D&D Movie/TV Chris Pine To Star In D&D Movie

The long, slow process towards a modern take on D&D movies took a large step forward with the announcement of a huge star signed to the project. Considering that filming is set to start soon a cascade of announcements should be revealed in initiative order imminently. Filming begins in Q1 2021.

Jonathan Goldstein and John Francis Daley will be directing the film which features "an ensemble cast and take a subversive approach to the game."

Chris Pine In Talks To Star In ‘Dungeons & Dragons’ For eOne And Paramount; Jonathan Goldstein & John Francis Daley Direct

Chris Pine To Star In 'Dungeons & Dragons'

deadline.com

Chris Pine has closed a deal to star in Dungeons & Dragons, the live action film based on Hasbro’s massively popular role-playing game from Wizards of the Coast. Hasbro/eOne and Paramount are jointly producing and financing, with eOne distributing in the UK and Canada, and Paramount the rest of the world.

 

[Zardnaar]

No, I haven't hear much of their more recent (anything post 2005) works.

Youtube is your friend, it's not bad. Funny clip.

 

[wicked cool]

Its funny that there are some on this thread that believe Chris Pratt is a better actor then Pine. I'm sure they were 100% on board with Pratt being a super hero at the time guardians was announced

Another argument that D&D 2 dark for our times-last Harry Potter movie was very dark, the last avengers movie was dark etc

Modern audiences need it dumbed down and scifi not popular
Game of Thrones
Stranger Things
Mandalorian
Walking Dead

all 4 of these are mainstream-they appeal to mass audiences, are very dark, violent etc

All television all very popular (Walking Dead still has high ratings)

Nobody could have predicted
Peter Jackson-little history of directing (the frighteners) could turn a movie into 6 blockbuster movies that appeals to hardcore and casual
black/white comic strip into a mega zombie hit
a new director/ok actor to save Star Wars!

How about this 1-A little known director turning a lessor known super hero into one that inspired a whole country (Black Panther)


Its not the IP that has me worried its the parent company. As far as I know doesn't WOTC control the rights to this (meaning a director cant come in and do what they want without running it by WOTC?) . Disney has been mostly successful in doing this with some arguing that Star Wars went off the rails because of the people in charge

 

[LuisCarlos17f]

How to explain better the idea I want to say? Do you remember Harley Quinn, Joker's ex-girlfriend? This is an example of things from TV, videogames or movies what later were added to the comic, or the novels, (for example "Bones" the literary characters became pregnant after the actress of the action-live serie was really), and these become canon.

The scrippters hired for the D&D movie for the idea storm can suggest a lot of things, and later something from this to be added to the games. My theory is Hasbro wants Magic+D&D multiverse within "Hasbroverse", and this can alter the canon, the official lore, even causing someting like a multiverse crisis and with this some retcons or eve a total reboot of some lines.

Pixar's Onwarld isn't only a love letter for D&D but also Disney trying to court/woo Hasbro, something like "forget Paramount, I can produce the best blockbuster for your franchises".

 

[Umbran]

Fantasy is great for exploring the human experience via way of archetypes and mythic forms, but when it becomes a vehicle for social and political commentary it often diminishes its fantastical nature and veers towards social SF or mimetic fiction in the guise of fantasy.

:looks at what you wrote:
:looks at tons of material discussing LotR as commentary based on Tolkien's experience with WWI:
shrugs

 

[Umbran]

Critical acclaim means vanishingly little, especially in terms of what audiences enjoy, but into, and spend money on.

I don't think that's universally true. The fact that Rotten Tomatoes exists suggests that, at least in some media, critical acclaim is still relevant.

I think the stronger argument is that, for literature, persistent bias has driven traditional critical thought to the point of irrelevance to most of the audience. Critics of movies and theater have changed with the times, while much of literary criticism remains bogged down in outmoded patterns.

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

Right, critics don't always understand great art or what the populace wants.

No, they do, but they also see hundreds of movies a year, or their equivalent in whatever medium they review, and generally have more to say than just "I liked it, I didn't."

If anything, it's the fact that most people only see a few dozen movies a year makes them much more willing to put up with crap. If you're a critic, and you're seeing likely your 30th or 40th terrible movie of the year, you're not likely to be as indulgent.

(Also, I'm not sure why people get their feelings hurt when a critic doesn't like something. They're not going to slap your hand for enjoying it.)

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

Its funny that there are some on this thread that believe Chris Pratt is a better actor then Pine. I'm sure they were 100% on board with Pratt being a super hero at the time guardians was announced

Everyone was excited because he was great in Parks & Rec and that meant he would likely be funny in Guardians of the Galaxy, as he was. And people were shocked and amazed at his physical transformation.

If he's done as many dramatic roles as Chris Pratt, they're nowhere as well known as his comedy.

 

[Umbran]

The Nebula award is presented by fantasy or sci-fi writers. When you’re comparing fantasy and sci-if to other genres then an award created specifically to recognize fantasy and sci-fi probably doesn’t count.

No award you've mentioned is genre inclusive, though. It isn't like fantasy is the only fictional genre largely missing from the awards you've cited.

There is the National Award for Fiction, I posted a link earlier.

There's a National BOOK Award for Fiction.

As for the Booker there are fantasy writers outside of America. Im not sure what the concern is? Is fantasy writing only American?

By population size, you'd expect about 70% of English Language Fantasy to be written by Americans, I think.

I don’t see how being measured on your body of work disadvantages fantasy writers (unless some of it isn’t very good). But do you think bestowing benefit on mankind or take us in an ideal direction is a quality of one of the best authors.

With respect, the goalposts are moving. You started with "well written" - the awards were an indication that work was well written. Clearly, though, the awards aren't only for being well-written.

Let me try another approach here - I submit to you that, statistically speaking, these awards CANNOT be unbiased (in pretty much any way - genre, ethnicity of writer, or whatever). The number of awards given is too small! There's on the order of a million books published in the US each year. Each award selects roughly one.

Even if the awards held no intrinsic genre bias, a random choice of a handful out of millions should not be expected to be representative of the nature of the works. To sample large populations, even when you are taking an active effort to eliminate bias, you need a sample of hundreds to thousands, not singles. And, I don't think there's a solid argument that these awards are trying to eliminate biases.

 

[Mercurius]

:looks at what you wrote:
:looks at tons of material discussing LotR as commentary based on Tolkien's experience with WWI:
shrugs

Tolkien wasn't as much "commenting on" WWI (or II) as his writing was affected by his experience - which is always the case. There is a difference, and it relates to my point above. A writer such as Tolkien approaches the fantasy world as "true" in and of itself, which has its own story "speaks for itself," if you will. I'm not saying he didn't intentionally insert any socio-cultural-political commentary, but it was only minimally so.

Of course that is aside from the point that I was responding to, and rehashes an old argument that has been bandied about before. I think the main point is that I was agreeing with someone's hope that the D&D movie isn't yet another vehicle for writers to message their stance on current socio-cultural dynamics, or at least minimally so. It breaks from the immersive experience, if one is constantly turned back on contemporary (and ever-changing) dynamics in our world. We already have tons of echo chambers to mirror back our beliefs and ideas about the world - why must we make a fantasy film yet another?

 

[doctorbadwolf]

I don't think that's universally true. The fact that Rotten Tomatoes exists suggests that, at least in some media, critical acclaim is still relevant.

I think the stronger argument is that, for literature, persistent bias has driven traditional critical thought to the point of irrelevance to most of the audience. Critics of movies and theater have changed with the times, while much of literary criticism remains bogged down in outmoded patterns.

While I agree your proposed explanation is true, I don’t buy that rotten tomatoes critic score actually changes what people watch and enjoy, nearly ever. If there was a way to conclusively test it, I’d gladly wager $100 that less than 5% of movie goers have their mind changed by the aggregate critic score of any of the couple websites that have that, and I’d throw an extra 20 on it being less than 1%.

Extremely negative reviews might stop people seeing soemthing, but they don’t change their minds about it after viewing, and if the audience score is high, most people will dismiss the critic score as critics not getting it.