D&D Movie/TV D&D Movie Moves Forward With Deal With Former Marvel Exec Jeremy Latcham

[LuisCarlos17f]

You can bet the plans for videogames are very important, but these projects need time. A good AAA videogame needs years of work, and even the best studios can start to fail.

 

[Traycor]

You can bet the plans for videogames are very important, but these projects need time. A good AAA videogame needs years of work, and even the best studios can start to fail.

I mean developing that story as their movie.

 

[Haffrung]

We already have a template for what a D&D movie should look like: Guardians of the Galaxy.

Characters are a group of diverse freaks unknown to the movie-going public. With no audience familiarity the filmmakers will need to present vivid and broadly-drawn characters.

Action is centered around heists and exploring strange places. The group are not do-gooders by nature, but they kind of fall into doing good. Perfect for a D&D action movie.

Leans into comedy. Despite its recent emergence as a quasi-mainstream activity, D&D's reputation among the wider public is still pretty dorky. This movie should lean into that with the kind of knowing genre winks and one-liners that GotG embraces. (Also see Jumanji).

Kick-ass soundtrack. If I were the director, I'd take a cue from James Gunn and burn the studio a soundtrack mix when I turned in the treatment. Rush. Black Sabbath (I imagine an opening slow-mo action scene accompanied by 'the Wizard'), Iron Maiden, Metallica, Rage Against the Machine.

The worst thing they could do is give it a serious tone. Aside from a handful of uber-nerds, nobody wants to watch a serious fantasy movie based off a tabletop game.

 

[Dausuul]

They're ALL money-grabs! Every movie you mentioned was in fact a money-grab and anyone spinning it otherwise is lying to you.

Movies are money grabs, Highness. Anyone who says differently is selling something.

 

[Istbor]

Lord of the Rings?
13th Warrior?
Kingdom of Heaven?
Prince of Persia?
47 Ronin?

My heart will always belong to 13th Warrior.

 

[Chaosmancer]

The worst thing they could do is give it a serious tone. Aside from a handful of uber-nerds, nobody wants to watch a serious fantasy movie based off a tabletop game.

"based off a tabletop game" I will agree.

But, with Game of Thrones ending "just recently" I could see a niche for a serious fantasy film.

 

[Deset Gled]

We already have a template for what a D&D movie should look like: Guardians of the Galaxy.

Not picking on you, Haffrung, lots of people have been saying this in this thread, but.... Trying to be like GotG, or anything out of the MCU, is a huge mistake on so many levels.

First, consider that everyone has tried to copy the MCU, and pretty much everyone has failed. Universal tried to kickstart their own Universe with The Mummy; it failed. DC (Warner) tried to copy GotG with Suicide Squad; it failed. There are more. A D+D movie will have less budget, less material to pull from, less talent available, and less interest to the public (medieval fantasy vs sci-fi) than any of the copycats, and an equally lower chance of succeeding.

More importantly, though, a major reason GotG (and other movies in the MCU) was successful was because it was original and played against the standard. You can't copy that because now it's the standard.

 

[Ralif Redhammer]

I think that the problem has traditionally been that studios want to follow the part in the MCU template where it's already a franchise, without putting in the groundwork. You just cannot jump to The Avengers without that first Iron Man movie. You need one good movie to start things off with, that isn't hellbent on establishing a franchise, but on just being a good movie.

First, consider that everyone has tried to copy the MCU, and pretty much everyone has failed. Universal tried to kickstart their own Universe with The Mummy; it failed. DC (Warner) tried to copy GotG with Suicide Squad; it failed. There are more.

 

[FlyingChihuahua]

I think that the problem has traditionally been that studios want to follow the part in the MCU template where it's already a franchise, without putting in the groundwork. You just cannot jump to The Avengers without that first Iron Man movie. You need one good movie to start things off with, that isn't hellbent on establishing a franchise, but on just being a good movie.

As well as the other movies setting up the other characters.

 

[bedir than]

Making it like Guardians doesn't mean making it like the MCU. The MCU could exist without Guardians pretty easily.

The tone and story of Guardians is what they suggest they are aiming for, not some kind of subplot or sidebar to a larger universe. That can't be true until they have a larger universe