D&D 5E Does 5E avoid the overloads of previous editions?

[Mistwell]

You are not a lesser known hero by making 12th.

Pretty sure that's exactly what that means. Superman, Batman, Wonder Woman, Spider-man, X-Men, Hulk. Those were the Tier 1 properties - the ones everyone knew.

For Marvel, Fantastic Four, Daredevil, and Wolverine (as an individual) ranked next tier.

Lower down were Punisher, Iron Man, Captain America, and Thor.

Iron Man, prior to the movie, was a lesser known character. Now of course he is a household name. But there is a good reason why, when Marvel was forced to sell their well-known characters, Iron Man was lower on the list. He was on the list (I think it was New Line, who let their option expire), but he just wasn't considered one of the highly important, well known characters.

 

[Mistwell]

I mean, is it really your contention that Hollywood is only interested in original content, and not at all in remakes, reboots, spin-offs, copies, and other material derivative of successful productions?

That's a great point.

The Black Ranger's argument about how D&D's tropes have "already been done" is an argument in FAVOR of D&D movies. Everything about the last 20 years of movies says "It's like something else" is a benefit for a film, not a harm.

 

[Scrivener of Doom]

(snip) Continuing in the superhero theme, it was a mere 6 years between the release of Batman & Robin and when Nolan and Goyer were given the go-ahead on Batman Begins.

Major difference: the Batman franchise had already demonstrated that it could be financially and critically successful. That is definitely not the case with D&D!

However, I do otherwise appreciate your basic argument: Hollywood has proven time and time again that derivative is acceptable and even successful.

 

[Iosue]

However, I do otherwise appreciate your basic argument: Hollywood has proven time and time again that derivative is acceptable and even successful.

And I'll just note that, were I a betting man, I'd wager on a future D&D movie not being of especially great quality -- especially from the point of view of actual D&D fans. But if whatever licensing deal they have brings revenue to the D&D brand, and helps the D&D brand get past the $50 million mark to become a Core Brand, that's to the good of the game.

 

[The Black Ranger]

And I'll just note that, were I a betting man, I'd wager on a future D&D movie not being of especially great quality -- especially from the point of view of actual D&D fans. But if whatever licensing deal they have brings revenue to the D&D brand, and helps the D&D brand get past the $50 million mark to become a Core Brand, that's to the good of the game.

I think if there was to be another D&D movie it should have been done just after Return of the King, while the Harry Potter series was still going on. I believe the fantasy era has passed for now, The Hobbit didn't do as great as LOTR, and the era of comicbook heroes is what's in at the moment. That could last another decade.

 

[Iosue]

I think if there was to be another D&D movie it should have been done just after Return of the King, while the Harry Potter series was still going on. I believe the fantasy era has passed for now, The Hobbit didn't do as great as LOTR, and the era of comicbook heroes is what's in at the moment. That could last another decade.

The Hobbit movies are doing great. $303,003,568 domestic + $714,000,000 foreign = $1,017,003,568 worldwide for An Unexpected Journey, and $258,366,855 domestic + $694,700,000 foreign = $953,066,855 worldwide for Desolation of Smaug. Game of Thrones is all the rage. There's plenty of juice left in the cinematic fantasy genre. And even if hype dies down, a decent project can stoke it back up again.

 

[Texicles]

And don't forget about the World of Warcraft movie that's wrapping up filming about this time. Despite subscriber numbers that have been steadily declining for the last 3 years, a very niche fanbase, and significant difficulty getting production going, Blizzard (who's subject to their Activison overlords) felt it would be wise to continue the project. Not apples to apples with D&D, but someone's willing to throw money at a movie, betting that fantasy isn't dead.

Obviously, time will tell how profitable it is, but I think the same rules apply. If it's written, directed, acted and special effected well, it has a strong chance of doing well, making money and strengthening the Warcraft brand.

 

[Mistwell]

I think if there was to be another D&D movie it should have been done just after Return of the King, while the Harry Potter series was still going on. I believe the fantasy era has passed for now, The Hobbit didn't do as great as LOTR, and the era of comicbook heroes is what's in at the moment. That could last another decade.

Doesn't matter when "peak" revenue could have been achieved, we're just talking about what would be smart for Hasbro to do right now. Here are some of the most recent movies, all of which have a significant fantasy element to them: Frozen, 300: Rise of an Empire, Hobbit: Desolation of Smaug, Hunger Games: Catching Fire, The Legend of Hercules, Pompeii, Noah, 47 Ronin, and Thor: The Dark World. And that's just the last 5 months or so. I think a D&D movie will do just fine right now. It doesn't have to be a billion dollar box office smash - it just has to do fine. It's not like the Blade movies had lines around the block with hordes of people waiting to see them - but they did fine, and that kicked off what eventually became the Marvel empire of movies.