D&D 2 Movie Preview at Gen Con!

[Sundragon2012]

I also have to say that I feel that D&D is NOTHING more than a ruleset to support great stories and adventures. It isn't IMO supposed to be a certain thing other than the background mechanics to aid the DM and players in creating a systematic way in whch to run a setting.

The setting, the characters, the NPCs, the plots, these are the things that matter most. If someone were writing a book, D&D the system is the language being used, while the actual story is the work of the DM and players. Certain languages express certain concepts better than others, the same way some rule sets are better than others for certain types of gaming. However, it isn't merely the language the reader wants when they open up a book, it is what the words do to inspire the imagination.

Philosophically I am utterly opposed to the movie made to reflect a set of rules and dice rolls.

Chris

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

I sure hope we see WotC putting more Ismer material up online, like they did for the last movie.

What? The Web content was pretty good, despite the awfulness of the movie. Somewhere, they've got at least two movie tie-in supplements that were never published, just waiting to be raided for more Web content.

 

[Desdichado]

It might not suck, and it seems certain to suck a lot less than the first film.

A truly glowing recommendation!

The first D&D movie is right up there with Street Fighter as possibly the biggest cinematic disappointments of my life. Armed with those extremely low expectations, I'm hoping that the second D&D movie will at least mildly entertain me. If it does, I'll probably be satisfied.

 

[Upper_Krust]

Thanks for the report wingsandsword dude!

Well, I did see the preview at Gen Con. (By the way, I"m a "him")

It was a 25 minute preview reel,

Was anyone in the audience wielding a camcorder?

I'm just wondering if (and when) this footage is going to be released online?

with the writer of the film as well as Charles Ryan, and someone from Hasbro that I didn't recognize her name there also to answer questions (the tone of the audience was a little dubious at first, as we all wanted it so succeed, but we know the first one sucked and hope against hope this will be at least decent). By the end, there was a general feel of cautious optimism that the movie will be fun and something we can enjoy.

I was optimistic before the report, now I'll almost certainly be buying the dvd.

Here are some facts:

It's set in the same world as the first one, as it's technically a sequel. There are references to it taking place in the same Kingdom of Ismer, and Damodar is back as a recurring villain (now an undead, and they specifically said he doesn't have any funny lipstick), it's set 100 years in the future. Otherwise, it's a completely new story with only tenuous connections to the first.

He probably would have made a better Death Knight than Lich, but we will see how it goes.

They have the 4 basic archetypes as the main characters: Cleric (including a shot of him turning undead), Wizard (including casting Lightning Bolts devastating an oncoming army), a thief (including disarming a trap they find in a dungeon), and a warrior-type (a female half-elf barbarian), they really play up her rage apparently.

Are the thief and wizard both male?

Is the actress playing the half-elf a babe-arian?

Other than one actor in a supporting role, everything is new. New writers, new directors/producers, new cast. They are going out of their way to ignore many things about the first move, includng the line "Snails? Who's Snails?", delivered with a smile when the writer was asked about if Snails was ressurected in the movie.

They could have a scene in the movie where one character falls into a slimy, stone trap, and wakes to find snails (the creatures, not the character) all over his body and they say "I hate snails!"...only to be attacked by a Flailsnail.

There are passing references to other parts of D&D. The thief asks the barbarian what her kind saw in the Barrier Peaks that drove them crazy. (Yes, I know Barrier Peaks are technically in Greyhawk, but I think that was supposed to be a reference of "This is D&D")

Izmer could be the Suloise Empire? Or the Great Kingdom.

Charles Ryan heavily reviewed the script inserting suggestions for ways to make it be more like D&D, and specifically made sure that certain D&Disms were put in, and at least mentioned in dialog to set them up for a non D&D-playing audience (we were shown a clip of a brief part where the difference between Arcane and Divine magic is explained).

Praise the Lord - theres a Cleric in the movie this time! Hallelujah!

When characters cast spells, they use VSM components, they didn't hammer it in with lots of explanatory dialog, but if you pay close attention, you can realize that every time any character casts X spell, they use Y verbal component.

Did you notice any spells other than Lightning Bolt?

The main villain of the movie is a dracolich (well, it's an undead dragon, and Charles Ryan said a major character is a Lich), and the cleric in one scene tries to turn him and use divine magic against him.

I'm just wondering, the characters must be fairly high-level if they are taking on a Lich and a Dracolich. You also mention the Wizard gets to Lightning Bolt 'an army'.

One character has a Ring of the Ram, and uses it heavily in a fight scene.

Its already cooler than the first movie by virtue of that alone.

There are drow in the movie, but we only see their dead bodies in a dungeon.

Dungeons & Dragons 3: Revenge of the Drow.

A magmin is featured in the movie, and it specifically wasn't depicted as too bright (a reply to the answers about Beholders and other smart monsters being depicted as fairly dumb in the D&D movie, they used normal D&D creatures, and specifically paid attention to their ability scores when writing what they could do).

Any other monsters other than a Dracolich, Lich, Magmin? You mentioned the cleric turns undead too...?

When the main characters enter a dungeon, all 4 enter at once as a group, and it's a big underground complex full of monsters, traps, treasure, and the like, instead of one character walking down a hallway while everybody else waits (like the first movie).

Do they have a 10 foot pole?

Players Handbooks were on the set/location, and the actors had to read relevant parts about their character class/race and the things they were supposed to be doing, as character research. (One way or the other, you can't say they didn't even read the PHB when making it).

I wonder did they get to roleplay the 'adventure' before they acted it out. I just hope theres not a TPK...although to be fair that would have worked well in the first movie.

It's planned for a DVD release in the USA in early to mid November, overseas it is getting a theatrical distribution in some countries (details still being worked out), and DVD in other countries. If it does well, further sequels are certain and theatrical releases are much more likely.

I am confident it will do well. If its any good at all then most gamers will buy it.

Hopefully it will get a theatrical release here in the UK.

The only reason the movie wasn't set in an established setting, like Forgotten Realms or Dragonlance was that the movie rights to those settings were in the hands of yet another company than the D&D name itself.

Plenty of time for those to surface.

 

[naturaltwenty]

Straight to DVD?

Straight to DVD movies are usually regulated to properties that have run their course (Disney's Lion King 2, Aladdin 2, etc) or soft-core porn ala Shannon Whirrey.

Does this mean I won't rent it when it comes out it just doesn't come to the table with as much pizzaz as a theatrical release.

Later,

Greg Volz
Natural Twenty Gaming
www.naturaltwenty.com

 

[Desdichado]

Straight to DVD movies are usually regulated to properties that have run their course (Disney's Lion King 2, Aladdin 2, etc) or soft-core porn ala Shannon Whirrey.

The movie might actually be better with Paris Hilton if it is soft-core porn. I suspect that's where her true talent lies.

 

[WizarDru]

Straight to DVD movies are usually regulated to properties that have run their course (Disney's Lion King 2, Aladdin 2, etc) or soft-core porn ala Shannon Whirrey.

Quick Point of Law, here: the Lion King set sales records for it's home video sales and rental figures. Lion King II did also....they weren't slumming; they were playing to their market. Lion King 1 1/2, Aladdin 2 and 3 also did well...so that's not necessarily a bad thing.

And for the record, Mad Max I did NOT do big box office. It did hit $100 million dollars, yes...in FIVE YEARS. For it's initial run that it was in theaters, it grossed 8 million in the US and 5 million AUS dollars. I mean, the biggest grossing film of 1979 only made 106 Million, followed by the Muppet Movie, which made 76 Million. It's a cult classic, to be sure, but let's compare apples to apples, here.

 

[wingsandsword]

Straight to DVD movies are usually regulated to properties that have run their course (Disney's Lion King 2, Aladdin 2, etc) or soft-core porn ala Shannon Whirrey.

Or for things where the distributor has little confidence about its ability to be profitable with a cinema release. The first D&D movie didn't do so well, so they're probably skittish about letting it's sequel into theaters. They did say, in no uncertain terms, that if the movie does very well on DVD, future sequels being theatrical releases was likely.

As for questions about the preview, no there were no camcorders that I saw, but I think they had 3 showings of it (and plenty of people still in line when they ran out of time to keep showing it), I don't recall any other creatures, but we only saw bits & pieces so I wouldn't be surprised about other things showing up, the lighting bolts were being thrown in a battle where dozens of soldiers were coming over a hill, and the wizard was standing there blowing up lines of them. It might have been an item, I don't know. Yes, the half-elf barbarian is hot. The other three characters are male, and I think human, although the thief is a very short person so I don't know if he was supposed to be a gnome or halfling (it's doubtless explained in dialog if he is, but the actor himself is very short).

Other things I recall:
The running time of the movie is 90 to 95 minutes depending on how editing goes.

They made a point of characters finding new equipment and using it, including a vorpal sword (although they were treating it as a sword of sharpness, since they showed a clip of it taking someones arm off, but Vorpal Sword sounds a lot cooler than "sword of sharpness and we don't know if it also takes heads off).

The cleric doesn't use any edged weapons in the movie. (A bit of an old-school nod). We didn't see any clips of them explaining it in dialog, but they did say that he doesn't use any.

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

The movie might actually be better with Paris Hilton if it is soft-core porn. I suspect that's where her true talent lies.

The evidence is out there on the Internet: No, it's not where her talent lies. If anything, she's probably a better actress when she keeps her clothes on, which should tell you all that you need to know about the nudie stuff.

 

[Upper_Krust]

Hello again!

Here is a link to the film poster (before they changed the name to Wrath of the Dragon God:

http://www.filmfantastic.com/film-pictures/Dungeons & Dragons 2.jpg

You sure the mage isn't a girl?

Also it would seem that Damodar may not be the lich (at least to start with).

I wonder what those flying monsters are at the top left of the poster are...vargouilles (?)...although they have feet/hands.

The dracolich looks great...reminds me a little of the Alien Queen from Aliens.

Or for things where the distributor has little confidence about its ability to be profitable with a cinema release. The first D&D movie didn't do so well, so they're probably skittish about letting it's sequel into theaters. They did say, in no uncertain terms, that if the movie does very well on DVD, future sequels being theatrical releases was likely.

Makes sense.

As for questions about the preview, no there were no camcorders that I saw, but I think they had 3 showings of it (and plenty of people still in line when they ran out of time to keep showing it),

I'll talk to Charles over on the WotC boards and see what he says.

I don't recall any other creatures, but we only saw bits & pieces so I wouldn't be surprised about other things showing up,

the lighting bolts were being thrown in a battle where dozens of soldiers were coming over a hill, and the wizard was standing there blowing up lines of them. It might have been an item, I don't know.

Maybe its a wand that will run out once the mage gets over confident.

Or maybe you saw Damodar using that Orb he seems to be carrying in the poster.

Yes, the half-elf barbarian is hot.

She is kinda cute.

The other three characters are male, and I think human, although the thief is a very short person so I don't know if he was supposed to be a gnome or halfling (it's doubtless explained in dialog if he is, but the actor himself is very short).

No pointed ears (?) so presumably not an elf then.

Other things I recall:
The running time of the movie is 90 to 95 minutes depending on how editing goes.

Thats what I expected.

They made a point of characters finding new equipment and using it, including a vorpal sword (although they were treating it as a sword of sharpness, since they showed a clip of it taking someones arm off, but Vorpal Sword sounds a lot cooler than "sword of sharpness and we don't know if it also takes heads off).

Kewl!

The cleric doesn't use any edged weapons in the movie. (A bit of an old-school nod). We didn't see any clips of them explaining it in dialog, but they did say that he doesn't use any.

Is that him on the left of the four 'heroes' on the poster?