D&D Movie/TV D&D Movie Hit or Flop?

[M_Natas]

Not a bad idea basically my idea with the video fane. Entire season of Shadow and Bone cost 60 odd million.

Basically they need to make decent lower ambition stuff and build up to the big stuff.

"The brand" isn't really there outside if the ttrpg. In been decades since they've had a hit game.

So, Hasbro/WotC - if you read here - you can hire me and put me I charge of the D&D Cinematic Universe

 

[M_Natas]

Don't really need a negative article the numbers are staring you in the face.

There's not really any recent articles good or bad. That's even worse it implies indifference much like the box office take.

That's sadly the case, I fear. Outside of D&D circles, nobody really cares about the movie. Even my favourite movie reviewers, Redlettermedia, didn't do a Review on DD:HaT, which should be right up their alley.

 

[Zardnaar]

That's sadly the case, I fear. Outside of D&D circles, nobody really cares about the movie. Even my favourite movie reviewers, Redlettermedia, didn't do a Review on DD:HaT, which should be right up their alley.

So is review bombing good?

 

[FrogReaver]

But people don't go to the Cinema to see a world (except maybe Avatar ... but I think James Cameron made a deal with devil - his Box office record os outright scary - with 11 movies he is the highestgrossing director ever and made more money then steven spielberg with his 30 movies ...). In order to be successful you need characters. Pirates of the Caribbean was a succes because of Johnny Depps Jack Sparrow. The MCU was a success because they made us care about Tony Stark, Steve Rogers, Thor and even the freaking Hulk and a Raccoon! But that is also the reason the MCU is struggling right now, because they have problems making us care about the next generation of avengers. I mean, who cares about the eternals or Shang-Chi?

Star Trek works best, when they succeed in making us care about the characters. That's why it's usually needs like three seasons of a new Trek show to become good.

They need to build up the Characters and need to make us a care about them.
Ironically they actually did that with the prequel novels. That should have been the first movies/series in the D&D cinematic universe. To make us getting to know the characters and make us care about them. That's why John Wick is working. The first movie made us care. That's why we watch part 2, 3 and 4, because of the emotional connection forged in the first movie.

We have to see about that. My guess is, outside the D&D bubble not a lot of people took an interest in the movie. That's why it's bombing.

IMO, you seem to be of the opinion that if they try they can make us care about whatever character they want. The reality is that they always try to make us care about the characters - they just don't always succeed.

People in general don't care about the eternals, not for lack of trying on their part but because people just don't care as much about that IP as they do for the more popular ones.

D&D doesn't have an established story people want to see told, so they get to build from mostly scratch - that's both a blessing and a curse.

 

[Zardnaar]

IMO, you seem to be of the opinion that if they try they can make us care about whatever character they want. The reality is that they always try to make us care about the characters - they just don't always succeed.

People in general don't care about the eternals, not for lack of trying on their part but because people just don't care as much about that IP as they do for the more popular ones.

D&D doesn't have an established story people want to see told, so they get to build from mostly scratch - that's both a blessing and a curse.

Might be partly true there's probably multiple reasons we can come up with.

Avengers for example they had individual movies first.

 

[M_Natas]

So is review bombing good?

At least it would create some buzz. You fail as an artist if you people just don't care about your art.
At best they love your art. At second best, they hate it. At worst the don't care and just ignore you.
Like ... HaT has 36 000 ratings on IMDB. Freaking cocaine bear has 50 000 and Mario has so far 38 000 (I don't think a lot more Kids have IMDB Accounts). John Wick 4 has 100 000 ratings and even Shazam 2 had 41 000. That just shows, that there is not a lot of interest in the movie itself.
Like ... for most people DD:HaT is as interesting as Shazam 2. And that is not a lot. Because even though I know that Shazam 2 exists, I really don't care. If it is streamed on a streaming service I already subscribe too, I may watch it if there is nothing else (like with Shazam 1 - I watched it in an airplane, because it was the most interesting Movie they had that I hadn't seen yet), but that's it. The same seems to be the case with DD:HaT. Casual movie goers without interest in D&D or having a friend who is dragging them to the cinema, they just don't care about it. They may see it if it drops to their streaming service but they will not seeks it out. Like my Sister, who is actually playing D&D - she was just - meh, I see it when it comes to Netflix.

Some Movies make you want to go the cinema, like the MCU at the Hight of their game, like, it seems, any James Cameron Movie ...
Even my interest wasn't that big to begin with. Only reading the Prequel novels made me really excited to see the movie.

Like ... I'm more excited about the Barbie Movie. Those trailers peaked my interest. Like - wtf is going on over their at Mattel?

The D&D Marketing didn't do that for me. I needed the prequel novels to get really excited for the Movie. And sadly not a lot of people are reading books anymore. And reading a book to get excited about a movie is not the best marketing strategy

Paramount and Hasbro need to up their marketing and movie making game.

 

[M_Natas]

IMO, you seem to be of the opinion that if they try they can make us care about whatever character they want. The reality is that they always try to make us care about the characters - they just don't always succeed.

Yes. And the movies that succeed in making us (the casual movie goers in general) care about the characters usually do better at the Box Office.
And one of the biggest criticisms of HaT is, that reviewers don't really care about the characters. And I can see that. I don't know if I would have cared so much for the characters if I haven't read the prequel novels. They really enhance the movie.
Like even though I make fun of James Cameron, he know how to make us care about giant blue people. Haven't seen Avatar 2 yet, but in one, we care about the Na'vi and are like "Yeah, stick it to the human corporate scum!".
In HaT? Did anybody really care that Edgin and his Crew turned around to fight Sofia and safe the city instead of running away with the loot? The highest stake in HaT (saving the city) had no emotional connection. The Movie didn't make us care about the City and its inhabitants.
They don't because it is the right thing to do, but it doesn'thave the same impact as Han Solo coming back in Star Wars (IV) to help Luke blow up the Death Star. It is the same plot device (reluctant hero comes back to save the day). In Star Wars we care that the death Star is about to blow up the rebel base, because Leia & Luke care. In HaT, non of the Characters really cares about Neverwinter.
It is really like a D&D campaign, where the Group goes to random city 12 to save it and then move on. Its a D&D campaign in good and in bad.

People in general don't care about the eternals, not for lack of trying on their part but because people just don't care as much about that IP as they do for the more popular ones.

People didn't care for Thor or Captain America in the beginning either. But they made us care. Shang Shi and Eternals ate in the same ballpark (around 400 million) as the first Thor or the first captain America. Shang Shi is better rated, Eternals worse than those two. So they are right in the ballpark of at the beginningmof making us care. Only an exceptional marvel movie (or other external benefiting factors like black panther) with new characters will make more then 400 million in their first movie.

D&D doesn't have an established story people want to see told, so they get to build from mostly scratch - that's both a blessing and a curse.

Yeah. And that is true. But they need an emotional core. I mean, as much as I don't care about the Fast & Furious movies, they have their emotional core in their found family and they are milking that.

 

[Gammadoodler]

My comparison has more to do with how well known the IPs are, budget and talk about a sequel based on box office. It's a good compasion point of what a big studio would consider successful enough to fast track a sequel (and the fact the DND movie probably wont hit that). There might be better examples but enough of the factors are close enough that I think it's a fairly good comparison.

I actually do think a live action Pokemon movie that was an adaption of maybe the first few gyms of the Pokemon game/anime probably would have done better than Detective Pikachu, properly playing off nostalgia.

Sure, to be clear, I'm inclined to agree that there likely are comparisons that may have similar quantitative and qualitative characteristics as the D&D movie.

I just do not think Detective Pikachu is that movie, and the qualitative characteristics differ enough that using it to predict the future for a D&D franchise seems unwise.

I would also agree that a live action Pokemon movie based on traditional Pokemon content could do really well barring a complete trainwreck.

 

[Gammadoodler]

IMO, you seem to be of the opinion that if they try they can make us care about whatever character they want. The reality is that they always try to make us care about the characters - they just don't always succeed.

People in general don't care about the eternals, not for lack of trying on their part but because people just don't care as much about that IP as they do for the more popular ones.

D&D doesn't have an established story people want to see told, so they get to build from mostly scratch - that's both a blessing and a curse.

Enhh. I'd argue that the Eternals movie doesn't really care that much about the Eternals' characters. The entire basis for the romance between the two leads was a montage of them being pretty together and/or looking looking sultrily at each other, and that's maybe the deepest relationship shown onscreen.

A reasonable comparison in terms of IP prestige would be the Guardians of the Galaxy. Similarly obscure, but much more care in fleshing out how those characters tick, how they fit together, where conflicts are, etc. And the result is that we care about them more.

 

[Undrave]

Overall thoughts on this, yes the OP is quite clear how measuring this, so I can see why the focus is on the numbers by Zardnaar, it is the whole premise of the thread, though perhaps the title could have said something like 'D&D Move - Hit or Flop at Box Office?' or something similarly a bit more narrower in focus to go along with the opening post, otherwise it lends itself to a bit more general interpretations and is possibly more emotive / getting stronger reactions as it stands than if it was otherwise (and not helped with other posts around the likes of 'could D&D die again?' which look to be interesting thought experiments, but all added together can be taking as doom saying for D&D as a whole).

For me I guess I disagree with the premise of measuring it solely on box office results, as aren't necessarily only measures of success, given other sources of revenue that others mention, plus what might be the overall goals.

Shazam and Black Adam have both had a lot of media attention on poor showings at the box office, but if they were just standalone independent films there may have not been such attention or such a view of being failures, but it is more them being part of the wider DC / superhero franchises that people look at them as being poor. Similar Doctor Strange and MoM has had a lot of mixed views on it's success, despite nearly reaching 1 billion at the box office on a budget upwards of 200 million - not a financial issue by any means, but people expected / hoped for more. The attention on Antman and the Wasp 3 is even worse, though again more than doubled it's budget, but people expected a lot better, and already doomsaying about the MCU as a whole despite what seems to still be a profitable business, just not as profitable as it used to be.

Thus when it comes to D&D, people have different expectations, and may consider that while at box office it may not recoup costs, that doesn't mean it wasn't successful for what they were going for, whether something else in Paramount + stable, more awareness / sales for D&D brand, merchandising etc.

I admit I hoped for better myself in terms of Box Office results, as would like a sequel and obviously the better it goes, the more likely this will occur, but I don't think that it's performance to date necessarily means it won't get a sequel - Paramount and Hasbro could be pretty happy with where things stand now.

And Paramount is in a much more solid position than DC in comes of production slate. Paramount has multiple franchises doing well, while DC is struggling to get success from 1 of the like… two franchise they’re still developing.

They clearly didn’t trust the new IP enough for a spot in the summer or holiday season, and it’s clear that, had Mario showed up for Christmas, instead of April, DnD would probably have hung on to the first place for last weekend. ‘Air’ was never going to draw the family crowds so its opening is probably within expectations and it wouldn’t have been a contender.

It’s really weird that the movie is getting lots of praise, both from critics and audiences, and is still not more profitable. I think the marketing maybe failed to capture the heart of the film?

That is true. I read the prequel Novel and was like: will the daughter even be in the movie? Why isn't she mentioned in the trailers at all? Both prequel novels really pull at your heartstrings and Road to Neverwinter is the best D&D Novel I've read so far and that is what you should focus on. The heart of the story. The Advertisement made the Movie to be a Knock Off Guardians of the Galaxy.

I think that's why it is not getting traction with casual movie goers. They have enough of soulless Superhero studio movies.

They have also no emotional investment in D&D in comparison to something like Mario. I think what we see right now are the box office numbers you get, when you only activate the fan base.
It will end up with something like 200 million globally. Which is not a lot. And that is a problem.

They really needed a line I nthe trailer that went ‘I’m taking my daughter back’ or something.