D&D Movie/TV Should the D&D Movie Been Serious or Not Called D&D?

[payn]

It should have appealed more the Game of Thrones or Lord of the Rings types. It did not.

No. Game of Thrones style would have bombed harder because of its mature nature and further limiting the audience. D&D has no established epic story like Lord of the Rings. It would have looked like a cheap copy. I do believe they chose the best path to success, but the reality is that D&D has no strong brand identity at the moment. 2023 is shaping up to be year of the killer IP, and D&D is weak sauce in that department.

 

[Mannahnin]

I'm still not convinced it "flopped." Paramount probably isn't either.

Flopped is what is used towards it in some articles today. Perhaps..."probably not good enough to get a sequel"...is a better wording?

Part of this is still dueling definitions. Is it a flop if it doesn't make its production and marketing costs back, as some folks are using it? Or is it a flop if it's a "total failure", "completely unsuccessful", as, say, Merriam-Webster or Oxford Languages define the word?

Combine that with our recent inability to actually determine if a lot of movies turn a profit or not and we're left with a fair amount of guessing and some talking past each other.

 

[CleverNickName]

Flopped is what is used towards it in some articles today. Perhaps..."probably not good enough to get a sequel"...is a better wording?

That's what this is about?

I don't know, sequels seem pretty arbitrary. I've seen far worse movies get multiple sequels (Legally Blonde, Magic Mike). I've seen movies get sequels when it makes no sense to the story (they're making a sequel to Good Omens). And there have been hordes of movies that did better than most and never got a sequel at all (Goonies, Beetlejuice, Eragon).

 

[payn]

That's what this is about?

I don't know, sequels seem pretty arbitrary. I've seen far worse movies get multiple sequels (Legally Blonde, Magic Mike). I've seen movies get sequels when it makes no sense to the story (they're making a sequel to Good Omens). And there have been hordes of movies that did better than most and never got a sequel at all (Goonies, Beetlejuice, Eragon).

Yeah...about that...

 

[AnotherGuy]

I tend to agree with @GreyLord in that they deep-ended their audience into D&D, meaning it would appeal, predominantly to a D&D-familiar audience which when clips of that style-of-movie are marketed, they don't have the necessary pull.
Anyways, it is what it is.

 

[CleverNickName]

Yeah...about that...

Sorry, I was working of the top of my head. I could have used Google to pull up a giant list, I guess. ;-)

My point is, apparently box office performance is just one reason of many for deciding whether or not a movie gets a sequel.

 

[Gadget]

All the well regarded fantasy TV shows and big budget tend to be serious in tone as well (GoT, Shadow and Bone, Wheel of Time, Rings of Power, Witcher, Sandman).

Willow was the exception but it wasn't well regarded or high budget and got canceled.

If think the listed shows are "well regarded" than I just don't know what to say. GoT was, until the last season or so, and has regained some mojo with HotD. I'm not sure about Shadow and Bone & Sandman, but the Wheel of Time, Rings of Power & Witcher are either largely hated by fans of the original work, or vigorously mocked. At the very least, they are very controversial

This is a tough time for box office in in the post COVID era in general, and I'm not sure that 'a more serious tone' would not have rolled the D&D movie into the hated/mocked category (see all previous D&D movies).

 

[nevin]

most of the fans of witcher that I know love the seried. Wheel of time producers did it to themselves. The changes they made to the story made no sense and added nothing to the story. I'm sure there was a strategy there but I can't see it. Rings of Power suffers from what i call the episode I (referenceing star wars). It's a slow motion train wreck. We know it's going to end badly so that hangs over your head constantly. Really makes it hard for a lot of people to enjoy.

 

[The Grinning Frog]

I don't want to say simply 'no' in response... but.... NO!

Focusing on the title of the question:

Should the D&D Movie Been Serious - no, thank god it wasn't There is enough serious stuff out there. I wanted to be entertained, my wife (non-DnD player) wanted to be entertained, my three children (ex or current players) wanted to be entertained.
We were entertained. And what is it now $100million in ticket sales, positive review and good audience feedback suggests that other people were also entertained.
(Also, I was entertained enough to see it three times.)

or Not Called D&D? - no, D&D has clout at the moment, maybe only for a while but it has it at the moment. This was the perfect time to use the name and attempt to continue to build the brand.

SO where did it go wrong? (You didn't ask but it is helpful to consider this inline with my answers.)

Overspending on the movie and advertising.

I was thoroughly entertained but the movie didn't look like it cost as much as it did to make. Sorry but it didn't, less ego behind the marketing spend might have been good and perhaps they could have leveraged the fan base better.

All things to consider but I'm going with no and no in response to the question.

​

 

[nevin]

I don't want to say simply 'no' in response... but.... NO!

Focusing on the title of the question:

Should the D&D Movie Been Serious - no, thank god it wasn't There is enough serious stuff out there. I wanted to be entertained, my wife (non-DnD player) wanted to be entertained, my three children (ex or current players) wanted to be entertained.
We were entertained. And what is it now $100million in ticket sales, positive review and good audience feedback suggests that other people were also entertained.
(Also, I was entertained enough to see it three times.)

or Not Called D&D? - no, D&D has clout at the moment, maybe only for a while but it has it at the moment. This was the perfect time to use the name and attempt to continue to build the brand.

SO where did it go wrong? (You didn't ask but it is helpful to consider this inline with my answers.)

Overspending on the movie and advertising.

I was thoroughly entertained but the movie didn't look like it cost as much as it did to make. Sorry but it didn't, less ego behind the marketing spend might have been good and perhaps they could have leveraged the fan base better.

All things to consider but I'm going with no and no in response to the question.

​

Is it possible you've conflated serious with GOT style misery? I think a lot of people are exhausted by Drama so deep that there's no hope.