New D&D movie in the works?

[Oryan77]

I just don't understand why they can make this awesome looking movie: Avatar but they can't make an equally good D&D movie.

I mean they made a great LotRs 3 part epic movie, but they can't do the same with D&D? Surely D&D brings in more money than the LotRs books?

Well, I'm writing a fantasy screenplay...so maybe one day I can create us the D&D movie we deserve

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

The first D&D movie (IMO) had a pretty decent movie buried under poor direction. The acting (mostly) was okay to good, the production values were good, the screenplay was good, the cast was excellent . . . . but all of that ruined by a first-time director with no talent and the arrogance to skip film school and just buy his way into his first film. Which is one of the reasons I think most people hate the film so much!!! It had soooooo much potential squandered!

In addition, D&D:tM had:

1) Jeremy Irons delivering the worst performance of his career- so many of his lines were delivered with a shout and spit that he sounded not unlike coked-up Tony Montana at the end of Scarface...but worse. At times, he was unintelligible.

2) CGI that was cut & paste.

3) Bruce Payne as the BBEG's right-hand man doing his best to act like Right Said Fred- he was too sexy, too sexy, too sexy for his helmet.

4) A Wayans brother. As if that weren't bad enough, it had a Wayans brother doing a terrible impression of Chris Tucker. If I want a black guy with a high-pitched nasally voice, I want the one who does it best.

5) Dragons that were apparently massless. Nothing that big moves like that.

6) Artifacts of power- the dragonstaves or whatever they called them- that looked like the plastic they were made out of. I swear, you could almost see the seam.

7) An actress playing an elf like she was Commander Tuvac in drag.

8) A nearly unrecognizable Tom Baker as a Dwarf.

That movie was brutal.

 

[Ed_Laprade]

Personally, I don't care if they ever make another D&D movie, so long as they do make good fantasy movies. But I fail to understand why anyone would not get that putting D&D in the title is advertising? Why would WotC/Hasboro want to make a generic fantasy movie when they can spend the same amount of money (not that they're actually spending anything on it themselves, I would think) and get a ton of publicity by sticking D&D in the title? (Of course, if its a bad movie its negative publicity. But, as they say, bad publicity is better than no publicity!)

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

I mean they made a great LotRs 3 part epic movie, but they can't do the same with D&D? Surely D&D brings in more money than the LotRs books?

2 things here:

1) LotR probably doesn't have the annual sales that D&D has, but it may have a much larger overall historical monetary value over its 50 years of existence. There is a reason there was a 3 movie epic made from it...and no doubt an equally impressive option check that went along with it.

2) LotR, Conan, and the others are all unified storylines. D&D is, by its nature, a pastiche. Its easy to come up with an original Conan screenplay that will somehow be in accord with the tenets of the original IP. It may not be good, but it will be Conan.

D&D, OTOH, can go in so many directions that it may well be impossible to tell the "quintessential" D&D story without ripping off one of the IPs that inspired the game in the first place and seeming derivative.

 

[kitsune9]

The Escapist : Third Dungeons & Dragons movie a possibility

Saw it from Third D&D Movie: The Film of Seven Parts? « Of Dice and Men

from my rss google feed at rpgbloggers.com

Could it be?

Who's the coolmore consortium? Anybody know anything else?

Well, I'm one of those people who are kind of easy to please when it comes to movies. I thought the first movie was mediocre okay and the second one okay. Should I duck now to avoid shoes being thrown in my direction?

Anyways, if a third came out, I'd watch too.

 

[Oryan77]

1) LotR probably doesn't have the annual sales that D&D has, but it may have a much larger overall historical monetary value over its 50 years of existence. There is a reason there was a 3 movie epic made from it...and no doubt an equally impressive option check that went along with it.

From my experience with non gamer people...more people know what D&D is and has heard the name Dungeons and Dragonsm more than they know what Lord of the Rings is (before the movies). They might not know exactly what D&D is...but they know it is fantasy stuff. I'd think D&D was more popular within the general public than LotRs before the movies were out.

The only reason non gamers saw LotRs is because of the hipe and the fact that it was good enough to get people to actually say, "Go see this movie, it's good".

There is no reason a D&D movie couldn't have received the same attention the LotRs movies had. Maybe D&D players don't have as much money to help invest in the movie like LotRs did because we're broke from buying so many gaming books.

D&D, OTOH, can go in so many directions that it may well be impossible to tell the "quintessential" D&D story without ripping off one of the IPs that inspired the game in the first place and seeming derivative.

No, I believe that's the exact reason why so many movies fail...they are all all unified storylines. Nobody wants to release an original story anymore. Production companies don't want to take risks on original stuff, that's why we have so many remakes in the past 10 years. Or they take an already popular story and butcher it on film. And most movies being released fail horribly.

I think the thing that would make D&D successful is the fact there is so much material to work with and you can create a more original movie from that material. Movie makers are focusing their attention in the wrong areas and do more copying from other movies than just doing their own thing.

As long as you provided fans with subject matter they can relate too from the D&D game, that's all that matters. They won't care if it fits their specific idea of what a D&D world is as long as they walk away saying, "Wow, that's an amazing movie. I liked when the Rogue did that...the Cleric did this....the Wizard did that...". If they can relate to the characters because they had a similar thing happen in an adventure they played in, they'll love it. But the movie needs to be high quality, have a good cast, and most importantly have characters that you will like, a story you will be interested in, & subject matter from the game that fans will recognize.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

From my experience with non gamer people...more people know what D&D is and has heard the name Dungeons and Dragonsm more than they know what Lord of the Rings is (before the movies). They might not know exactly what D&D is...but they know it is fantasy stuff. I'd think D&D was more popular within the general public than LotRs before the movies were out.

The only reason non gamers saw LotRs is because of the hipe and the fact that it was good enough to get people to actually say, "Go see this movie, it's good".

You kind of missed my point.

I conceded and expect that D&D as a product probably sells more annually than LotR, and has more visibility in the current pop culture than LotR does.

However, LotR has a huge track record in publishing- many editions in English are in print, and possibly only the Bible and Koran have sold more copies in the last 50 years. It is taught as literature in some schools.

Add to that the overlapping fan base- most D&D players were going to be interested in LotR- and you have an almost guaranteed hit...assuming you do it right.

And Hollywood is going to throw big money at almost any book with a strong track record like that, like the Harry Potter movies. Or the Bible.

There is no reason a D&D movie couldn't have received the same attention the LotRs movies had.

As mentioned elsewhere, D&D also has a track record of being blamed for a lot of things in the relatively recent past- the Satanic Panic of the 1980s, the assault that happened last week- that it just doesn't have the cache and squeaky-clean history that LotR does.

I think the thing that would make D&D successful is the fact there is so much material to work with and you can create a more original movie from that material. Movie makers are focusing their attention in the wrong areas and do more copying from other movies than just doing their own thing.

Its not the market for a D&D movie you have to look at, but the market for a D&D movie in which setting you have to examine.

What is the size of the built-in market for Forgotten Realms? For DarkSun? Spelljammer? Greyhawk? Ravenloft? Maztica? Eberron?

Points of Light?

Now compare that to the built-in market for a fantasy novel or novel series written by one (or a few) author with a 50+ year history of being on sale.

Hollywood can look at Fafhrd & Grey Mouser or Elric and see potential in those much beloved novels. When they look at D&D, they have to look at which subset of D&D they're going to work with. The whole property is balkanized.

On top of that, some of the ones with the biggest followings are already somewhat "generic" in feel in comparison to established novels that Hollywood has already looked at.

 

[Aloïsius]

Hum, a Dark Sun movie...

However, I think the best thing to do would be :
1) A serie, maybe a cartoon. Think about Babylon 5 : its writer was an RPG artist.... The goal of the serie is to make public familiar with a specific setting. Not "standard vanilla" like D&D1 or 2, but something flavourful enough to be immediately recognized. Think Dark Sun, Menzoberrezan or Planescape by example. Maybe Sharn in Eberron, but certainly not Waterdeep.

2) Once the serie is well known (after two full seasons at least) make the movie. Or rather the first instalment of some trilogy. Start with one simple character (rogue or fighter) who discover the setting with the casual public, and then add the rest of the group as the plot thickens. Don't forget to level up the characters at least "once". For the second movie, you have the group and a full adventure at a slightly higher level. And the same for the third. In term of 3e, it could be : level 1-3 for movie 1, 4-6 for movie 2, 7-9 for movie 3.

 

[Fifth Element]

8) A nearly unrecognizable Tom Baker as a Dwarf.

Elf, actually.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

Elf, actually.

[edmcmahon]You are indeed correct, Sir![/edmcmahon]

I stand corrected!