New D&D movie?

[theburningman]

What I want to know is why the heck would anybody finance this thing? The first one cost over $40 million and according to "The Numbers," it only made $15 million in the U.S. I think we can be fairly certain it lost money, even counting foreign ticket sales. No matter who they aimed the film at, it seems to me that the DnD players out there would have been the audience who actually went to see it, and there doesn't seem to be a whole lot of support for a sequel. So again I say, why would anyone put money up for this?

That said, I'll probably see it on DVD.

 

[The Blue Elf]

Re: Re

That first movie was such utter garbage that I wish they wouldn't even call another movie a sequel. I'd rather see them attempt to sweep that mess of a movie under the carpet and act as though it did not even exist. I wouldn't even want an association with that other movie.

I hope they use the FR rather than Greyhawk for a new movie. I don't want an over the top story involving controlling dragons. I cannot emphasize enough how disgusted I was with that first movie. A sensible, well-written adventure story would be much more entertaining.

Don't put a Wayans brother in it. They do some great comedy, but they are not good actors.

Well FR story seting we have a very powerful wizard that does uber good deeds, protects the Shadowdale, founder of the Harpers,help raise the Sliver sisters,and Mystra choosen which would be a good part for Ben Affleck to play.Is that well-written adventure story for Ya?

 

[RPGRealms]

p.s. BTW, I found this legal disclaimer on The S.F.R.P.G. Zone website. That's quite an interesting connnection, don't you think. Traveller movie anyone?

Traveller is a trademark of Far Future Enterprises and is used under exclusive license by Imperium Games Inc. Imperium Games Inc., is a subsidiary of Sweetpea Entertainment Inc.

Fortunately they no longer have the option on doing a Traveller movie.

 

[Welverin]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Second Chances???

* throws in a * Dude! You can't blame any actor in that film.

I can and I do. He did it, it's his fault. Not that it absolves Solomon for his part, which is everything, but I would have at least been able to tolerate the movie. Irons' performance was so bad it made me want to gouge my eyes out and tear my eardrums out, and experience what to the pain truly means.

On a final note: I can't believe I am in any way defending this film. Damn my Devil's Advocate side.

Yes, damn it to hell right where it belongs with this craptacualr movie!

 

[Alaric_Prympax]

What I want to know is why the heck would anybody finance this thing? The first one cost over $40 million and according to "The Numbers," it only made $15 million in the U.S. I think we can be fairly certain it lost money, even counting foreign ticket sales. No matter who they aimed the film at, it seems to me that the DnD players out there would have been the audience who actually went to see it, and there doesn't seem to be a whole lot of support for a sequel. So again I say, why would anyone put money up for this?

That said, I'll probably see it on DVD.

From what I heard awhile back (but I don't remember where, sorry) the D&D movie did do enough in foreign revenues and video/DVD sales to warrent a sequel.

 

[jdavis]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Second Chances???

I can and I do. He did it, it's his fault. Not that it absolves Solomon for his part, which is everything, but I would have at least been able to tolerate the movie. Irons' performance was so bad it made me want to gouge my eyes out and tear my eardrums out, and experience what to the pain truly means.

When Jeremy Irons was asked about the movie he said: some movies you make for the love of the art and some movies you just make for the money, this movie I made for the money.

He is a wonderful actor, probably why he realized what he was getting into, it was obvious he didn't care, it was obvious he didn't want to be there, heck it was obvious that half the actors on the set didn't want to be there. I mean they all read the script, what suprised me is that Jeremy Irons even stayed for the money, he had to know the movie would damage his career, maybe he just assumed (rightly) that nobody would actually go see it.

Picked up this bit off of Dark Horizons:

Joel Silver's Zinc Entertainment announced a sequel is in the works to 'Dungeons & Dragons' which revolves around an evil wizard who steals a black orb or something.

That is all I can actually find on the movie.

Edit: I found this while looking for info on D&D 2, It's related tot he Jeremy Irons issue:

American Beauty (1999) star Thora Birch was terrified of Jeremy Irons throughout the filming of new fantasy movie Dungeons & Dragons (2000) - because he was so intense. The actress admits his style made her act better, but she spent the first weeks dreading scenes with the British actor - and finished wanting to hit him. She says, "He's a very, very intense actor. When you do a scene with him, it becomes almost combative because he gets so into it. "You want to come up to his level. I really wanted to beat him up a few times, which was great, because my character, the Empress, did too.

 

[jdavis]

Apparently it was big in Spain

From what I heard awhile back (but I don't remember where, sorry) the D&D movie did do enough in foreign revenues and video/DVD sales to warrent a sequel.

Budget
$35,000,000 (USA)

Opening Weekend
£405,669 (UK) (18 February 2001) (140 Screens)
$7,237,422 (USA) (10 December 2000) (2,078 Screens)

Gross
$34,815,000 (Non-USA)
€2,221,502 (Spain) (31 August 2002)
ESP 339,664,113 (Spain) (30 June 2001)
£1,943,235 (UK) (15 April 2001)
£1,797,952 (UK) (8 April 2001)
£1,543,453 (UK) (11 March 2001)
£1,379,713 (UK) (4 March 2001)
£1,118,895 (UK) (25 February 2001)
£405,669 (UK) (18 February 2001)
$15,185,241 (USA) (28 January 2001)
$15,074,916 (USA) (21 January 2001)
$14,981,991 (USA) (14 January 2001)
$14,813,627 (USA) (7 January 2001)
$14,250,748 (USA) (1 January 2001)
$12,987,828 (USA) (25 December 2000)
$11,147,608 (USA) (17 December 2000)
$7,237,422 (USA) (10 December 2000)
$50,000,000 (Worldwide)
Weekend Gross
£55,322 (UK) (15 April 2001) (170 Screens)
£100,867 (UK) (8 April 2001) (172 Screens)
£109,441 (UK) (11 March 2001) (141 Screens)
£161,246 (UK) (4 March 2001) (141 Screens)
£350,030 (UK) (25 February 2001) (140 Screens)
£405,669 (UK) (18 February 2001) (140 Screens)
$86,626 (USA) (28 January 2001) (173 Screens)
$75,535 (USA) (21 January 2001) (159 Screens)
$81,080 (USA) (14 January 2001) (131 Screens)
$300,198 (USA) (7 January 2001) (514 Screens)
$697,018 (USA) (1 January 2001) (885 Screens)
$779,640 (USA) (25 December 2000) (1,214 Screens)
$2,438,086 (USA) (17 December 2000) (2,078 Screens)
$7,237,422 (USA) (10 December 2000) (2,078 Screens)

Admissions
27,380 (22 July 2001) (opening weekend)
537,432 (Spain) (31 August 2002)
484,779 (Spain) (30 June 2001)

http://us.imdb.com/Business?0190374

 

[fusangite]

I'm amazed by all the grasping at straws to explain how the first movie or its sequel are not complete excrement. A few points:

1. Jeremy Irons is a good actor in other movies. But his performance in D&D led most audience members to believe that he had joined the cast to fund his newly-acquired crack habit.

2. Thora Birch is a perfectly good actress as long as she's not trying to do a British accent. I'm sorry but the accent alone was enough to make her performance utterly irredeemable. And if she shows up in the sequel, you can bet she'll have to keep the same ridiculous accent.

3. The idea that the Wayans kid's performance is defensible because he played a more multidimensional character than the others just makes me want to cry. He played a cardboard cutout stereotype; it's just that the stereotype is so offensive to that such characters stopped appearing in mainstream movies by the 1960s. It's not that he played a real character: he just played a stereotype so antiquated, stupid and regressive that modern people don't immediately recognize it.

The only positive statement from this thread that I will accept uncontested is that Zoe McLellan is cute.

 

[jdavis]

You know it's the directors job to get the best out of his actors, he's the one that's responsible for the movie as a whole. Did the guy not look at Jeremy Irons performance as horrible? If those were the good takes then I'm really scared of what the bad takes were. Did he instruct Irons to overact every line? and if he didn't want that in his movie then why didn't he put a stop to it. Thora Birch's half dozen scenes were crappy scenes to start with. Why were the big name actors only in supporting roles that were rarely on screen but the Wayans brother was all over the place? No there is no excuse for that mess and that was supposed to be the directors vision of how his movie should be?

 

[Ferret]

I think she was meant to be a grey elf.

What was with her "No! He must do it alone" Forbodin g, dues ex machina, rail roading cheese.