D&D Movie/TV (Yet another) D&D Movie Speculation thread.

[generic]

Counterpoint-

Pirates of the Caribbean (Based off of a Theme Park Ride)

Transformers (Based off of a Toy)

I could keep going, but you get the idea. Here's the thing, IMO. Movies are a different medium. I mean, sure, some sources (books, comics) are a little easier to translate to film, but ... it's still different. And that's before you get to specialized use cases (such as Tristram Shandy, or Naked Lunch, both of which have ... movies ... that are good, but are very different than the books).

Any movie as D&D is not going to even attempt to be D&D qua D&D. Instead, it's going to try and (hopefully) be a good movie, first. And saying that you cannot find good characters somewhere in the history of all the D&D is, IMO again, preposterous. At least in comparison to Pirates. I mean .... there's been books, and stuff.* Narrative books, you could buy in the fiction section of a bookseller.**

So D&D does, in fact, bring a lot to the table. It brings some built-in knowledge. Both the actual players as well as a general level of background knowledge (if nothing else, someone might remember it from Big Bang Theory to Stranger Things or from seeing something something youtube). It has a decent cachet in the creative community, which is always a small bonus when bringing something to screen. And it has a rich and storied set of ... stuff ... that can be used, from Mind Flayers to Beholders to FIREBALL!


*Maybe a lot of them weren't good. But there were a LOT of them.

**To the extent it hasn't been killed dead by Amazon.

Good points, I agree with most of them.

However, I'm curious about which novel series you think would be a good movies or series of movies?

I don't doubt the quality of D&D fiction, I'm actually curious.

 

[lowkey13]

*Deleted by user*

 

[Umbran]

Counterpoint-

Pirates of the Caribbean (Based off of a Theme Park Ride)

This kind of proves my point, rather than stands as a counterpoint. The actual property added only the name - it didn't bring any of the stuff to actually make a good movie with it. They made a fantasy pirate movie, and slapped the name on it.

Transformers (Based off of a Toy)

Not "a toy". An entire toy line that is (drumroll please) comprised of a bunch of highly iconic characters that had been in broad-audience comic books and TV for years.

And note how the movie in the property that is actually getting good reviews (opening *tomorrow* - Bumblebee) is very much focused on one character.

Any movie as D&D is not going to even attempt to be D&D qua D&D. Instead, it's going to try and (hopefully) be a good movie, first. And saying that you cannot find good characters somewhere in the history of all the D&D is, IMO again, preposterous.

That's not really what I said.

When you do a superhero movie, you have the central superhero, and the tropes that come with them. You do a Pirates of the Caribbean movie, you get a whole lot of pirate tropes to work with - even if you aren't working with a well-known named character, you have iconic imagery and character *types*.

You do a D&D movie... you don't have those things, at least not for the mass audience. Drizzt and Dragonalnce are the only characters anyone outside the D&D fanbase have a snowball's chance in heck of recognizing. The latter are more tied to Dragonlance than D&D (including rights, I expect), and drow are complicated, as noted in the OP. In most movie making, you get to use your genre to your own advantage. To do a D&D movie, you *have to teach the audience about the iconic bits of D&D in the process*.

And, you can do that, sure. It is by no means impossible to present a fantasy movie with D&D tropes in it! But, the author and director have to bring those, they don't come to the audience *with the name*.

So, if I have to teach the audience all the tropes anyway... why am I also *paying* someone to use the D&D brand? Why am I not just making my own fantasy movie? Given the dorky and bad-movie baggage "D&D movie" now carries with it?

 

[robus]

To make a successful movie, I'm inclined to think their best bet is to persuade Vin Diesel and The Rock to star, and have them do to D&D whatever it is they do with "The Fast and the Furious". Go for unapologetically entertaining rather than 'good'.

Apparently the Rock is not going to work with Diesel again - doesn't appreciate his lack of "work ethic" apparently.

 

[Azzy]

Do NOT further distract the man from finishing the next GoT novel!

He's never going to finish the series. We just need to accept that.

 

[robus]

As for the movie, I fear that the producers are going to take things far too seriously and try for an epic, GoT-esque story. It really needs to be a light-hearted romp through fantasy tropes, celebrating some (heroic self-sacrifice) and mocking others (damsel in distress).

Ella Enchanted might actually be a good model, it has a narrator (i.e. a DM stand-in) and an entertaining story. Of course rather than a rom-com the D&D movie would be swash-buckling adventure but with its tongue firmly in cheek. The narrator providing entertaining asides on the action and foreshadowing trouble ahead.

 

[lowkey13]

*Deleted by user*

 

[robus]

Because that's how Hollywood works. Not by making their own fantasy movies.

You're right, they're looking at it as some kind of strange insurance, basically trying to guarantee there's at least some audience for the movie when it comes out. The desire as you say to massively break out beyond that with a movie that has great word of mouth (and reviews).

And you're right about the Pirates movie that succeeded on the strength of its execution, the early chatter being mostly everyone eye-rolling on the concept. On release the reviews and word-of-mouth were stratospheric and it really was a movie that demanded to be seen! I remember thoroughly enjoying every minute

The magic is not guaranteed, and Marvel's roll with its movies is really unprecedented. The only equivalent I can think of is the James Bond series but that's stretched over 5 decades (and includes a few formulaic clunkers). Marvel has definitely assembled (ha) a competent core crew of story planners that have plotted out this potential mess of characters and arcs into something that is reasonably coherent and that is no small feat.

I had this crazy idea that if the producers were smart (?) they'd hire a top-tier cast of actors for this movie with the intention of recasting them in sequels, but here's the D&D twist: they'd play different characters in the sequel - i.e. the actors remain the same but the roles shift (much like in the game itself). The narrator/storyteller (if there is one and there bloody better!) remains constant of course.

I'm prepared to be disappointed of course!

 

[gyor]

There are memes depicting black persons as orcs from the LotR films. I feel that any "dark" race would be problematic.

The main problem a producer would have in my opinion is not being labeled being another LotR, GoT, or HP style film.

If one confuses LOTRs orcs for black people, that reflects more on them, then LOTRs.

Honestly focus on having a good characters with a good plot with good dialog with a movie that is true to whatever setting they put it in, and let the chips fall where they may.

 

[Ralif Redhammer]

I think the movie needs to be called Dungeons & Dragons. I mean, there are tons of D&D movies with the serial numbers filed off (The Mythica series, for example).

Dwayne Johnson starring wouldn’t hurt. Just look at the G.I. Joe live action movie series – swapping Johnson in for Tatum helped the second movie, absolutely. A charismatic lead matters.

But so does source fidelity. Look at the Transformers movie line. They’ve become increasingly unrecognizable in design and plot from the source material as they’ve gone on, to critical condemnation. But now there’s the Bumblebee movie, which appears to hew closer to the source material, and is building buzz D sorry, pun not intended).