D&D Movie/TV (Yet another) D&D Movie Speculation thread.

[Mistwell]

I cannot even think of a fantasy, non-horror movie that did have evil elves.

Thor? Hellboy?

 

[Paul Farquhar]

The first movie has always been Episode IV. I recall at the time Lucas saying he started at IV because it was the episode when all the heroes meet. I'm sure he didn't know exactly what might be in any sequels or prequels but there was certainly a degree of planning here.

No. It was retitled when ESB was released.

It was always the fourth episode in Lucas' loose outline, but he started with it specifically because it was the only story that could stand alone and he didn't think it very likely that he would get to make the others.

The lesson: any D&D movie can be part of a sequence but it must also be completely self contained. Darlkwalker on Moonshae achieves that (although it's not difficult).

 

[Paul Farquhar]

Thor? Hellboy?

Thor 2 and Hellboy 2 to be precise.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

Having just read that the movie should stay away from elves and dwarves and include tieflings, I suddenly wondered if it could have both elves, dwarves, and a tieflings.

You could have elves and dwarves, but you would want to do them differently to the recent Tolkien movies. Sure, D&D has always ripped off Tolkien, and Peter Jackson ripped off D&D, but the movie needs to look like it's own thing.

For example, in the novel I suggested, Darkwalker on Moonshae, the elves are all female, wear shiny full plate, and are mounted; the dwarf is female and does not consume any alcohol.

But I have other reasons for suggesting a tiefling, other than simply "being different". Aquaman is currently doing well, with people praising it's "stunning visuals". Avatar was a huge hit almost entirely on it's visuals. "Stunning visuals" is one way a D&D movie could stand out from the crowd, but that would be hard to achieve in a generic pseudo-medieval setting. Going to Sigil would give creative artists and VFX people a chance to really go to town. And tieflings are common in Sigil.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

I cannot even think of a fantasy, non-horror movie that did have evil elves. Maybe a D&D movie will have to treat all elves more like the Seelie and Unseelie Courts from Celtic lore than the PHB elves if both good and evil ones exist.

The miniseries adaptation of Jonathan Strange featured some fey who were, if not actually evil, were definitely operating with a different moral compass than Tolkien elves. The same could be said of the Faries from the tv series, The Magicians.

In sci-fi, the highly advanced but declining species known as the Omec from Defiance were somewhat drowish, somewhat vampirish, and not exactly well-thought of.

 

[Pauln6]

No. It was retitled when ESB was released.It was always the fourth episode in Lucas' loose outline, but he started with it specifically because it was the only story that could stand alone and he didn't think it very likely that he would get to make the others.The lesson: any D&D movie can be part of a sequence but it must also be completely self contained. Darlkwalker on Moonshae achieves that (although it's not difficult).

I agree, self-contained stories with ongoing elements. I'd rather we didn't get a TPK. I think fans of some of the more fantastical versions of D&D have to consider that it has little movie pedigree so the budget can't be too ambitious. Character development is way more important than hollow spectacle because without it you can't appeal to a wider audience.

 

[rgoodbb]

The core of the movie should be about the party.

The party should be about quality group dynamics.

Very few people do quality group dynamics as well as Joss.

It should be Joss.

If it is Joss, everything else will fall into place and the movie should turn out quite nicely.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

Character development is way more important than hollow spectacle because without it you can't appeal to a wider audience.

Avatar and Aquaman beg to differ.

 

[Pauln6]

Avatar and Aquaman beg to differ.

Ah yeah, I should have said it's 'much harder to appeal to a wider audience'. There is a sweet spot for every movie and part of that success is timing. Avatar did a great job o bedazzling us with 3d trickery that few since have been able to repeat. Aquaman did also look like a movie that made excellent use of 3d imagery, although I saw it in 2d. I suspect that part of its success is that it has less competition for its niche at the moment but it was well paced, looked beautiful, had eye-popping CGI with awesome 3d effects, not one but two romance plots, and had a good cast.That said, its plotting was childishly simple, its approach to politics was infantile, and it was yet another example of Smurfette syndrome. Conan the Destroyer is possibly the best example of a big budget D&D movie that I can think of, although some of its plotting and most of its characterisation were very juvenile too. Mix that in with Thor: the Dark World and Pan's Labyrinth and see where we're at. :-D

 

[Paul Farquhar]

How do you explain Michel Bay then? His movies are consistently profitable, and consist of nothing but spectacle. Given the choice between character, plot, and big robots punching each other, audiences consistently turn out for the robots.