I agree. Yet, I remember some people on these boards saying D&D has to include both dungeons and dragons, because of the name". Personally, rather specifying Dungeons and Dragons, if they do something in Forgotten Realms, I would rather they use Forgotten Realms in the title.I think the most likely reason a D&D movie will fail is the same reason the first D&D movie failed: Trying to do too much.
Where did it go wrong?
(1a) "This is a D&D movie right? So let's have dragons and dungeons and dungeons and lotsa dragons when we save the princess (queen) at the end!" Way too much stuff going on.
(1b) Letting the name "Dungeons & Dragons" get in the way of a good tale is a terrible idea.
On more than one occasion i have seen your refer to yourself as the character, "Snails". Are you doing that because of your screen name or are you actually Marlon Wayons?(2) Too many characters. The movie did not let any of them (except me, Snails) breathe.
I agree with you on the potential risk of overwhelming the a large portion of the audience with weird stuff.(5) An amazing world of fantastic fantasy stuff is not automatically a plus. It can burn through effects budget quickly without endearing the movie to the audience. IMO Willow was one of the better pre-LotR fantasy movies; the story made enough sense without overwhelming us with weird stuff. Likewise, the first Harry Potter story is incredibly small plotwise, because Rowlings did not want to overwhelm with her weird world -- she wanted us to get to know the main characters instead.