D&D Movie/TV New D&D Movie: July 23rd 2021

It's official - the new Dungeons & Dragons movie is coming, and it's coming in four years - July 23rd, 2021, as announced by Paramount.

We already know that the movie will be produced by the Lego Movie's Roy Lee, that it will be directed by Rob Letterman (Goosebumps, Monsters vs. Aliens, Shark Tale). Originally scripted by David Leslie Johnson (Wrath of the Titans), it's now being written by Joe Manganelio, might be Dragonlance and then again might feature the Yawning Portal, and will adopt a Guardians of the Galaxy tone. Oh, and that we should take everything I just said with a pinch of salt as the movie appears have jumped from WB to Paramount at some point in the process!

 

[ArchfiendBobbie]

Yes. But the point is a bad, critically panned movie would damage the brand regardless of how much it takes at the box office. We've already had bad D&D movies before. We now want a movie that gives D&D some respectability to a wider audience, confounds expectations and get's people thinking 'you know, this game isn't just for losers and nerds'.

Your premise is flawed. It seems to confuse "critically panned" with "bad movie." It also implies the equally flawed premise that "critically loved" means "good movie." There is a lot of overlap in both sets of concepts, but they do not always track with each other.

For example check out the Rotten Tomatoes on Last Jedi. The critics absolutely love that movie... yet it's only scoring 52% of the audience liking it, which is the same percentage as the 2016 Ghostbusters movie. Contrast that with the one for The Greatest Showman. The audience loves it, but the critics don't like it.

Do you want the critics to like it, or do you want the audience to like it? Which one would be better for the franchise?

 

[Demetrios1453]

For example check out the Rotten Tomatoes on Last Jedi. The critics absolutely love that movie... yet it's only scoring 52% of the audience liking it, which is the same percentage as the 2016 Ghostbusters movie. Contrast that with the one for The Greatest Showman. The audience loves it, but the critics don't like it.

A bit OT, but The Last Jedi is only getting panned on the Rotten Tomatoes audience score, which is fairly easy for those with an axe to grind to manipulate. If you go to Cinemascore, which is a scientific survey done by interviewing theatergoers as they leave the film, it's scoring an "A".

 

[mflayermonk]

A bit OT, but The Last Jedi is only getting panned on the Rotten Tomatoes audience score, which is fairly easy for those with an axe to grind to manipulate. If you go to Cinemascore, which is a scientific survey done by interviewing theatergoers as they leave the film, it's scoring an "A".

Cinemascore is done on the Friday night of a new release. Its a snapshot of one point in time. Rotten Tomatoes can be voted on all through the time a movie is out, so people that waited until the film was out for a week may have a different opinion than the people that viewed the film on the Friday release night.

 

[ArchfiendBobbie]

A bit OT, but The Last Jedi is only getting panned on the Rotten Tomatoes audience score, which is fairly easy for those with an axe to grind to manipulate. If you go to Cinemascore, which is a scientific survey done by interviewing theatergoers as they leave the film, it's scoring an "A".

Cinemascore was ignored by me because of accuracy issues, such as the way it it rated the 2016 Ghostbusters movie; a rating of B, which does not match the movie's office box performance. Despite their more scientific method, I generally find them not accurate to actual performance on too many movies to have relevance to any discussion, scientific or otherwise, of how a movie will perform. That website demonstrates, from what I see, one of the ways the scientific method can fail to produce results that match reality.

TL;DR: They're too inaccurate to be relevant to the discussion.

 

[TrippyHippy]

Your premise is flawed. It seems to confuse "critically panned" with "bad movie." It also implies the equally flawed premise that "critically loved" means "good movie." There is a lot of overlap in both sets of concepts, but they do not always track with each other.

For example check out the Rotten Tomatoes on Last Jedi. The critics absolutely love that movie... yet it's only scoring 52% of the audience liking it, which is the same percentage as the 2016 Ghostbusters movie. Contrast that with the one for The Greatest Showman. The audience loves it, but the critics don't like it.

Do you want the critics to like it, or do you want the audience to like it? Which one would be better for the franchise?

At this juncture, I don't think the situation occurring with The Last Jedi is a good comparison with any movie. I'd let the hullabaloo die down a bit first - indeed, I'm not sure we can truly analyse the quality of any Star Wars movie until the last episode of the new trilogy is completed. The passions are too high, and in some cases misleading, with all the trolling and politicised opinions going on, along with all the historical expectations and theorising. Star Wars, as it currently is, is it's own case and shouldn't be compared to anything.

With regards to splits between critics and audience ratings, sure, there are some movies that have a gap. I was hoping for high ratings by both critics and fans though - and there are plenty of movies that have done that too.

 

[ArchfiendBobbie]

At this juncture, I don't think the situation occurring with The Last Jedi is a good comparison with any movie. I'd let the hullabaloo die down a bit first - indeed, I'm not sure we can truly analyse the quality of any Star Wars movie until the last episode of the new trilogy is completed. The passions are too high, and in some cases misleading, with all the trolling and politicised opinions going on, along with all the historical expectations and theorising. Star Wars, as it currently is, is it's own case and shouldn't be compared to anything.

With regards to splits between critics and audience ratings, sure, there are some movies that have a gap. I was hoping for high ratings by both critics and fans though - and there are plenty of movies that have done that too.

You have a point with Last Jedi.

I'm hoping for the same. But if I have to choose, I want the audience to like it. Might mean more people in the hobby.

 

[Parmandur]

Cinemascore was ignored by me because of accuracy issues, such as the way it it rated the 2016 Ghostbusters movie; a rating of B, which does not match the movie's office box performance. Despite their more scientific method, I generally find them not accurate to actual performance on too many movies to have relevance to any discussion, scientific or otherwise, of how a movie will perform. That website demonstrates, from what I see, one of the ways the scientific method can fail to produce results that match reality.

TL;DR: They're too inaccurate to be relevant to the discussion.

B is really quite bad for Cinemascore: audiences tend to be generous. B movies consistently suffer problems with box office legs, because people were not enthusiastic (most of the DCEU movies are also B's, for instance). Rotten Tomatoes is a self-selected sample that, if we assume no bots or duplicate accounts (a generous assumption) represent a sliver of the millions of people who see a movie like Last Jedi. Not statistically representative, like Cinemascores happens to be.

Sent from my [device_name] using EN World mobile app

 

[ArchfiendBobbie]

B is really quite bad for Cinemascore: audiences tend to be generous. B movies consistently suffer problems with box office legs, because people were not enthusiastic (most of the DCEU movies are also B's, for instance). Rotten Tomatoes is a self-selected sample that, if we assume no bots or duplicate accounts (a generous assumption) represent a sliver of the millions of people who see a movie like Last Jedi. Not statistically representative, like Cinemascores happens to be.

Sent from my [device_name] using EN World mobile app

Okay, let's factor that in and take a look at some highlights of their fails.

Justice League, a B+, is doing quite well. Murder on the Orient Express, another B, has made back its budget multiple times already. Star Trek Beyond, an A-, was a flop; it failed to break even. Ferdinand, which is ranked A, is on its way to being another flop.

I could go on and on and on. Example after example after example of where they were not only wrong, even based on what you say, but sometimes hilariously so.

Even adjusting for the value of Bs, it does not change the fact they have too big of an inaccuracy ratio to justify that their data is actually statistically representative. Because it's not even remotely close to statistically representative. They're only collecting data for the first night of the box office run, not the entire run to get a true representative sample size.

In short, they keep getting wrong answers because they are not practicing true science, but are instead using a stunted version of a real data collection method and relying on a massively incomplete data set to reach their rankings. They are practicing junk science.

Again, they are not accurate to actual performance on too many movies to have relevance to any discussion, scientific or otherwise, of how a movie will perform.

 

[Mirtek]

You don't appear to actually understand what the point is. The financial success of the movie is secondary to the enhancement of the brand itself. If they make a financially successful, but critically reviled movie it will not enhance the brand. A Michael Bay-style movie would damage the brand in the same way that just making a porn movie would. It needs to be well crafted, well directed and brand enhancing movie. They are not selling Transformer toys, they are selling Dungeons & Dragons which imparts a different set of specifications.

You reap what you sow.

Ah...thanks. And you too.

I disagree. A financially successfull, but crititcally reviled movie will enchange the brand. A Michael Bay-style movie would enhance the brand.

It would just show that the critics have no clue at all what D&D target group likes. But the critics are not the ones buying the branded product, the target group is.

 

[Imaculata]

indeed, I'm not sure we can truly analyse the quality of any Star Wars movie until the last episode of the new trilogy is completed.

I think that is nonsense. I do not think the problems with The Last Jedi will become any less once the third movie is completed. If anything, the problems with the plot will become worse.

When TFA came out, it deliberately left a lot of open plot hooks. And that's fine when you're aiming to answer those questions in a later film. But that doesn't mean you can't criticize other aspects of the film.

The Last Jedi has a lot of scenes and plots that ultimately don't go anywhere, and sets up an epic end battle which then doesn't take place. A future film is not going to change that.