D&D Movie/TV D&D Movie - Wild Speculation and Poll

[Ralif Redhammer]

There are so many things about the script that just don't square up. That Gygax approved of it and praised it so, despite it being so far afield from D&D (while at the same time blasting Conan the Barbarian). And that James Goldman, the writer of the amazing Lion in Winter (well worth watching if you haven't) and the darkly thoughtful Robin and Marian created such a simplistic piece of nonsense.

Uff - that reads like a really really bad script. And the problem is not the Frame-Story ^^

 

[ART!]

There are so many things about the script that just don't square up. That Gygax approved of it and praised it so, despite it being so far afield from D&D (while at the same time blasting Conan the Barbarian). And that James Goldman, the writer of the amazing Lion in Winter (well worth watching if you haven't) and the darkly thoughtful Robin and Marian created such a simplistic piece of nonsense.

Stan Lee oversaw the creation of some pretty terrible/inaccurate Marvel adaptations to tv in the '70s. I'm sure the history of media adaptations is full of the creative forces behind successful IPs being adapted with full consultation of the creator into terrible and/or far-afield adaptations. I'm not sure what causes this. Probably studio/committee interference.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

The difference is, the characters in Pirates and Indiana Jones are real, at least within the fiction of the movie. The only real characters in TPB are a little boy and his grandpa, and they are never in any danger. If anything bad happens to anyone grandpa can just change it.

That makes it much closer to Monty Python and the Holy Grail.

Not to anyone just enjoying the movie rather than nitpicking it in order to have a hot take.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

Not to anyone just enjoying the movie rather than nitpicking it in order to have a hot take.

I enjoyed The Princess Bride, I enjoyed Monty Python and the Holy Grail. Because they where funny, not because they had stakes.

 

[ART!]

Different people are able to suspend their disbelief more readily or less readily, and in different ways. The story within a story in TPB isn't inherently less capable of engaging the viewer just because it's overtly a story being told to a kid - it just depends on the viewer.

 

[Christopher Bixby]

Well if one were to look into it further there already is a d&d movie out there and it is quite good as it was. It brought together a group of hero's of the main four races elf, human, dwarf, and halfling. They basically made it as an adventure in the mind if the characters and from a dms perspective it was kind of how I see a session for a campaign could go. The story building and character development were quite well done as well

 

[Christopher Bixby]

Here is a link to the 2000 movie on imdb website

Dungeons & Dragons (2000) ⭐ 3.6 | Action, Adventure, Fantasy

1h 47m | PG-13

m.imdb.com

 

[doctorbadwolf]

I enjoyed The Princess Bride, I enjoyed Monty Python and the Holy Grail. Because they where funny, not because they had stakes.

Good for you

 

[OB1]

I enjoyed The Princess Bride, I enjoyed Monty Python and the Holy Grail. Because they where funny, not because they had stakes.

I wonder if we are using different definitions of the word "stakes". Because funny relies on communicating the stakes of the scene to produce the emotional response of laughter just as much as a drama does to make you cry or an action story does to get you to the edge of your seat.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

I wonder if we are using different definitions of the word "stakes". Because funny relies on communicating the stakes of the scene to produce the emotional response of laughter just as much as a drama does to make you cry or an action story does to get you to the edge of your seat.

I want.... a shrubbery!