried to make all their movies genuinely good.
A D&D movie that is just "fantasy action CGI brain-dead fun" won't leave a mark. It needs to be on some level truly "good" in order to establish a franchise.
Mistwell
Crusty Old Meatwad (he/him)
What elements do you propose to include which would actually make it a "D&D" movie if you intend to remove both the name and the setting specifics from it?
Imagine if they said about a proposed Transformers movie, 1) don't use the word Transformers in the title of the movie, and 2) don't have them transform.
I mean...on some level there is no point to the project if it doesn't cater somewhat to people who recognize the D&D brand. That's pretty much the point of doing this to begin with. Generic Fantasy Movie will fail before it starts.
Parmandur
Book-Friend
This is a fun review of the 2005 movie and some discussion of D&D movies in general...
[video=youtube_share;zjCZAcneUII]https://youtu.be/zjCZAcneUII[/video]
The acting looks so incredibly wooden, and the camera work seems very static making the whole thing seem quite lifeless. The improvements to CGI should be a big help in whatever they're cooking up. But you can't fix bad directing, bad acting, a bad script and bad cinematography with CGI.
If we were to use Roger Corman's schlock machine Fantastic Four movie from the early 90's, and use that to argue how unlikely Paramount making a good Marvel comics movie in 2008, we would have been deeply off base.
The new D&D movie will not necessarily be good but neither must it necessarily be bad: but it is fundamentally unrelated to those old movies, and they have no bearing on what might happen.
Marvel, Disney (Pirates), the Fast & the Furious guys (who have stated they see their movies as D&D campaigns) have all shown that something like this can work. And as a wise man once said, anything worth doing is worth doing badly. The potential rewards are more than ample for Paramount to give it a good shot at being at the very least entertaining and money-making.
Parmandur
Book-Friend
Given how closely partnered WotC has become with Twitch, and that one of the Critical Role cast members won an Emmy for voice directing an Amazon original cartoon, an animated D&D series would not be shocking.
Similar Threads
