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..."

DUNGEONS & DRAGONS: Michelle Rodriguez And Justice Smith Join Chris Pine In Fantasy Adaptation

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...

www.comicbookmovie.com

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

D&D Movie/TV - Chris Pine To Star In D&D Movie

The long, slow process towards a modern take on D&D movies took a large step forward with the announcement of a huge star signed to the project. Considering that filming is set to start soon a cascade of announcements should be revealed in initiative order imminently. Filming begins in Q1 2021...

www.enworld.org

 

[Dausuul]

Casting doesn't really tell us anything--good or bad--about the quality of the movie. The quality of the script and the direction are far more important.

An extraordinary actor can compensate for bad writing and a weak director, but only within the confines of their own role. In the Star Wars prequels, Christopher Lee and Ian McDiarmid turned in stunning performances as Count Dooku and Chancellor Palpatine, but they couldn't do anything about the scenes where they weren't on screen, nor redeem the trilogy as a whole.

And most of the cast, despite being perfectly competent actors who had done well in other films, couldn't even salvage their own parts.

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.

Avatar's visuals, back in 2009, had me spellbound for a solid two hours.

Sadly, Avatar's running time is more than two hours long.

 

[Mirtek]

I didn't ignore her other roles. I simply pointed the flaw in your statement about how using an actor who was in a billion dollar franchise somehow infers that using them means you'll have commercial greatness, using her as an analogy.

*I.e., Rodriquez and Pine probably had little to do with either of those franchises being commercially great (just like Portman's roles in SW and the MCU had little to do with those successes commercially), thus you seem to be engaging in a correlation/causation fallacy.

Well, if we attribute the commercial success of a franchise to any actor who had 10s of screentime and two words (yes, I know both had much more than that in those franchises) then Stan Lee is the the most commercially accomplished actor of all time.

 

[bulletmeat]

Casting doesn't really tell us anything--good or bad--about the quality of the movie. The quality of the script and the direction are far more important.

I think Jeremy Irons proved that in the first one.

 

[Alzrius]

I think Jeremy Irons proved that in the first one.

Presented without commentary:

 

[bulletmeat]

Ooo, I just got a shiver down my spine.

 

[ShinHakkaider]

Wait, what?

hahahahhaha.

For one, just because someone is in a big grossing movie doesn't make them great actors. Natalie Portman has been in two billion dollar franchises, and while she's a fine actor, she's not great. (It's also odd that you'd cite Pine as a secondary actor in DCU, and not his primary role in Star Trek)

Secondly, you apparently have no idea who Jeremy Irons is or work he's done. He's most definitely not "two bit". Not many actors who have won an academy award and multiple golden globes and emmy's are.

You are aware that Natalie Portman is also an Academy Award Winning Actress? IIRC for BLACK SWAN back in 2011-12? She's also won multiple Golden Globes as in two, for Closer and the other again for Black Swan.

I just find it odd to claim that she's not a great actress and cite Jeremy Irons' achievements when she's fairly accomplished in her own right and is considered more than just a "fine actor" by more than few directors and her peers.

 

[bedir than]

You are aware that Natalie Portman is also an Academy Award Winning Actress? IIRC for BLACK SWAN back in 2011-12? She's also won multiple Golden Globes as in two, for Closer and the other again for Black Swan.

I just find it odd to claim that she's not a great actress and cite Jeremy Irons' achievements when she's fairly accomplished in her own right and is considered more than just a "fine actor" by more than few directors and her peers.

Portman: 39 award wins (4 major), 76 nominations
Irons: 8 wins (2 major), 19 nominations

Also, @ShinHakkaider her performance in Jackie was regularly a finalist for recognition too. Her mix of indie films, awards, and blockbusters makes her one of the bigger actresses of the past 30 years. I'll admit I'm a Portman stan.

It's bizarre for anyone to claim that Portman isn't the performer that Irons is.

 

[Sacrosanct]

It's bizarre for anyone to claim that Portman isn't the performer that Irons is.

Good thing no one did that, then.

I used Portman as an analogy to state point out the flaw in your logic that using an actor who wasn't the primary actor in a billion dollar franchise (I used her because she has two such franchises, so the point was driven home) doesn't in any way mean that using that actor was a way to capture the commercial success of the franchises they were also part of, like you inferred.

Then I brought up how Irons isn't two bit like you claimed. Separate sentence. I wasn't comparing them at all. If you think so, it's a strawman from your end; no argument I or anyone else ever made. Saying an actor with his accomplishments isn't "two bit" is not the same as saying he is better than Portman.

 

[ShinHakkaider]

Portman: 39 award wins (4 major), 76 nominations
Irons: 8 wins (2 major), 19 nominations

Also, @ShinHakkaider her performance in Jackie was regularly a finalist for recognition too. Her mix of indie films, awards, and blockbusters makes her one of the bigger actresses of the past 30 years. I'll admit I'm a Portman stan.

It's bizarre for anyone to claim that Portman isn't the performer that Irons is.

Agreed.

 

[Sacrosanct]

You are aware that Natalie Portman is also an Academy Award Winning Actress? IIRC for BLACK SWAN back in 2011-12? She's also won multiple Golden Globes as in two, for Closer and the other again for Black Swan.

I just find it odd to claim that she's not a great actress and cite Jeremy Irons' achievements when she's fairly accomplished in her own right and is considered more than just a "fine actor" by more than few directors and her peers.

See my post above. No one made the comparison between the two. I only cited Irons' achievements to prove he isn't two-bit, not that he's better than Portman. Two completely different topics.

 

[ShinHakkaider]

See my post above. No one made the comparison between the two. I only cited Irons' achievements to prove he isn't two-bit, not that he's better than Portman. Two completely different topics.

OKAY.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

I didn’t say they were flops, so please don’t put words in my mouth. Being in a movie that did well does not necessarily mean all their other movies will do well. Thora Birch was in American Beauty and Marlon Wayans was in Scary Movie. The first movie was still trash.

The first movie is good.

 

[bedir than]

Then I brought up how Irons isn't two bit like you claimed.

Commercially. His commercial success is nowhere near the lead role Pine has had in Star Trek - do you actually think who plays Captain Kirk doesn't matter? His commercial success is nowhere near Rodriguez, who is consistent supporting actress in a massive franchise.

His commercial and awards success is dwarfed by Portman, who you foolishly brought up as if Pine and Rodriguez' roles in Star Trek, Wonder Woman, Fast&Furious is as minor as Portman's in Star Wars

 

[Sacrosanct]

Commercially. His commercial success is nowhere near the lead role Pine has had in Star Trek - do you actually think who plays Captain Kirk doesn't matter? His commercial success is nowhere near Rodriguez, who is consistent supporting actress in a massive franchise.

His commercial and awards success is dwarfed by Portman, who you foolishly brought up as if Pine and Rodriguez' roles in Star Trek, Wonder Woman, Fast&Furious is as minor as Portman's in Star Wars

I didn't foolishly bring her up. You were the one to bring up the argument that if an actor was part of a billion dollar franchise, that somehow means a company choosing them for a role later means they are gaining or benefitting from that financial success. THAT is what a foolish argument looks like. Pine had little or no impact to the DCU being a billion dollar franchise (which is the example you gave, not star trek, which is what I mentioned). And Rodriguez certainly isn't responsible for FF franchise being valuable. So saying they chose or otherwise will benefit from those actors because they were part of a valued franchise is simply silly unless you can show how each actor is the driving reason why the DCU and FF franchised are so valued.

That's the reason I brought up portman. Not to compare to Irons. But only to illustrate why the premise of your entire argument is flawed. No one is hiring portman in hopes to cash in on the success of the MCU and star wars.

 

[Dire Bare]

The first movie is good.

The first D&D movie? Or the first Scary Movie? Scary Movie is hilarious and a genius film that birthed a genre of copycat films, beyond just the sequels in the Scary Movie franchise.

The first D&D movie? I wanted to like that movie soooo badly, and really, it's not as bad as a lot of fans kvetch, it's got some good and fun moments. It's watchable . . . . but good?

 

[Tyler Do'Urden]

Jeremy Irons was the only good part of the D&D movie. The man plays villains with such relish...

But I would put the movie from 20 years ago out of mind; it's not even relevant. It was by an untested young director with a relatively modest budget. These days, after the D&D boom of the last few years, things are likely to be different - we're looking at a movie with a director who knows what he's doing, a better cast, good screenwriters, 20 years of advance in visual effects, and I'm going to guess a budget at least four times higher (probably in the studio tentpole $150-200 million range - given that western fantasy is usually not a difficult sell in East Asia, I'd imagine they're expecting this is one they can make bank on in China. Wouldn't surprise me if Hasbro is considering a big overseas launch of D&D products to go with the movie. If they're not considering one - they should. The definitely should.)

I don't know if I'm terribly excited - but I'm cautiously optimistic that this could be pretty good.

 

[Azzy]

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.

What? You didn't like Pocahontas in Space?

 

[Oofta]

What? You didn't like Pocahontas in Space?

Well, a movie have something more than looking cool. I mean, Alien Covenant was even dumber but that doesn't mean much.

 

[GreyLord]

While in a chainmail bikini.

But how are you going to get 18 year old Judi Dench these days???

That said, I think Dench would have more class than do anything like that, even back then.

I have other fears about this movie, such as them trying to make it far more comedic in tone than taking it more seriously...aka...treating it more like the 1st D&D movie did regarding humor rather than a more serious take (and it doesn't have to be always serious, but perhaps something more akin to how marvel has done their movies than a comedy is done).

 

[Azzy]

Well, a movie have something more than looking cool. I mean, Alien Covenant was even dumber but that doesn't mean much.

Yeah, the story was rather weak. And calling your fictionalized materian "unobtanium" was really dumb—that's the name of the trope for rare, exotic materials (like mithril, adamantine, adamantium, vibranium, etc.).