Will the D&D movie (2016) be good?

[NecroDancer]

I want to know this forums honest opinion, and more importantly can it top the greatness that was the original

[nyjastul69]

I want to know this forums honest opinion, and more importantly can it top the greatness that was the original

I don't hold out much hope. Topping the first one is setting the bar rather low. The first one was terrible. There were some ok elements, bit overall it was terrible. I thought Wrath of the Dragon God was tolerable for what it was. The Book of Vile Darkness was also absolutely terrible. If I was forced to find a something positive it would be the slaymate.

Anywho, I hope this one exceeds my expectations.

[Ninja_Prawn]

The best it can hope for is surely 'so bad it's good', which, in fairness, I thought BoVD nailed. An objectively terrible film, but still somehow enjoyable to watch.

[Rogar Demonblud]

I want to know this forums honest opinion, and more importantly can it top the greatness that was the original

It will suck, because Hollywood has pretty consistently shown they can't handle fantasy any more (even the LotR movies are more meh on a re-watch). This will be a fantasy movie with not only Hollywood Executives meddling from start to finish, but also Corporate Executives, plus incessant sniping from fanbois over the tiny inconsequential details they've gotten wrong.


Topping the first one is setting the bar rather low.

So low it's subterranean. I've found that watching paint dry is literally a more interesting thing to do than watch that movie. (I gave up on the third after 20 minutes, and am told I missed nothing good after that point)

[Thrudd]

It has to be better than the first one and the made for TV stuff.

But who knows. I would guess this one will take place in Forgotten Realms, since that is now the official setting and I'm guessing Hasbro owns it. So fans of the Realms might get to see some familiar stuff brought to life. Would it be cool to see Waterdeep or Baldur's Gate in live action?

I also think the producers know this movie should actually have some things representative of the game in its tone and content. Like an actual adventuring party, a dungeon, representations of the actual classes and spells and monsters found in the setting.

[Rogar Demonblud]

They stated back when they originally announced the deal that the movie would be set in the Realms. They hinted that no other place is worth considering. Probably, that's a swipe at how bad the Krynn-based Dragonlance movie did.

[Winter_Wolf]

Considering how bad the first two were, don't plan to hold my breath over it. Also this is the first I've heard of another attempt at a D&D movie. At least they're off trying to remake movies that did well in their original release. For now.

[Anonymouswizard]

Now I'm weird, in that I actually enjoyed the first D&D movie. I don't know why, it's horrible and they used the wrong ending, but I can still get a laugh at it.

However, I am convinced that live action is the wrong choice for any fantasy movie. I prefer the animated Lord of the Rings film over the live action one, and significantly prefer the old Berserk anime over almost any live action fantasy film, and loved the animated Dragonlance film (although I haven't read the books). So my gut reaction is that it will be terrible unless animated.

[Ninja_Prawn]

this movie should actually have some things representative of the game in its tone and content. Like an actual adventuring party, a dungeon, representations of the actual classes and spells and monsters found in the setting.

Book of Vile Darkness had all of those things. It was still terrible.

[NecroDancer]

I feel like the movie should be about the PLAYERS in real life and then transition into the game (like the gamers dorkness rising).

[Kantaki]

Book of Vile Darkness had all of those things. It was still terrible.

Was that the one with the guy who activated a Paladin artifact by declaring himself a Blackguard?
(Seriously, how is that supposed to work? Aren't those more or less polar opposites?)

There will really be another D&D movie?
Well, I don't know if it will be better than the previous ones, but I doubt it will be worse. They would have to try for that.

[Lethologica]

If the movie isn't a direct rip of Vin Diesel and Helen Mirren's game sessions during filming for Chronicles of Riddick, I'm out.

[Ninja_Prawn]

Was that the one with the guy who activated a Paladin artifact by declaring himself a Blackguard?
(Seriously, how is that supposed to work? Aren't those more or less polar opposites?)

The ending was pretty messy... I got the impression his recovery of his paladin powers came from his realisation and acceptance of who he was and what he stood for - and his claiming to be evil was a deliberate ruse done in honest service to Pelor. But I may be mis-remembering.

Reading this (http://collider.com/dungeons-and-dragons-movie-story/)... I feel increasingly confident the new film will not be a good one.


If the movie isn't a direct rip of Vin Diesel and Helen Mirren's game sessions during filming for Chronicles of Riddick, I'm out.

Oh, that reminds me... has anyone seen that D&Diesel video? That was fun. Some kind of fourth-wall-breaking thing where Vin Diesel plays himself might just work as a feature-length film.

[Kitten Champion]

I think the producer at least has a good foundational idea for a D&D movie. That is, a Guardians of the Galaxy-style ensemble-based action-comedy romp in a high fantasy setting could really work. Something that doesn't take itself too seriously and plays up the colourful and diverse imagination that goes into D&D, with an emphasis on making likable and memorable characters.

I'd personally use the 2010 IDW D&D comics that I really enjoyed as the base, it has everything you'd need character and tone-wise regardless of what direction you want to go with the actual story.

Though the thorn resting dangerously about the heart of any hope that I may have is that Warner Brothers and Hasbro are capable of screwing up everything magnificently, like malfunctioning clockwork really.

[Hopeless]

So a movie set in the Forgotten Realms imitating the GOTG movie?

How about they watch Critical Role or better yet the Force Grey Giant Hunters actual play series and turn that into your movie?

Be a good promotion for the latest Dnd adventure Storm Kings Thunder!

Oh I hope they don't try to do a movie on Acquisitions Incorporated I'm not sure the world is ready for Omin, Bronzebottom and Darkmagic on the big screen... oh that's next week?!

[Kantaki]

The ending was pretty messy... I got the impression his recovery of his paladin powers came from his realisation and acceptance of who he was and what he stood for - and his claiming to be evil was a deliberate ruse done in honest service to Pelor. But I may be mis-remembering.

Unless Pelor cares more about lawfulness than about not-being-evilness in his servants that seems unlikely.
I mean he managed to pass that zombie child. From what I remember being evil was a requirement for that.
When I watched the movie (because hey, a D&D movie, it can't be that bad right?:smalltongue:) I was very amused how willing the „hero” was to commit evil acts. During the scene with the artifact I only thought „Boy, this thing is supposed to be a tool of good. After all the things you have done do you seriously think you can... Did he just activate it by declaring himself a champion of evil?”
Maybe it would make more sense with a bit less/more D&D knowledge, but to me that moment was really weird.

A GotG style movie? Could be interesting.
Maybe with a lawful leader trying to keep the mostly chaotic (and neutral) teammates in check?:smallamused:

[Hopeless]

So some kind of heist movie mixed with Leverage and a healthy dose of the best part of the Lord of the Rings and The Hobbit without the bad parts where they ignore the base material like Beholder Guard Dogs, Thieves who don't know dropping the rest of the way off that wall after climbing down their rope is better than picking a fight with the purple lipped Fighter wearing dragon skin armour he killed personally...

Actually liked Wrath of the Dragon God, still can't watch the Vile Darkness movie as they forgot about clerics after claiming Pelor hasn't recognised any Paladins for a few centuries...

This new release I hope they manage to pull it off as it would be nice if it was as good as any one of the Lord of the Rings movies or the first Hobbit movie wouldn't it?

[JoshL]

Short answer, probably, but I'll still watch and probably love it (just for different reasons than I'm hoping to). But let's look at what IMDB has to say (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2906216/)

One cast member (so 2016 is not going to happen) in talks. Ansel Elgort from the Divergent movies. Okay, I haven't seen them so I really don't have any opinion. But to be fair, the old one clearly blew it's casting budget on Jeremy Irons, who Shatnered his way to add some entertainment value. Not quality, but entertaining at least.

Director, Rob Letterman, of various kids movies through Goosebumps. Keep meaning to watch that. But still, not saying that he can't do something that isn't aimed at 10 year olds, but that's where his experience is. And NOT what I'd want out of a D&D movie (though to be fair, the other extreme with BoVD's "I'm so bad, there's bad with my bad!" was pretty terrible too, and is my least favorite of the three films).

Three writers:
Lindsey Beer - nothing complete, but credits include this, Barbie, M.A.S.K. Visionaries, ROM and a Short Circuit remake. Other than Barbie and Short Circuit, I kinda want to see all of those, but not really expecting anything great from them.

David Leslie Johnson - a few credits, Conjuring 2 was okay, Wrath of the Titans was...well...Orphan was bland at best, and I didn't see 2011's Red Riding Hood (but Gary Oldman is in it, so I really ought to). Doesn't seem good though.

Geneva Robertson-Dworet - Replace Barbie and Short Circuit with a Tomb Raider remake, and her credits are the same as Lindsey Beer's. Those three things have 10 writers (including Brian K. Vaughan) so probably tv/cartoon series. Still want to see them.

Anyway, lots of relatively inexperienced folks whose experiences seem skewed young. Indicating someone in the producer's food chain is thinking "D&D? That's a toy right? Let's treat it like a toy movie" so probably not going to be as good as it could be. But I hope to be proved wrong.

Personally, I'd hate to see a people playing the game scenario because there are plenty of things out there that do that very well. What I'd really like to see is a tv series. Follow a party on a campaign. Some episodic/arc side-quests. That sort of thing (and preferably tell the Forgotten Realms Avatar series). But to be honest, I do love Wrath of the Dragon God, and whatever they make I will watch it, probably more times than I should ever admit to.

[Tvtyrant]

D&D is a really bad setting for fantasy stories, so I doubt it will be very good.

The assumption of a fantasy setting is that what the main characters do is important, and usually only they can do/have the will to do it. The assumption of D&D is that the world is full of super powered heroes that would make the Marvel universe weep, even in "low level" settings like Eberron and Dark Sun.

[t209]

Consider that they are doing Greyhawk, not a good one I bet. Maybe go with Planescape, Darksun, or other "not-so-standard fantasy".

[Giggling Ghast]

I'm sure it will be as good as the Warcraft movie. :smalltongue:

[Kitten Champion]

Anyway, lots of relatively inexperienced folks whose experiences seem skewed young. Indicating someone in the producer's food chain is thinking "D&D? That's a toy right? Let's treat it like a toy movie" so probably not going to be as good as it could be. But I hope to be proved wrong.

I'd imagine it's more a matter of Hasbro having writers contracted to do several movies for them - most of which will naturally skew young due to being toy IPs - than a superficial awareness of their own product.

Though my issue is more that these are clearly economical choices... and, while 2000's Dungeons & Dragons had a variety of issues on every conceivable level, the sense of cheapness was particularly egregious to the point that it really felt like a TV movie. It almost goes without saying but, Fellowship came out the next year as a contrast.

Point being, if Hasbro/WB doesn't put some degree of resources and ambition behind this I can't see it going too far. This doesn't have the talent behind it to make a silk purse out of a sow's ear.

[Rogar Demonblud]

Consider that they are doing Greyhawk, not a good one I bet. Maybe go with Planescape, Darksun, or other "not-so-standard fantasy".

They are doing the Realms, and only the Realms, for every D&D movie from here on out. It's the only property Wizards has that has brand awareness.

MtG would probably beat it, but they aren't doing MtG movies 'ever'.

And for those who believed the GotG-eske pitch line, you'll be happy to know* that the terms they're using to describe the movie are now making references to heists (so Ant-Man) and mature romance (read Deadpool). So it's anybody's guess what will be the current hotness they try to imitate when production actually starts. I find it off-putting no one seems to have a firm grasp of what they want the movie to be (besides profitable), but really, half the fun of this is watching the trainwreck happen.

*note: sarcasm

[Olinser]

I have almost zero faith in the ability of Hollywood to make a good movie about it. The last attempt at a D&D movie felt like a 3rd rate hack director and script writer got cliff notes about the game from a reporter that interviewed a random guy that played a couple D&D games 10 years earlier.

If the staff in charge of creative direction of the movie have never played the game, I have zero faith it will be any good.

Also given the fact I have seen absolutely no details about the plot but everything announced keeps talking about OTHER movies like LOTR or GoTG, it sounds like they're just throwing together whatever clichés they think are popular and hoping a movie comes out of it.

90% sure I will not be seeing it unless the trailer blows me away.

[Thrudd]

A D&D movie needs:

A dark, stone dungeon with flickering torches and inhuman sounds echoing from within

A party of adventurers creeping down corridors, carefully prodding suspicious looking things with poles

Classic traps and dungeon hazards- hidden pit full of spikes, poison darts from the wall, green slime melting someone's face off, gelatinous cube that absorbs a guy and we see him dissolve, shriekers
Carrion crawler or two skittering out of the darkness and paralyzing someone,

Sliding hidden doors and secret passages

Somewhere we need to see a regenerating troll, rubbery mottled green skin and all

A rust monster

A Bigby's Hand spell used at some point
Use of magic for utility and problem solving: tenser's floating disc, dancing lights, feather fall, spider climb
Somebody collecting or handling bat guano

Hiring a bunch of mercenaries to accompany the party, see most of them get horribly killed by monsters and traps before the rest of them run away.

Hauling sacks full of loot while being chased by something.

[Ninja_Prawn]

while 2000's Dungeons & Dragons had a variety of issues on every conceivable level, the sense of cheapness was particularly egregious to the point that it really felt like a TV movie.

Was I the only one who found the cheapness of that one charming? Maybe I was just in the right (i.e. wrong) mindset when I happened to see it...

[Hopeless]

So let's assume you got asked what would be the ideal main characters and villain in the latest movie who would you go for?

For example have a villainous wizard seeking the means to turn himself into a dragon as his reason for burning down towns and cities with their own wizard school.
The heroes consist of survivors of his latest attack, say a neophyte fighter leading an aged but wise cleric, a dwarf ranger, an elvish sorceress and a halfling bard.
One lost his father in the attack, another lost her druidic mentor,the other three have their own reasons to get involved but it all boils down to stopping the evil wizard before he burns down another town.

How would you handle the plot?

[AvatarVecna]

As long as it's called "The D&D Movie" or something along those lines, no, it will not be good, because the title being so would indicate that those responsible for making it are completely missing the point of the game.

The first problem with the mindset that leads to making a "D&D Movie" is the idea that D&D is some kind of established setting; anybody who has spent even two minutes perusing the setting material will understand that D&D is a system of rules that allows you to make characters for a wide variety of settings, be it Faerun, Eberron, Dragonlance, Spacejammer, Golarion, Planescape...you get the idea. Now, having stories that take place in one of these worlds would be good, but if the movie was taking place in one of those worlds, those in charge of the movie would be afraid that setting a story in Eberron might exclude D&D fans that prefer non-Eberron settings.

From here, we're presented with some choices to make about the direction to take this movie in, and none of them are good: firstly, we can pick an existing setting and tell an existing story...but that story's probably already been told, so it wouldn't be telling a new story, and it would require getting the rights to use famous characters of the setting, which can be costly. Sadly, telling a pre-existing story is probably the best option available; I mean hell, I've never even read the books, but if it was announced that they're was gonna be a Drizz't movie, I'd go see it. Who knows, maybe it'll be great; LotR did it well, after all. Sadly, saying "but what if it ends up being as good as Lord Of The Rings?" isn't likely to get people to invest in such a story.

Next option is, unfortunately, far less ideal: make a fantasy film that doesn't take place in a pre-existing D&D universe, doesn't star pre-existing famous D&D characters, and is basically just some other fantasy with "D&D Movie" as the title. "Dungeons & Dragons" is a good example of this kind of movie; appropriate, it's only so infamous because the title is "Dungeons & Dragons", and would be far less well-known if it was called "Ismir's Folly", or something similarly unconnected to D&D. The problem here is that it's not really a D&D movie, it's some non-D&D thing that has the game's name slapped on to try and draw in fans.

Third option could be done well, but probably wouldn't be: have the movie set in a pre-existing universe, but have the story of it start non-famous characters (even completely new ones). My idea for something like this could be to set it in Eberron (allowing the movie's writers to easily make it an allegory for late 19th/early 20th century Earth, since that's basically what the setting is), and would star the protagonists (a party of badass Xen'drik tomb raiders halfway between LotR and Indiana Jones) who discover that the local giants and drow have been taken over by Quori, and are attempting to unearth ancient Giant artifacts that will allow them to perform a ritual to tie Eberron and Dal Quor into planar binds with each other, keeping the two planes in close metaphysical contact and allowing the quori to take over the world; now the adventurers must race to find the artifacts before the cult can, in order to prevent doomsday from coming early. The biggest problem with such a movie is, of course, that it would essentially be a big budget gaming story...and gaming stories are rarely interesting to somebody who wasn't taking part in that game.

Final option: if you're going to make a D&D movie, have it star the players, not the characters. This allows you to explore (in)famous gamer stereotypes, set up realistic people the audience can understand and connect with, show off the gaming stuff in a way that's easy to explain my game mechanics matter in a movie, playfully mock certain kinds of players and rules alike, and show how a bad group with a bad DM can still work together to make a great game, if they can stop being morons for two seconds and headbutting over every little things. The biggest problem with this idea, of course, is that Dorkness Rising is already a thing that exists.

TL;DR

There's already been 4 good D&D movies; one was Dorkness Rising, the other three are all Lord Of The Rings. If you want a D&D Movie to be good, it either needs to retell a pre-existing story with pre-existing characters (with the film's addition being to turn the words on the page into moving images), or it needs to focus less on the characters and more on the players (and deconstructing/reconstructing the traditions and nuances of the gaming sub-culture).

[Ninja_Prawn]

The first problem with the mindset that leads to making a "D&D Movie" is the idea that D&D is some kind of established setting;

In a way, you could say that every movie ever made was a D&D movie. If it involved characters making decisions, well that's what D&D is. You can play D&D in space, you can play D&D with ponies, you can play D&D noir mysteries and gothic horror films.

I'd love if they did a 'D&D movie' with all classic high fantasy trailers, but then the opening scene was the DM setting up a screen and saying "okay, people. Today, we're going to be starting a new campaign... in my homebrewed Harry Potter AU!" And then the rest of the film is a really bad HP knock-off.

[Aotrs Commander]

First I've heard of it...


As long as it's called "The D&D Movie" or something along those lines, no, it will not be good, because the title being so would indicate that those responsible for making it are completely missing the point of the game.

Unless you get the people who write for LEGO to do it...

Mind you, LEGO is dead smart, since their mandate appears to be "make a good movie/show, the fact it involves LEGO is incidental."

(Really, the only thing I've seen LEGO do that's a bit blagh is Nexo Knights... But then again, Ninjago took a while to pick up its pace.)

One does not feel that is going to be the mentality here.

[Winter_Wolf]

A D&D movie needs:

A dark, stone dungeon with flickering torches and inhuman sounds echoing from within

A party of adventurers creeping down corridors, carefully prodding suspicious looking things with poles

Classic traps and dungeon hazards- hidden pit full of spikes, poison darts from the wall, green slime melting someone's face off, gelatinous cube that absorbs a guy and we see him dissolve, shriekers
Carrion crawler or two skittering out of the darkness and paralyzing someone,

Sliding hidden doors and secret passages

Somewhere we need to see a regenerating troll, rubbery mottled green skin and all

A rust monster

A Bigby's Hand spell used at some point
Use of magic for utility and problem solving: tenser's floating disc, dancing lights, feather fall, spider climb
Somebody collecting or handling bat guano

Hiring a bunch of mercenaries to accompany the party, see most of them get horribly killed by monsters and traps before the rest of them run away.

Hauling sacks full of loot while being chased by something.

So...kind of like Aliens but without guns. :smalltongue: I'd watch it.

[Asmodean_]

will the say what now

[danzibr]

Snnnnaaaaaaaaiiiiiiiiillllllllllssssssssssss!!!!!! !!!!!

[Stewzors]

I've already had my perfect D&D movie in Your Highness so either way I'm good.

But in seriousness I'm fully expecting it to be awful - I'd be surprised if it was anywhere near as good as the Warcraft movie and that was a solid "Meh".

As people have said I'd like a D&D movie to have some focus on the players, not TOO much, but similar to the way Princess Bride was filmed with the cuts to child and grandpa - occasional 4th wall breaks to the table with reactions etc The "DM" actor doing the Narration in the movie - stuff like that. Embrace the people playing the game side of things rather than just the epic fantasy movie vision.

[AvatarVecna]

Snnnnaaaaaaaaiiiiiiiiillllllllllssssssssssss!!!!!! !!!!!

Shh...did you hear that?

Listen very carefully...

Yes, you hear that? That complete lack of sound? That's the sound of nobody caring.

[Thrudd]

So...kind of like Aliens but without guns. :smalltongue: I'd watch it.

Totally. The Indiana Jones tomb robbing scenes, maybe a little of the first Brendan Fraser Mummy film, plus Aliens, all with chain mail, swords, axes and spears. That's the tone we're looking for. We can even have a guy saying "game over man! game over!" as the survivors cram themselves into a ten by ten room and wedge the door shut, after watching three people get eaten by something.

[Hopeless]

I've already had my perfect D&D movie in Your Highness so either way I'm good.

But in seriousness I'm fully expecting it to be awful - I'd be surprised if it was anywhere near as good as the Warcraft movie and that was a solid "Meh".

As people have said I'd like a D&D movie to have some focus on the players, not TOO much, but similar to the way Princess Bride was filmed with the cuts to child and grandpa - occasional 4th wall breaks to the table with reactions etc The "DM" actor doing the Narration in the movie - stuff like that. Embrace the people playing the game side of things rather than just the epic fantasy movie vision.

Never watched that movie is it worth watching?

[Ichneumon]

The Warcraft movie wasn't very good, so I don't have high hopes for the D&D movie, unless they somehow make it something different from a standard fantasy tale. One suggestion is making it actually about the game. So, people playing Dungeons and Dragons as well as the adventures their characters partake in. It could be a celebration and tribute to the roleplaying community. If it is something like that, it would be something unique and different. If not, well, than it just becomes a generic fantasy story and I don't see a real market for that anymore.

[Rogar Demonblud]

People did that 'cut to the real world' thing with LEGO, and it ended up being pretty badly mocked. At least in part because it derailed the momentum of the third act.


Never watched that movie is it worth watching?

If you're referring to Warcraft, you can safely skip it (like any video game movie, fantasy movie or movie made to cash in on pop culture buzz).

If you're referring to The Princess Bride, you should probably watch it at least once so you understand where a third of the quotes on the internet come from.

[Thrudd]

Totally. The Indiana Jones tomb robbing scenes, maybe a little of the first Brendan Fraser Mummy film, plus Aliens, all with chain mail, swords, axes and spears. That's the tone we're looking for. We can even have a guy saying "game over man! game over!" as the survivors cram themselves into a ten by ten room and wedge the door shut, after watching three people get eaten by something.

Oh yeah. And at some point, probably the climax of the movie, there will be a huge dragon, probably a red dragon, that either swoops down or rises up out of some lava and fire, to the tune of 80's metal guitar riffs with the determined heroes in the foreground poised for action.

Of course the dragon needs to kill at least one of the main adventuring party in the course of the combat. Maybe the cynical thief, who finally has come to value friendship over gold and does something brave instead of hiding like he usually would. After the fight, the others will rush over to the dying thief, and someone will hand him a huge gem or a golden gem encrusted chalice and say "look, Ferdis, the hoard is ours!" he'll be like - *cough blood* "bury me with my share of the treasure. Don't forget the *cough* extra ten percent we agreed on and the *cough* magic dagger I let you borrow."
Then they lay him down on a pile of gold and he dies clutching the chalice with a serene smile on his face.

[Hopeless]

Make it a quest to the ruins of a legendary city thought protected by a fierce dragon.
Turns out one of the adventurers' is a descendant of the ruler and hopes to find proof of his claim somewhere in the ruins, another seeks the dragon's hoard even if it risks the fury of the dragon.
Various forces are also interested in the ruins but are willing to wait for the adventurers to return outside so they can rob them, but one of the adventurers isn't who they think she is.
Revealed as the former guardian of the city she has returned to help the descendant pay his respects to his ancestor revealing her hoard was spent helping to protect the city as it shielded her grove.
A rival faith turned the locals against her and they burnt down her grove releasing her from her oath resulting in the destruction of the city as the rival cities realised it was now unprotected but they claimed she was responsible to avoid accepting the blame for their actions.
The tomb of his ancestor is revealed as the only untouched treasure trove in the city but they're still faced with their rivals awaiting their return to steal their loot.
The Guardian reveals herself allowing the adventurers to escape the city wiser, more experienced and a little richer but facing an uncertain future as their friend revealed as a dragon druidic sorceress has to move on to maintain her secret identity... are they willing to let her go and keep the secret or accompany her knowing that for them the adventure is only the beginning?

[Giggling Ghast]

Snnnnaaaaaaaaiiiiiiiiillllllllllssssssssssss!!!!!! !!!!!

I liked Snails over the rest of the cast.

[Bohandas]

As long as it's called "The D&D Movie" or something along those lines, no, it will not be good, because the title being so would indicate that those responsible for making it are completely missing the point of the game.

The first problem with the mindset that leads to making a "D&D Movie" is the idea that D&D is some kind of established setting; anybody who has spent even two minutes perusing the setting material will understand that D&D is a system of rules that allows you to make characters for a wide variety of settings, be it Faerun, Eberron, Dragonlance, Spacejammer, Golarion, Planescape...you get the idea. Now, having stories that take place in one of these worlds would be good, but if the movie was taking place in one of those worlds, those in charge of the movie would be afraid that setting a story in Eberron might exclude D&D fans that prefer non-Eberron settings.

From here, we're presented with some choices to make about the direction to take this movie in, and none of them are good: firstly, we can pick an existing setting and tell an existing story...but that story's probably already been told, so it wouldn't be telling a new story, and it would require getting the rights to use famous characters of the setting, which can be costly. Sadly, telling a pre-existing story is probably the best option available; I mean hell, I've never even read the books, but if it was announced that they're was gonna be a Drizz't movie, I'd go see it. Who knows, maybe it'll be great; LotR did it well, after all. Sadly, saying "but what if it ends up being as good as Lord Of The Rings?" isn't likely to get people to invest in such a story.

Next option is, unfortunately, far less ideal: make a fantasy film that doesn't take place in a pre-existing D&D universe, doesn't star pre-existing famous D&D characters, and is basically just some other fantasy with "D&D Movie" as the title. "Dungeons & Dragons" is a good example of this kind of movie; appropriate, it's only so infamous because the title is "Dungeons & Dragons", and would be far less well-known if it was called "Ismir's Folly", or something similarly unconnected to D&D. The problem here is that it's not really a D&D movie, it's some non-D&D thing that has the game's name slapped on to try and draw in fans.

Third option could be done well, but probably wouldn't be: have the movie set in a pre-existing universe, but have the story of it start non-famous characters (even completely new ones). My idea for something like this could be to set it in Eberron (allowing the movie's writers to easily make it an allegory for late 19th/early 20th century Earth, since that's basically what the setting is), and would star the protagonists (a party of badass Xen'drik tomb raiders halfway between LotR and Indiana Jones) who discover that the local giants and drow have been taken over by Quori, and are attempting to unearth ancient Giant artifacts that will allow them to perform a ritual to tie Eberron and Dal Quor into planar binds with each other, keeping the two planes in close metaphysical contact and allowing the quori to take over the world; now the adventurers must race to find the artifacts before the cult can, in order to prevent doomsday from coming early. The biggest problem with such a movie is, of course, that it would essentially be a big budget gaming story...and gaming stories are rarely interesting to somebody who wasn't taking part in that game.

Final option: if you're going to make a D&D movie, have it star the players, not the characters. This allows you to explore (in)famous gamer stereotypes, set up realistic people the audience can understand and connect with, show off the gaming stuff in a way that's easy to explain my game mechanics matter in a movie, playfully mock certain kinds of players and rules alike, and show how a bad group with a bad DM can still work together to make a great game, if they can stop being morons for two seconds and headbutting over every little things. The biggest problem with this idea, of course, is that Dorkness Rising is already a thing that exists.

TL;DR

There's already been 4 good D&D movies; one was Dorkness Rising, the other three are all Lord Of The Rings. If you want a D&D Movie to be good, it either needs to retell a pre-existing story with pre-existing characters (with the film's addition being to turn the words on the page into moving images), or it needs to focus less on the characters and more on the players (and deconstructing/reconstructing the traditions and nuances of the gaming sub-culture).

I think the only half decent way to do a D&D movie would be to do a direct adaptation of a well known adventure module such as Great Modron March, Expedition to Castle Ravenloft, or Temple of Elemental Evil. Preexisting characters aren't absolutely necessary.

Edit: Or Baldur's Gate!


Next option is, unfortunately, far less ideal: make a fantasy film that doesn't take place in a pre-existing D&D universe, doesn't star pre-existing famous D&D characters, and is basically just some other fantasy with "D&D Movie" as the title.

A filmmaking technique which was also the basis of the new Ghostbusters movie


From here, we're presented with some choices to make about the direction to take this movie in, and none of them are good: firstly, we can pick an existing setting and tell an existing story...but that story's probably already been told, so it wouldn't be telling a new story, and it would require getting the rights to use famous characters of the setting, which can be costly. Sadly, telling a pre-existing story is probably the best option available; I mean hell, I've never even read the books, but if it was announced that they're was gonna be a Drizz't movie, I'd go see it. Who knows, maybe it'll be great; LotR did it well, after all. Sadly, saying "but what if it ends up being as good as Lord Of The Rings?" isn't likely to get people to invest in such a story.

Plus saying "it'll be as good as Lord of the Rings" is kind of a monkey's paw, miscast wish kind of statement; what if it's as good as the Ralph Bakshi version of Lord of the Rings?


The first problem with the mindset that leads to making a "D&D Movie" is the idea that D&D is some kind of established setting; anybody who has spent even two minutes perusing the setting material will understand that D&D is a system of rules that allows you to make characters for a wide variety of settings, be it Faerun, Eberron, Dragonlance, Spacejammer, Golarion, Planescape...you get the idea. Now, having stories that take place in one of these worlds would be good, but if the movie was taking place in one of those worlds, those in charge of the movie would be afraid that setting a story in Eberron might exclude D&D fans that prefer non-Eberron settings.

From here, we're presented with some choices to make about the direction to take this movie in, and none of them are good: firstly, we can pick an existing setting and tell an existing story...but that story's probably already been told, so it wouldn't be telling a new story, and it would require getting the rights to use famous characters of the setting, which can be costly. Sadly, telling a pre-existing story is probably the best option available; I mean hell, I've never even read the books, but if it was announced that they're was gonna be a Drizz't movie, I'd go see it. Who knows, maybe it'll be great; LotR did it well, after all. Sadly, saying "but what if it ends up being as good as Lord Of The Rings?" isn't likely to get people to invest in such a story.


To be fair, there's definitely somethig to be said for the mindset mentioned at the end of that first paragraph, because I wouldn't go see the movie proposed in the second paragraph.

[Blackhawk748]

They stated back when they originally announced the deal that the movie would be set in the Realms. They hinted that no other place is worth considering. Probably, that's a swipe at how bad the Krynn-based Dragonlance movie did.

Ok thats just insulting to all of their other settings. Personally Forgotten Realms is pretty far down on my list of settings (its right above Krynn, stupid color coded factions), i would much prefer Planescape (a DnD fan favorite) Greyhak (a classic) Eberrron (so many options) or Dark Sun, really anywhere but Faerun. Faerun just feels so... generic, on top of the fact that virtually every game they've ever made is set there whats left to tell?

In short, go to Eberron, its the setting of Dungeuons and Dragons Online, which is still fairly popular) and its a setting that gives them a lot of freedom and it in no way feels "generic"


Oh yeah. And at some point, probably the climax of the movie, there will be a huge dragon, probably a red dragon, that either swoops down or rises up out of some lava and fire, to the tune of 80's metal guitar riffs with the determined heroes in the foreground poised for action.

So this then? (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DUCRFMZ-hiY) I am of the firm belief that Dragons must be introduced to epic Metal Guitar Riffs, otherwise something is wrong.

[Bohandas]

Actually, now that I think of it, you could do a legitimate generic D&D movie without established characters, an established setting, or an established adventure provided that the entire movie was about mind flayers fighting a war against beholders

[Rogar Demonblud]

Ok that's just insulting to all of their other settings. Personally Forgotten Realms is pretty far down on my list of settings (its right above Krynn, stupid color coded factions), i would much prefer Planescape (a DnD fan favorite) Greyhawk (a classic) Eberron (so many options) or Dark Sun, really anywhere but Faerun. Faerun just feels so... generic, on top of the fact that virtually every game they've ever made is set there what's left to tell?

That marked bit? That's what the suits care about. More people have probably heard of or played Baldur's Gate and Pools of Radiance than otherwise have the faintest clue about what D&D is. You want that name recognition, because it serves as a multiplier on your advertising dollars.

Otherwise, people's reactions tend towards "Oh, that thing from the 80s that got everyone pissed off. And wasn't there a crappy cartoon too?" Then they turn to Google, find out the first movie stank, the next two were SyFy Originals, and they decide they can skip going to this.

[Knaight]

D&D is a really bad setting for fantasy stories, so I doubt it will be very good.

The assumption of a fantasy setting is that what the main characters do is important, and usually only they can do/have the will to do it. The assumption of D&D is that the world is full of super powered heroes that would make the Marvel universe weep, even in "low level" settings like Eberron and Dark Sun.
I'd agree that D&D is a terrible setting for fantasy stories, and that more than that games in general do not turn into movies well. With that said, that assumption doesn't fit a great many fantasy settings.


I think the only half decent way to do a D&D movie would be to do a direct adaptation of a well known adventure module such as Great Modron March, Expedition to Castle Ravenloft, or Temple of Elemental Evil. Preexisting characters aren't absolutely necessary.
This seems like a terrible idea. A decent movie lives and dies on the qualify of its storytelling and characters; this undercuts storytelling immediately and indirectly weakens the characters.

[Bohandas]

This seems like a terrible idea. A decent movie lives and dies on the qualify of its storytelling and characters; this undercuts storytelling immediately and indirectly weakens the characters.

Not in fantasy and science fiction. A sufficiently intriguing setting and/oror story premise can make up for other shortcomings. I honestly couldn't tell most of the human characters from Lord of the Rings apart (nor could I tell Merriweather and Pippin apart, nor could i tell the dwarves from The Hobbit apart) but I still loved the movies anyway. There weren't any recurring characters in The Twilight Zone (unless you count the narrator). And 2001 A Space Odyssey is widely recognized as one of the best movies of all time despite having some of the most opaque and incomprehensible storytelling of all time. Plus, some of the best writers in history were rather poor storytellers, but made up for it by having good stories to tell; Tolkien, Dickens, and Lovecraft concocted some of the most wonderful stories ever told and then set them down on paper in a fashion that was only barely readable.

[Hopeless]

Like this? (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g-JhzKub33E)

[Lord]

The Warcraft movie wasn't very good, so I don't have high hopes for the D&D movie, unless they somehow make it something different from a standard fantasy tale. One suggestion is making it actually about the game. So, people playing Dungeons and Dragons as well as the adventures their characters partake in. It could be a celebration and tribute to the roleplaying community. If it is something like that, it would be something unique and different. If not, well, than it just becomes a generic fantasy story and I don't see a real market for that anymore.

Am I the only one who liked the Warcraft Movie? I thought it was flawed, but far better than Marvel Civil War, which was basically just a slew of pointless action sequences with a badly put together excuse plot. At least Warcraft aspired to be something more, and had some really interesting visuals. Frankly I'd say its the second best movie that has come out all yet. The best being Zootopia.
...And the fact that I am ranking a video game movie as the second best movie of the years speaks very poorly of this years crop. I hope I'm a bit eccentric.

At any rate if they are going to do a D&D movie, they should have a point where the Party goes off the rails. Where instead of following the carefully woven plot thread they just decide to go get drunk at a bar, and kill somebody important. This would spiral into an entirely different plot line where they are on the run from the Guards and trying to get out, and all the while the evil villains plans go forth without a hitch. At some point during this the rogue would die, and the Paladin and the Cleric would get into a brutal fight to the death over who got to steal his stuff. Eventually the surviving main characters get offered a job by the villain, who won offscreen because they were making so much chaos that nobody noticed his operations.
You know, like the sort of thing which actually happens in D&D campaigns.
Just a thought.

[Keltest]

Am I the only one who liked the Warcraft Movie? I thought it was flawed, but far better than Marvel Civil War, which was basically just a slew of pointless action sequences with a badly put together excuse plot. At least Warcraft aspired to be something more, and had some really interesting visuals. Frankly I'd say its the second best movie that has come out all yet. The best being Zootopia.
...And the fact that I am ranking a video game movie as the second best movie of the years speaks very poorly of this years crop. I hope I'm a bit eccentric.

I liked it. It had Orcs and Humans and they beat the crap out of each other, and that's really all it needed.

[Thrudd]

So this then? (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DUCRFMZ-hiY) I am of the firm belief that Dragons must be introduced to epic Metal Guitar Riffs, otherwise something is wrong.

YAAAS
Exactly. That is the perfect one.

[Anonymouswizard]

I liked Snails over the rest of the cast.

Well, you aren't supposed to have sense in this kind of movie. (Snails was the one who wanted to forget all this nonsense and do something safer, right?).


Plus saying "it'll be as good as Lord of the Rings" is kind of a monkey's paw, miscast wish kind of statement; what if it's as good as the Ralph Bakshi version of Lord of the Rings?

I don't see the problem with it being better than the live-action Lord of the Rings films.

Seriously, there are a good number of people who prefer Ralph Bakshi's version for legitimately reasons, can people please stop insisting that it's inferior to the Peter Jackson version.

[Bohandas]

I don't see the problem with it being better than the live-action Lord of the Rings films.

Seriously, there are a good number of people who prefer Ralph Bakshi's version for legitimately reasons, can people please stop insisting that it's inferior to the Peter Jackson version.

I'll level with you, I haven't actually seen Bakshi's version of LotR. I have however seen enough of his movies to know that most of his movies are really bad.

[AvatarVecna]

Am I the only one who liked the Warcraft Movie? I thought it was flawed, but far better than Marvel Civil War, which was basically just a slew of pointless action sequences with a badly put together excuse plot. At least Warcraft aspired to be something more, and had some really interesting visuals. Frankly I'd say its the second best movie that has come out all yet. The best being Zootopia.
...And the fact that I am ranking a video game movie as the second best movie of the years speaks very poorly of this years crop. I hope I'm a bit eccentric.

At any rate if they are going to do a D&D movie, they should have a point where the Party goes off the rails. Where instead of following the carefully woven plot thread they just decide to go get drunk at a bar, and kill somebody important. This would spiral into an entirely different plot line where they are on the run from the Guards and trying to get out, and all the while the evil villains plans go forth without a hitch. At some point during this the rogue would die, and the Paladin and the Cleric would get into a brutal fight to the death over who got to steal his stuff. Eventually the surviving main characters get offered a job by the villain, who won offscreen because they were making so much chaos that nobody noticed his operations.
You know, like the sort of thing which actually happens in D&D campaigns.
Just a thought.

I can agree with you that Civil War was disappointing in a number of ways, but I'm not sure I can agree about Warcraft being good. Now, keep in mind that my understanding of the movie comes not from seeing it, but seeing the trailers and hearing about the experience some friends of mine had at the movie; here's the impression I've been given:

"Going in, your expectations are probably low, because it's a magic-fantasy-based video-game movie; you figure, if you turn your brain off, and don't worry about whatever problems it has, maybe the movie will be a 'so bad it's good' movie. Then, as you watch the movie, it shows that there's serious effort going into it, and that people are trying, and that it just might deserve for you to take it seriously...and it raises your expectations just high enough that the movie can once more fail to meet them. This movie was a decent watch, but because it's aiming to be a great video-game movie and ends up coming out just above mediocre, it's not succeeding at its goal; it's too good to judge it by bad movie standards, but it's too bad to meet good movie standards."

I have no idea how accurate this impression is, given that I haven't seen the movie myself, but my friends have generally had good* taste in movies, so I imagine that's how I'd experience it as well.

*: Good movies in this case being "something I'd enjoy", since my friends and I tend to agree on what we thought of most movies (although we disagreed on Guardian Of The Galaxy).

[JoshL]

I'll level with you, I haven't actually seen Bakshi's version of LotR. I have however seen enough of his movies to know that most of his movies are really bad.

I love Bakshi's work, including LOTR, and he worked hard to promote the idea that animation can be for adults too. That said, yeah, sometimes they are bad, and this page will give a rundown better than I could http://flyingmoose.org/tolksarc/bakshi/bakshi.htm. keeping a character name consistent, ESPECIALLY if you are changing it to avoid confusion, seems like sort of basic stuff.

I also liked the Warcraft movie. It was an entertaining fantasy tragedy. Awkward at times, but at the end I wanted more. I hope there is a sequel in the works.

[Knaight]

Not in fantasy and science fiction. A sufficiently intriguing setting and/oror story premise can make up for other shortcomings.
D&D modules have neither of these things.

[Cazero]

Am I the only one who liked the Warcraft Movie? I thought it was flawed, but far better than Marvel Civil War, which was basically just a slew of pointless action sequences with a badly put together excuse plot. At least Warcraft aspired to be something more, and had some really interesting visuals.
Personally my main beef with the Warcraft movie is that it wrecked the Warcraft continuity.
But then WoW has been doing far worse for several years by now, so I really shouldn't be that upset.

[warty goblin]

Am I the only one who liked the Warcraft Movie? I thought it was flawed, but far better than Marvel Civil War, which was basically just a slew of pointless action sequences with a badly put together excuse plot. At least Warcraft aspired to be something more, and had some really interesting visuals. Frankly I'd say its the second best movie that has come out all yet. The best being Zootopia.
...And the fact that I am ranking a video game movie as the second best movie of the years speaks very poorly of this years crop. I hope I'm a bit eccentric.


Holy crap, they made two of us. 'Cause that was exactly my reaction to a Warcraft/Civil War double header with a friend. And it wasn't even that I liked Warcraft better than guys in themed tights punching each other - which I knew would bore me - I liked Warcraft enough to go a second time by myself.

But a new D&D movie won't be that good. There's a lot of weird stuff in D&D that would be extremely hard to cook down into a 2.5 hour long movie - all the history behind the monsters, the weird way magic works - and so on. This weird is what, to me at least, makes D&D fun; strip that out and you've got generic fantasy without a clear story. Which in theory could be good, but has a very low likelihood of actually being good.

Really, what they should do is a D&D TV show. You could do a sort of archytpical campaign a lot better that way; spend time on the party members' origins, put in bits about ancient illithid empires and so forth, actually show a decent chunk of a cool fantasy world. Then bring in the chief evil dude, show the players ascend in power from scrubs to actually cool, and so on. Season finale takes place in an appropriately elementally themed lair - and you can bring in a whole new set of adventurers next season if you want.

Naturally, this will never happen.

[Rodin]

I can agree with you that Civil War was disappointing in a number of ways, but I'm not sure I can agree about Warcraft being good. Now, keep in mind that my understanding of the movie comes not from seeing it, but seeing the trailers and hearing about the experience some friends of mine had at the movie; here's the impression I've been given:

"Going in, your expectations are probably low, because it's a magic-fantasy-based video-game movie; you figure, if you turn your brain off, and don't worry about whatever problems it has, maybe the movie will be a 'so bad it's good' movie. Then, as you watch the movie, it shows that there's serious effort going into it, and that people are trying, and that it just might deserve for you to take it seriously...and it raises your expectations just high enough that the movie can once more fail to meet them. This movie was a decent watch, but because it's aiming to be a great video-game movie and ends up coming out just above mediocre, it's not succeeding at its goal; it's too good to judge it by bad movie standards, but it's too bad to meet good movie standards."

I have no idea how accurate this impression is, given that I haven't seen the movie myself, but my friends have generally had good* taste in movies, so I imagine that's how I'd experience it as well.

*: Good movies in this case being "something I'd enjoy", since my friends and I tend to agree on what we thought of most movies (although we disagreed on Guardian Of The Galaxy).

That's pretty accurate. Stuff like the Mario movie you can laugh at because the cast were drunk the whole time they were filming it, and B-horror schlock is either done with a wink and a nod at the tiny budget or acting like the tiny budget is a big one with the disparity being what makes the humor.

For video game movies, the utter lack of understanding of the source material is what provides the entertainment. For the first D&D movie, casting Marlon Wayans as a major character, among many other sins. The people that make it don't care, and that allows you to wallow in the badness.

Warcraft had an obviously huge budget. A heck of a lot of work went into the CGI. The people that made it obviously did so with a very solid understanding of Warcraft lore* and a lot of care was put into making it seem authentic.

Warcraft didn't have Jeremy Irons taking huge bites out of the scenery. It didn't have an obviously miscast comedy actor in what should have been a serious role. It wasn't written by writers that were high on PCP, or directed by someone who was just using the movie as a tax dodge (*cough* Uwe Boll *cough*).

With all that going for it, you start to expect a good movie. And it just...wasn't. It was the top end of mediocre, and the failure to make it genuinely good with all the work that was put into it only makes the failure stand out more.

As for the new movie? Meh. Hollywood has proven incapable of writing original fantasy movies for the past 20 years at least. It's the one case where I'd prefer they adapt something, because at least then there's a chance of quality from the plot.


*this week's version of it. Don't like it? Wait a week for the next retcon.

[Blackhawk748]

Im all for doing the DnD movie like Dorkness Rising, then you can make jokes about everybody rolling like crap when a fight goes on for 2 minutes.

[Olinser]

Holy crap, they made two of us. 'Cause that was exactly my reaction to a Warcraft/Civil War double header with a friend. And it wasn't even that I liked Warcraft better than guys in themed tights punching each other - which I knew would bore me - I liked Warcraft enough to go a second time by myself.

But a new D&D movie won't be that good. There's a lot of weird stuff in D&D that would be extremely hard to cook down into a 2.5 hour long movie - all the history behind the monsters, the weird way magic works - and so on. This weird is what, to me at least, makes D&D fun; strip that out and you've got generic fantasy without a clear story. Which in theory could be good, but has a very low likelihood of actually being good.

Really, what they should do is a D&D TV show. You could do a sort of archytpical campaign a lot better that way; spend time on the party members' origins, put in bits about ancient illithid empires and so forth, actually show a decent chunk of a cool fantasy world. Then bring in the chief evil dude, show the players ascend in power from scrubs to actually cool, and so on. Season finale takes place in an appropriately elementally themed lair - and you can bring in a whole new set of adventurers next season if you want.

Naturally, this will never happen.

Sounds like a prime idea for a Netflix Original Series or Youtube Red.

[russdm]

I think that the problem is that D&D is not really good to make a movie about without having it be really Generic Fantasy. Seriously, Ancient Mind-flayer empires? That barely appears, and Mind-flayers aren't that associated with D&D.

The problem is that there is almost no plot that could work that couldn't also be done in a generic fantasy movie. For a D&D movie to work, it needs to first constrain what kind of story is being told, and how it is going to be presented. The most that could happen, would be some kind of dungeon crawl or something more but are you really getting the feel across?

How do you define a D&D movie exactly? Both D&D and D&D Wrath of the Dragon God were D&D movies. Dorkness Rising fits the best way to do a D&D movie the most because it features what it most important, the players playing the game.

D&D by its nature is essentially heroic fantasy, so any real generic fantasy story works.

As for a TV show, well, you run into a bigger problem, in that very few of the D&D plotlines beyond anything Drizzt related or Dragonlance related or Dark Sun related are going to last beyond one season. FR really isn't suited for multiple seasons.

The best way to make a D&D tv series is to use Greyhawk, Ravenloft or Planescape. Since you can vary the adventures. Greyhawk would work the best. You want settings or events that are unique, whereas most of D&D is really just generic.

Again, how would you exactly define D&D in a way that interests someone that has never played. Do we want to pull in the mythos of ancient mind-flayer empires, which sounds completely stupid anyway, rather than trying to incorporate history from a setting then have adventures there? Employ a base of operations and the characters explore? That might work way better than some confusing weird as all get out thing some time-traveling Kraken monsters.

(If there is one thing that D&D just needs to drop [there are many things it should drop], mind-flayers are really high. They just completely warp the entire thing from Fantasy to Pseudocrappy-scifi. Turns it all into some kind of really band B-movie garbage.

"Witness the attack of the Mind-flayers! [Using the same kind of descriptive tones from a trailer for Invasion of the Body Snatchers]")

[Bohandas]

I think that the problem is that D&D is not really good to make a movie about without having it be really Generic Fantasy. Seriously, Ancient Mind-flayer empires? That barely appears, and Mind-flayers aren't that associated with D&D.

...

Again, how would you exactly define D&D in a way that interests someone that has never played. Do we want to pull in the mythos of ancient mind-flayer empires, which sounds completely stupid anyway, rather than trying to incorporate history from a setting then have adventures there? Employ a base of operations and the characters explore? That might work way better than some confusing weird as all get out thing some time-traveling Kraken monsters.

(If there is one thing that D&D just needs to drop [there are many things it should drop], mind-flayers are really high. They just completely warp the entire thing from Fantasy to Pseudocrappy-scifi. Turns it all into some kind of really band B-movie garbage.

"Witness the attack of the Mind-flayers! [Using the same kind of descriptive tones from a trailer for Invasion of the Body Snatchers]")

Say what you like but that sounds a hell of a lot better than any of the D&D movies they've made so far

EDIT:
Another idea for a D&D movie that would be better than the ones they've made so far: Take The Blob, move it to a pseudo-medieval fantast setting and call it Dungeons & Dragons: The Rise of Juiblex. I'm not necessarily saying that either of these would be good ideas per se, but they would certainly be better than the ones that they've done already.

[Seerow]

As for a TV show, well, you run into a bigger problem, in that very few of the D&D plotlines beyond anything Drizzt related or Dragonlance related or Dark Sun related are going to last beyond one season. FR really isn't suited for multiple seasons.


I see nothing wrong with a TV show that has the premise of starting a new campaign each season, with the thread tying it all together being the group itself. Now whether that would fly to any sort of producers is another matter entirely.

[Bohandas]

(If there is one thing that D&D just needs to drop [there are many things it should drop], mind-flayers are really high. They just completely warp the entire thing from Fantasy to Pseudocrappy-scifi. Turns it all into some kind of really band B-movie garbage.

What about Beholders then? The worst that happens there is it feels like Big Trouble In Little China

[Hopeless]

Take the latest 5e releases for example.

Episode 1: Explain the scenery and why the adventurers are heading to the mining town of Phandulin.
The Knight and the Mine Owner are ambushed and kidnapped by Goblins leaving the adventurers to try and rescue them.

We learn an evil force wants something from the mine as rumours of attacks in the North by Giants as Triboar is attacked by a dragon something that explains why the Knight was willing to head on with the Mine Owner and some guards to travel faster to Phandulin hoping to get his task finished there so he can go investigate Triboar?

Episode 2: The Castle
By end of episode 1 the adventurers have routed the goblin camp and learned the Mine Owner was sent on to the Castle because of something found in the mine.
The Knight heads on to Phandulin more concerned with the dragon attack as the adventurers swiftly coming under heavy attack discover evidence of the Cult of the Dragon being behind the attack on Triboar and finally arrive in Phandulin to witness the goblins attack under the command of an Ogre leaving evidence that the Giants were behind this attack as well as whatever they want from the Mine.

I'm sure you can do better but I figure that might work as an arc before taking an episode out to ease the pressure so when they get back to the story we have more reason to want to continue watching...

Well I'm assuming that's how it might be handled anyway!

[russdm]

What about Beholders then? The worst that happens there is it feels like Big Trouble In Little China

Well, Beholders are super iconic, and have been really only associated with the Game, or with the Doom monster. The Beholders have a nice backstory, and can be used way easier then Squidheads(mind-flayers) as well.

Beholders: Visitors from an alternate dimension or a wizard's experiment gone bad. Shoots special beams from its eyestalks, also likes munching on people.

Quick, easy to the point, and sounds interesting.

Because we are trying to get people to watch who don't know anything about D&D, unless you want just the fans of D&D to be the only to watch it. Which might have been a problem for the first D&D movie, no explanations really.

Personally, I think the first D&D was good if you consider it the fantasy play of a bunch of somewhat not capable players, with a wacky DM. It's a nice campy movie.

People will see Beholders and think Wow!, which is that they are memorable. Them being memorable will help attract attention.

I think what Hopeless posted is really how to make the series work: Small little Arcs, maybe like more of what DS9 did or maybe Babylon 5 for inspiration. Then maybe start to show that the different adventures are all connected to some evil villain with an organization

That is not plotting to destroy the world, but take over a certain chunk of it. None of those "Take over the World" plots, more a "Take over this kingdom" or "Take over this land, This Empire"

To keep an interest, maybe we meet the rulers, interact with them, to make the villain succeeding be emotional for the audience. The plucky new empress/queen being challenged by someone ruthless, trying to steal her inheritance?

Add in some politics like game of Thrones (Errgghhh) and maybe people will want to watch.

[Rogar Demonblud]

From what I hear people talking about, I doubt politics is much of a draw for GoT. Sex and violence, oh yeah. Politics? We already have C-SPAN.

Anyway, in one of the periodic discussions on this on rpg.net (Other Media, usually), somebody sketched out a quick and dirty anti-zombie campaign, to be released around Halloween. Sounds like it could work to me, but I still say there is no real reason to use the D&D name or IP.

[Legato Endless]

Add in some politics like game of Thrones (Errgghhh) and maybe people will want to watch.

Maybe. D&D IP outside of your local DM is fairly uniform in doing politics poorly. Not even in the holistic sense of politics in the world rarely taking into account what politics in a D&D world would look like. No, it's usually juvenile and dull even beyond that because one suspects most of the writer's conception of political interactions was glued out of half remembered fragments of primary school and copy pasting the deliberatel minimalism of Star Wars (OT). Even the recent arc in OotS was fairly lambasted by a lot of Playgrounders despite the amusing bits of satire.

Game of Thrones maintains interest because the intrigue is more than a prelude to fighting and Martin actually has some historical grounding for his fantasy.


I see nothing wrong with a TV show that has the premise of starting a new campaign each season, with the thread tying it all together being the group itself. Now whether that would fly to any sort of producers is another matter entirely.

I kind of want to see an anthology series where you reuse the same principle actors and a few character tics but switch up the characters they're playing with each season. Give the audience an idea of a group of people all playing thesedifferent campaigns together.


I'll level with you, I haven't actually seen Bakshi's version of LotR. I have however seen enough of his movies to know that most of his movies are really bad.

His LOTR is less the capering embarrassment of Cool World and more a mind numbing collection of technical achievement tied to the storytelling sensibility of a damp rock. It has a kind of painful grandeur, like the 70s Caligula in animated form. But if you ignore "Aruman's" chipmunk voice, barbarian Boromir, the occasionally very strange staging and other baffling decisions, it's definitely an experience.

[Olinser]

I mean a tv series with a different group each season could have definite potential.

You could even have some degree of continuity by having all of the adventures take place in the same world, just not in the same area - like lets take Forgotten Realms universe. Your first group is in Waterdeep, then next season a different group in Icewind Dale (with possibly some tavern info about the successful exploits of the first group).


Or you could easily feature a new group dealing with the results of the last season's adventure.

Like lets say the first season was a group of guys working to overthrow an evil necromancer overlord of a small kingdom, and at the end they succeed.

Then next season would be a year later, and a different group forms to try and push back an invading orc army that invaded now that the necromancer isn't around to keep them in check.

Then fast forward a couple years later and you have group of newbies trying to make a name for themselves by pushing into untamed wilderness trying to expand the borders of the kingdom now that the orc threat has been significantly lessened.

You could go on like that for quite a while, and feature old characters returning in positions of authority (i.e. the leader of the group that overthrew the necromancer is the new Lord, the leader that pushed back the orcs is the General in charge of the border push, etc).

[Kitten Champion]

I want to see the dramatization of the D&D games played by the kids from Stranger Things.

[Kislath]

I'd like to see a Ravenloft movie. I think that could work.

[Bohandas]

From what I hear people talking about, I doubt politics is much of a draw for GoT. Sex and violence, oh yeah. Politics? We already have C-SPAN.

We also already have internet pornography and yet the sex is still apparently a draw for some people.

[Bohandas]

His LOTR is less the capering embarrassment of Cool World and more a mind numbing collection of technical achievement tied to the storytelling sensibility of a damp rock. It has a kind of painful grandeur, like the 70s Caligula in animated form. But if you ignore "Aruman's" chipmunk voice, barbarian Boromir, the occasionally very strange staging and other baffling decisions, it's definitely an experience.

From what I've seen of it Cool World seems to be one of Bakshi's better movies. Certainly better than Wizards or Fritz the Cat.

[Olinser]

I'd like to see a Ravenloft movie. I think that could work.

It COULD work, but I have very little faith in Hollywood's ability to make anything including vampires without trying to make them Twilight style romance vampires.

There's no way current Hollywood should TOUCH Ravenloft.

[Winter_Wolf]

From what I've seen of it Cool World seems to be one of Bakshi's better movies. Certainly better than Wizards or Fritz the Cat.

Ouch. Hardly a ringing endorsement of Bakshi. Even Gabriel Byrne couldn't save that movie. It proceeds to get worse the longer you watch it. Says the guy who's seen it at least three times full through. Catchy soundtrack though.

[Kitten Champion]

There's no way current Hollywood should TOUCH Ravenloft.

I doubt they'd try, it's certainly not something I'd advise were I studio executive. The people going to a theoretical Dungeons & Dragons movie with limited personal knowledge of D&D itself (which probably will be the majority) would likely be somewhat bemused with strong Gothic horror elements in their fantasy adventure movie. If you're using an established campaign setting for a movie it's going to be Forgotten Realms, basically.

Though more likely they'll just make a movie-specific setting, because it'll be cheaper and less limiting to be able to avoid established lore and possibly expensive visual effects that may be required by that setting.

[Thrudd]

It COULD work, but I have very little faith in Hollywood's ability to make anything including vampires without trying to make them Twilight style romance vampires.

There's no way current Hollywood should TOUCH Ravenloft.

Did you not see the "Fright Night" remake? It was pretty good. But yeah, vamps have made a decidedly romantic turn ever since Anne Rice.

Anyway, I don't think Ravenloft is a good idea anyway. Classic horror monsters are not unique enough and the adventures in ravenloft tend not to be very dungeony or dragony. The only point in a D&D movie or tv show should be to depict what is unique about D&D.

[Olinser]

I doubt they'd try, it's certainly not something I'd advise were I studio executive. The people going to a theoretical Dungeons & Dragons movie with limited personal knowledge of D&D itself (which probably will be the majority) would likely be somewhat bemused with strong Gothic horror elements in their fantasy adventure movie. If you're using an established campaign setting for a movie it's going to be Forgotten Realms, basically.

Though more likely they'll just make a movie-specific setting, because it'll be cheaper and less limiting to be able to avoid established lore and possibly expensive visual effects that may be required by that setting.

The problem is that these days Hollywood seems to want to try to turn everything into a blockbuster, and they do so by adding terrible action movie elements and completely disrespecting the source material.

I mean the entire point of making a D&D or other adaptation movie is because you WANT the fan base of the work to see your movie. So many movies lately seem to think they can just slap a franchise label on a movie and the fan base will show up to see it.

Which you can already see with announcements of the D&D movie. There is zero plot information, zero talk about D&D elements, zero talk about the world. Everything you hear is "Its going to be like Guardians of the Galaxy!" or "It's going to be like Lord of the Rings!" They seem to think they can just slap the D&D label on the movie and the fan base will show up to see it, so they can busy themselves making an action blockbuster that will attract the 'other' audience. And they end up pissing off the fan base and not appealing to anybody else.

[Thrudd]

I doubt they'd try, it's certainly not something I'd advise were I studio executive. The people going to a theoretical Dungeons & Dragons movie with limited personal knowledge of D&D itself (which probably will be the majority) would likely be somewhat bemused with strong Gothic horror elements in their fantasy adventure movie. If you're using an established campaign setting for a movie it's going to be Forgotten Realms, basically.

Though more likely they'll just make a movie-specific setting, because it'll be cheaper and less limiting to be able to avoid established lore and possibly expensive visual effects that may be required by that setting.

They are doing Forgotten Realms this time, I'm sure because it is now the official "core" setting.

[Kitten Champion]

The problem is that these days Hollywood seems to want to try to turn everything into a blockbuster, and they do so by adding terrible action movie elements and completely disrespecting the source material.

I mean the entire point of making a D&D or other adaptation movie is because you WANT the fan base of the work to see your movie. So many movies lately seem to think they can just slap a franchise label on a movie and the fan base will show up to see it.

Which you can already see with announcements of the D&D movie. There is zero plot information, zero talk about D&D elements, zero talk about the world. Everything you hear is "Its going to be like Guardians of the Galaxy!" or "It's going to be like Lord of the Rings!" They seem to think they can just slap the D&D label on the movie and the fan base will show up to see it, so they can busy themselves making an action blockbuster that will attract the 'other' audience. And they end up pissing off the fan base and not appealing to anybody else.

They don't really care about the core fanbase (which, honestly, based on my experience has no solid concept of what a D&D movie should entail and have strong divisions between them on every subject imaginable) nor would they make their money by actually doing so, as that's ultimately a tiny fraction of the potential audience that they'll need to at least break even, especially if you include international box-office. They want the Dungeons & Dragons name ultimately because it's a name people recognize even if the most they know about it is being a part of an antiquated punchline deriding someone's intrinsic nerdiness. This isn't any different than every other property Hasbro is currently in the process of cinema-tizing in hopes of Transformers money, whether it'll appeal to general audiences largely seems be a problem that's mystifying to absolutely everyone at the moment considering how terrible a year Hollywood has had regardless of brand-names.

As to the announcement, there was - to my knowledge - no plot information because they hadn't even written a script at that point. Those were bullet points for the direction the producer wanted, and "Guardians of the Galaxy-style movie in a Lord of the Rings-esque high fantasy world" is something someone who's never rolled anything but 6-sided dice can understand completely.


They are doing Forgotten Realms this time, I'm sure because it is now the official "core" setting.

Oh, okay. It makes sense, chances are if you've experienced any D&D-related property it'll be FR-related. Baldur's Gate and its expansions/sequel sold millions, Salvatore's novels are just as ubiquitous. I suppose FR is relatively cheap anyways, comparative to say... Eberron, I guess.

[Hopeless]

Oh, okay. It makes sense, chances are if you've experienced any D&D-related property it'll be FR-related. Baldur's Gate and its expansions/sequel sold millions, Salvatore's novels are just as ubiquitous. I suppose FR is relatively cheap anyways, comparative to say... Eberron, I guess.

If they try to put a certain Dark elf ranger or a certain sage on the big screen they better make sure not to screw that up!:smalleek:
It was bad enough when the first movie had Beholders as Guard Dogs that even Marlon Wayans could fool, why not ask whoever thought up the second one instead?

Better yet as previously mentioned ask the people behind the Gamers movies to do it instead?!

Extradimensional crossover, two adventuring groups stuck in the real world with a group of normal role-players stuck facing the Shadow...

Sigh I'd rather they base it on Greyhawk or Nentir Vale than Faerun... Eberron is it really that much of a pipe dream?

[Legato Endless]

We also already have internet pornography and yet the sex is still apparently a draw for some people.

Right. It's not like we're living in a world where House of Cards, The West Wing, and Battlestar Galactica weren't smashingly popular.

[Kitten Champion]

If they try to put a certain Dark elf ranger or a certain sage on the big screen they better make sure not to screw that up!:smalleek:

Were that the plan they'd have stated directly that they're adapting their novels, there's no point being coy about it.



Sigh I'd rather they base it on Greyhawk or Nentir Vale than Faerun... Eberron is it really that much of a pipe dream?

About as likely as Star Wars adapting the Thrawn books to the big screen at this point.

Forgotten Realms is Dungeons & Dragons in the most iconic sense as of 2016, I think I - and I'm guessing a lot of you here - have a familiarity breeds contempt deal with it that makes other settings feel richer or more exciting in contrast.

[Rogar Demonblud]

They are doing Forgotten Realms this time, I'm sure because it is now the official "core" setting.

Using the Realms has been the plan ever since Solomon's movie stank and tanked. So they were going to use the Realms when Greyhawk was core and when PoLand was core. It's really hard to overstate how much of the conversation is dominated by the amount of money made by the Baldur's Gate and Myth Drannor games.

[Tvtyrant]

But how cool would a spelljammer movie set in the Unhumam War be? The crew are a group of cut throat pirates hired to kill an Orc navy that has a witchlight marauder egg before it can hatch.

[Eldan]

It COULD work, but I have very little faith in Hollywood's ability to make anything including vampires without trying to make them Twilight style romance vampires.

There's no way current Hollywood should TOUCH Ravenloft.

Give it to Guillermo Del Toro? The Strain started out pretty decent before it turned into zombies and nazis. Cronos was a good vampire movie too.

[russdm]

Using the Realms has been the plan ever since Solomon's movie stank and tanked. So they were going to use the Realms when Greyhawk was core and when PoLand was core. It's really hard to overstate how much of the conversation is dominated by the amount of money made by the Baldur's Gate and Myth Drannor games.

Maybe they should do the Baldur's Gate games in movie form. That would be watchable. Or adventures in Baldur's Gate or Waterdeep.

[Rogar Demonblud]

Before the WotC boards went bye-bye, I could've pointed you to a VOCAL group who were dead certain all movies were going to involve Waterdeep and the Undermountain.