• The VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX is LIVE! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!

D&D Movie/TV Michelle Rodriguez, Justice Smith Join D&D Movie

From Comic Book Movies -- "Michelle Rodriguez (Avatar) and Justice Smith (Detective Pikachu) have joined Wonder Woman 1984's Chris Pine in Paramount and eOne's upcoming big-budget board game adaptation, Dungeons & Dragons..." https://www.comicbookmovie.com/fantasy/dungeons-dragons-michelle-rodriguez-and-justice-smith-join-chris-pine-in-fantasy-adaptation-a182313#gs.sfctbx We learned in...

From Comic Book Movies -- "Michelle Rodriguez (Avatar) and Justice Smith (Detective Pikachu) have joined Wonder Woman 1984's Chris Pine in Paramount and eOne's upcoming big-budget board game adaptation, Dungeons & Dragons..."

Michelle_Rodriguez_Cannes_2018_cropped.jpg



We learned in December about Chris Pine's involvement, along with directors Jonathan Goldstein and John Francis Daley.

 

log in or register to remove this ad


log in or register to remove this ad

No, the point is nonsense. You claiming I'm not playing fair is requiring me to treat the point as having any value whatsoever.

Adaptations, in any genre, have no better track record than works that are not adaptations.

What makes a film successful is a combination of the efforts of hundreds of people, from the producer, to the director, to the typically team of screenwriters (no matter what gets credited, there's usually a lot of cooks in the kitchen there), to production design and a thousand other factors.

Again, if adapting works was more likely to lead to success, THAT'S ALL HOLLYWOOD WOULD DO.

If you don't know what Save the Cat is, go look it up. There was a long period where it was considered the key to financial success. read the beats of what's outlined in that process and you will likely recognize dozens of films, because Hollywood drove that technique into the ground, because they thought it was a sure-fire way to succeed.
You have no idea what you're talking about. It's amazing.

Adapting works is the vast majority of what Hollywood does with bigger budget stuff. Have you not been paying attention for the last coupole of decades? And oh look, you're aware of a really basic trope from decades ago, and you seem to think that makes you some sort of expert? Good grief, this is just sad.
 



doctorbadwolf

Heretic of The Seventh Circle
I think the main problem is the Moonshaes is the Moonshaes.

If this was the 1980s, when a new wave of Celt-o-mania was upon us (which is what lead to the Moonshaes in the first place), people would totally be down for that.

Now? In 2021? There's no Celt-o-mania (that's a legit term btw, I didn't make it up), and there's not a particular hunger for a celtic setting, especially one chock-full of white people (two flavours - celt flavour and viking flavour, but still) and not much else. Yeah, you can of course have characters who have traveled from afar to the White People Islands (oh my god I am suppressing so many sassy comments sorry), but that's a pretty tired trope and makes non-white characters all "others" to some extent (it's not hideous or anything it's just tired).

Let's not even start on the character/place names or the Ffolk and so on.

Also, way more people have played D&D now, in 2021, than in 2000, and on top of that, awareness about D&D and RPGs in general is vastly higher. Part of what people love is the parties - diverse groups of weirdoes who bicker and squabble and have a good time whilst getting into adventures. Even the 2000 D&D movie got that bit. And I think any D&D movie has to, really. So you need a basis that has such a party in it (or can easily be expanded to have such).

Guardians of the Galaxy is actually in a lot of ways, the best "D&D movie" we've seen so far and really you want the fantasy equivalent of that. Which includes races which aren't just the Tolkien races.

I think that's why they're going original, despite the risk. None of the "classic" D&D novels (at least the well-known ones) captures what's cool about D&D. Some of them are cool stories, but they're not really D&D stories. Plus, they're almost all about a bunch of white people and some Tolkien-races (who are also white), and often disproportionately male (though not always - but the ones which aren't tend to be personally-focused stories rather than party-focused ones, for whatever reason).

I'll be shocked if the movie doesn't want to have a Tiefling and/or Dragonborn in it too. So really they'd be only looking at more modern stuff, which has little recognition.
I really wish they'd make it an Eberron movie, whether based on an existing novel or not. Eberron is extremely accessible (id say its even more accessible to the casual audience than it is to the average dnd nerd, who brings a bunch of assumptions with them that must then be abandoned), familiar but also new, with plenty of room for tropes from both fantasy and non-fantasy fiction without feeling like the movie doesn't take itself seriously, just like how GoTG can have jokes that feel decidedly American, and it works because there is an American character on screen, while other characters act more like a classic space opera.

Forgotten Realms has to work much harder to show why it isn't Middle Earth or whatever GoT-land is called.
 

Whizbang Dustyboots

Gnometown Hero
You have no idea what you're talking about. It's amazing.
Clearly, Hollywood should be keeping an eye on the ENWorld boards, where everyone running multi-billion dollar businesses could discover they've been doing it all wrong for decades and the clear answer for how to create successful movies is to, um, adapt a previously created idea, preferably a D&D novel. (y)

I cited Save the Cat because it's the most egregious example of Hollywood group-think, but if the fact that the book is older (although still very popular in screenwriting and especially production circles) is an issue, you don't have to look very far to find other examples, whether it's the "Die Hard but on a _______" genre that started in the early 1990s (and which gave us the excellent Speed and pretty good Under Siege) and continues today or the flurry of YA adaptations that followed Twilight (which gave us the excellent Hunger Games movies and the not so good everything else). Barring 2020's non-release schedule, it's common to see similar films coming out close to one another, because even the whiff of a good idea is enough to get other studios working on the same idea. Last year, I watched a whole slew of Netflix shows and movies with superpowers, all following in the footsteps of you know who.

But maybe fantasy adaptations are different. That seems like a bit of cheat, in that the thing that was once prohibitive for adapting fantasy (and science fiction) was the cost of special effects, has gotten dirt cheap thanks to CGI. There's certainly a lot of them being made nowadays, including ones already on our screens. We can argue about the ending of Game of Thrones, but it's hard to say the series as a whole wasn't a commercial and critical success. But Shanarra, also based on a wildly popular series of novels ... was not. Outlander is a big hit (and is likely only not considered a mainstream fantasy hit because of the gendered view of romance novels) while Legend of the Seeker, again based on extremely popular novels is ... again, not.

The lines of what constitutes a fantasy work and what doesn't are fuzzy and getting fuzzier all the time, but Supernatural, Stranger Things, Teen Wolf, Penny Dreadful, Fringe and Charmed all succeeded without being based on anything other than a name, an idea and good concepts by their showrunners. (Those are all over the maps in terms of quality, even between seasons, but they were all commercial successes.) And Xena, again while perhaps past some sort of statute of limitations, was hit fondly remembered decades later that was a spin-off of a TV series that had only the loosest connection to Greek myth. And Xena itself was more or less a hit out of whole cloth and much more fondly remembered than its ancestor.

But honestly, this is a pretty silly argument on an increasingly silly thread. There isn't a sure-fire way to create a hit in Hollywood, whatever the genre. It's not adaptations. It's not remakes. It's not chasing the trend of the week. It's not even hard work by talented people, because sometimes, for no reason that anyone can predict, or maybe ever identify, the audience just isn't there for the product.

No one working on the D&D movie or anything with a lot of special effects that have to be worked on over the course of months or maybe longer, is going to wing it without a sold script in hand. The amount of effort being put into any special effects-laden work is at least as much effort as is put into any D&D novel. (Oh, and RE, if you're super mad at me because I said D&D novels are bad and you're secretly a D&D novel author, I didn't mean your novels. Not sure quite why you're so pissed at me, and it's not something I'm here to incite.) So adapting a D&D novel isn't somehow going to mean a more thought-out series bible than the film would otherwise get. (Now, if you're adapting Tolkien or Martin, or someone else who fills phone books with series detail, that's a different story, although even then, it has to be something the studio can work with; tossing someone 1,000 pages about the ancient history of a setting doesn't mean any of it is useful to screenwriters or directors.)

The D&D novels don't have huge name recognition out of gamer circles, and most of them are so far in the past, I think it's fair to say many contemporary players have never read them. I think we can all agree that the studio wants a mass market hit, not a niche success, and the brand name they'll be promoting is Dungeons & Dragons. I think the fact that they're filming in Ireland is probably most important for tax purposes, but it certainly does offer a ton of scenic locations. It could be the Moonshae Isles, or it could be Screenwriterpulleditoutofhisbutt Land. We won't know for a while.

I will go see the new D&D movie the same way I saw Pirates of the Caribbean: Curse of the Black Pearl -- nervously, but with optimism. It could certainly stink -- although it'll be hard to top the first one in that regard, even though it, too, has some nice bones in the form of the 3E setting that WotC appeared to have been toying with releasing, based on the snippets they posted on their website at the time -- but if it does, I have faith that the creators will have screwed it up all on their own, whether they adapt it from previously published work or not.
 
Last edited:

ShinHakkaider

Adventurer
Clearly, Hollywood should be keeping an eye on the ENWorld boards, where everyone running multi-billion dollar businesses could discover they've been doing it all wrong for decades and the clear answer for how to create successful movies is to, um, adapt a previously created idea, preferably a D&D novel. (y)

I cited Save the Cat because it's the most egregious example of Hollywood group-think, but if the fact that the book is older (although still very popular in screenwriting and especially production circles) is an issue, you don't have to look very far to find other examples, whether it's the "Die Hard but on a _______" genre that started in the early 1990s (and which gave us the excellent Speed and pretty good Under Siege) and continues today or the flurry of YA adaptations that followed Twilight (which gave us the excellent Hunger Games movies and the not so good everything else). Barring 2020's non-release schedule, it's common to see similar films coming out close to one another, because even the whiff of a good idea is enough to get other studios working on the same idea. Last year, I watched a whole slew of Netflix shows and movies with superpowers, all following in the footsteps of you know who.

But maybe fantasy adaptations are different. That seems like a bit of cheat, in that the thing that was once prohibitive for adapting fantasy (and science fiction) was the cost of special effects, has gotten dirt cheap thanks to CGI. There's certainly a lot of them being made nowadays, including ones already on our screens. We can argue about the ending of Game of Thrones, but it's hard to say the series as a whole wasn't a commercial and critical success. But Shanarra, also based on a wildly popular series of novels ... was not. Outlander is a big hit (and is likely only not considered a mainstream fantasy hit because of the gendered view of romance novels) while Legend of the Seeker, again based on extremely popular novels is ... again, not.

The lines of what constitutes a fantasy work and what doesn't are fuzzy and getting fuzzier all the time, but Supernatural, Stranger Things, Teen Wolf, Penny Dreadful, Fringe and Charmed all succeeded without being based on anything other than a name, an idea and good concepts by their showrunners. (Those are all over the maps in terms of quality, even between seasons, but they were all commercial successes.) And Xena, again while perhaps past some sort of statute of limitations, was hit fondly remembered decades later that was a spin-off of a TV series that had only the loosest connection to Greek myth. And Xena itself was more or less a hit out of whole cloth and much more fondly remembered than its ancestor.

But honestly, this is a pretty silly argument on an increasingly silly thread. There isn't a sure-fire way to create a hit in Hollywood, whatever the genre. It's not adaptations. It's not remakes. It's not chasing the trend of the week. It's not even hard work by talented people, because sometimes, for no reason that anyone can predict, or maybe ever identify, the audience just isn't there for the product.

No one working on the D&D movie or anything with a lot of special effects that have to be worked on over the course of months or maybe longer, is going to wing it without a sold script in hand. The amount of effort being put into any special effects-laden work is at least as much effort as is put into any D&D novel. (Oh, and RE, if you're super mad at me because I said D&D novels are bad and you're secretly a D&D novel author, I didn't mean your novels. Not sure quite why you're so pissed at me, and it's not something I'm here to incite.) So adapting a D&D novel isn't somehow going to mean a more thought-out series bible than the film would otherwise get. (Now, if you're adapting Tolkien or Martin, or someone else who fills phone books with series detail, that's a different story, although even then, it has to be something the studio can work with; tossing someone 1,000 pages about the ancient history of a setting doesn't mean any of it is useful to screenwriters or directors.)

The D&D novels don't have huge name recognition out of gamer circles, and most of them are so far in the past, I think it's fair to say many contemporary players have never read them. I think we can all agree that the studio wants a mass market hit, not a niche success, and the brand name they'll be promoting is Dungeons & Dragons. I think the fact that they're filming in Ireland is probably most important for tax purposes, but it certainly does offer a ton of scenic locations. It could be the Moonshae Isles, or it could be Screenwriterpulleditoutofhisbutt Land. We won't know for a while.

I will go see the new D&D movie the same way I saw Pirates of the Caribbean: Curse of the Black Pearl -- nervously, but with optimism. It could certainly stink -- although it'll be hard to top the first one in that regard, even though it, too, has some nice bones in the form of the 3E setting that WotC appeared to have been toying with releasing, based on the snippets they posted on their website at the time -- but if it does, I have faith that the creators will have screwed it up all on their own, whether they adapt it from previously published work or not.

Stands Up

APPLAUSE
 

see

Pedantic Grognard
Apparently there are going to be at least 2 more sequels. I can hardly wait ... ah who am I kidding. I can wait. I thought the first one was dumb, and I'm pretty lenient on movie logic. I was cheering for the guys in the mech suits at the end. 🤷‍♂️
Bah. They utterly deserved to lose. Why deorbit mecha for ground combat when you can just drop a few Rods from God?
 

Forgotten Realms has to work much harder to show why it isn't Middle Earth or whatever GoT-land is called.
On the contrary, you probably don't want to slow down an action movie with a lot of world building exposition. Most people have some idea of GenericFantasyland, even if it's only from Frozen.

Game of Thrones and the Witcher do their worldbuilding gradually, sneaking it in over several episodes (and hiding it in the opening title sequence). They depend on the audience understanding the basics of Genericfantasyland until the details get filled in. There is no need to explain the Forgotten Realms.

If you want to go for the Pompous Epic approach, like Lord of the Rings or Dragonlance, then you might start with a 10 minute info dump, but not for a GotG-style action adventure.
 

Okay, I know I like to defend movies that are considered bad on here, and I'll give you Krull for the sake of argument, but Legend is an excellent film on...pretty much every level.
Okay buddy.


And having seen it twice I very much agree with that score.
 

Voidrunner's Codex

Remove ads

Voidrunner's Codex

Remove ads

Top