D&D Movie/TV Check Out The D&D Movie's Cast -- In Costume!

At San Diego Comic Con, next year's D&D movie, Honor Among Thieves, is getting a preview. Additionally, there's a 'tavern experience' where visitors can interact with D&D monsters and drink 'dragon brew', and at which is also displayed images of the cast of the movie in costume! everything below comes from that tavern experience, but there is an official panel/event later today (Thursday).

D&D Movie/TV - Dungeons & Dragons: Honor Among Thieves At San Diego Comic-Con

Attendees of San Diego Comic-Con this year will be able to immerse themselves in a 'Tavern Experience' promoting the upcoming D&D movie, Honor Among Thieves, IGN reports. It will be a 20-minute experience in which you can interact with D&D critters and characters. Additionally, guests can try...

www.enworld.org

Photo: ComicBook.com​

Various media outlets are there and are posting previews and photos:

• Check out the cast photos at ComicBook.com. These include Chris Pine, Regé-Jean Page, Michelle Rodriguez, Hugh Grant, and Sophia Lillis.
• The Hollywood Reporter tweeted a first look at the movie's dragon design along with another look at the cast with animated video posters.
• The movie poster has also been revealed (see below).

 

[Jer]

Since they also appear in Pathfinder I assume they are part of the OGL. So (arguably) OGL conditions would apply to use of the image. Which I seem to remember incudes a "WotC can use your stuff" clause.

Images are not a part of that - only text. In general images are considered Product Identity.

But it's all so murky that no one is going to want to challenge it.

Not really - under US law the copyright on the image either belongs to the original artist or to whoever contracted them to draw it (depending on whether it was done Work for Hire or not). Stealing someone's copyrighted work is something that companies that traffic in IP have to be extra careful about because, well, it's their livelihood.

It's also possible that the poster was made by the same artist that drew the Pathfinder illustration.

There are all sorts of explanations:

• The artist who created the poster is the same one who created the original image.
• The artist who created the poster is a hack and traced the image from a reference on a light table.
• The artist who created the poster had a list of monsters, googled their names, and stole the images they found to put into a collage under the mistaken idea that pictures on the Internet are public domain for remixing.
• The artist was given a bunch of references for monsters and was under the mistaken idea that they were able to be used to create a poster as is, rather than using them as a reference, and for some reason the Paizo bestiary was mixed in.

Unfortunately artists are not all angels and tracing other people's images or just taking images off the Internet and claiming them as their own is something that unscrupulous artists do all the time. Also far too many people think that if you google something and drawings come up those images are public domain and free to remix - even professional artists have this misaprhension sometimes, which is crazy because they're in the industry but it happens. If that's the case whoever owns the copyright - Paizo or the original artist - should probably contact eOne and/or Paramount and start asking if they're planning on paying for that image. Some graphic designer is likely in a heap of trouble once folks find out they've been using random unlicensed images off the internet.

 

[Rabulias]

Since they also appear in Pathfinder I assume they are part of the OGL. So (arguably) OGL conditions would apply to use of the image. Which I seem to remember incudes a "WotC can use your stuff" clause.

I am fairly sure the OGL does not apply to artwork.

It's also possible that the poster was made by the same artist that drew the Pathfinder illustration.

It is possible that the artist retained the copyright of the image after doing the work for Paizo, but I doubt it. The image of the mimic in the movie poster is the one from the 5th edition D&D Monster Manual. From a quick Google search, it looks to me like the displacer beast image is from D&D 4th edition. I can't find anything yet on the owlbear or the octopus images.

 

[BookTenTiger]

Since they also appear in Pathfinder I assume they are part of the OGL. So (arguably) OGL conditions would apply to use of the image. Which I seem to remember incudes a "WotC can use your stuff" clause.

But it's all so murky that no one is going to want to challenge it.

It's also possible that the poster was made by the same artist that drew the Pathfinder illustration.

What if it's actually the Intellect Devourer that is the common link... Maybe it's living in the brain of someone in marketing and is making sure they get good representation???

 

[Jer]

What if it's actually the Intellect Devourer that is the common link... Maybe it's living in the brain of someone in marketing and is making sure they get good representation???

On behalf of my friend who works in marketing, I must resist making the obvious joke about the poor starving Intellect Devourer...

 

[jmartkdr2]

This is why I said owner, not artist. I think Paizo owns the copyright to that image.

This is where it gets tricky. I don't think the intellect devourer is claimed as intellectual property by Wizards. Even if it was, that would get into trademark more than copyright? Again, IANAL, but if I draw a picture of Mickey Mouse for a purpose under fair use, I would own the copyright for that image.

Mickey Mouse is also protected by trademark, so it's a whole other kettle of legal fish.

 

[DarkCrisis]

that is what orcs and goblin women look like these days, arts seem to like it that way.

If it’s not fuckable, do we really need it?

 

[Morrus]

If it’s not fuckable, do we really need it?

Keep an eye on your language, please.

 

[Ghost2020]

I think it's the 'cheapness' of how it looks. The Witcher and LotR didn't have costumes and armor that look like they're from the Spirit Halloween store.

Or maybe it's just the style or something, Just seems....off.

 

[Von Ether]

Some people will want a serious D&D movie. For many of those fans, such treatment validates their views and they'll feel they have fuel for the fire for arguing that their hobby (and the related IPs) is not a kiddie thing and should be seen a cool, but serious thing.

I get that vibe, I also had that whole, "Football fans sneer at my game while wearing silly things on their head" thing while growing up in the uncool times. I've also seen that the MCU has lost some fans because they think this new phase of movies is too silly for them. Yet, many fans say we need some more lightness in the DC movie-verse.

But the world has caught up with us and perhaps we have too many serious fantasy movies now? (Not really if you ask me.) And I enjoyed Vox Machina! And I enjoyed Ocean's 11 as well.

As long as the movie is fun. I think we will be alright. That sets up cult status which eventually means others will come along and try to do your more serious D&D movie. I think a fun D&D movie will really be a win-win regardless because here is the secret. ...

Money.

When fellow gamers asked me when will the hobby catch fire? I've said, "When it starts to make real money." Every major mainstream thing, golf, football, reality shows, are also revenue streams. Once the suits feel like they can get a taste, success begets success. And if that means the first D&D set of movies out of the gate are a fantasy version of the Fast and Furious and nets F&F money + F&F sized fan base, that's all right with me.

 

[Reynard]

I think it's the 'cheapness' of how it looks. The Witcher and LotR didn't have costumes and armor that look like they're from the Spirit Halloween store.

Or maybe it's just the style or something, Just seems....off.

Still never look as good as the film. Ever.