Dragonlance Movie Trailer [Archive] - Giant in the Playground Forums

Rowanomicon

2007-10-22, 07:34 PM

I've been waiting for this for a while.

I have to say I'm surprised at the animation style; it's very...old school.

Kiefer Sutherland (I think that's how he spells it) is the voice of Raistlin, which is funny because long before I found that out my friend and I joked that if they ever made a Dragonlance movie he should play Raistlin sin both Raistlin and Jack Bauer whisper all the time to seem more intense.

Oh, I also think it's awesome that Lucy Lawless is in it.

I'll definitely see it, but it would have been a lot cooler if they'd made it a live action epic.

anyway I'm kinda stoked on DragonLance as I just read Soulforge.

DomaDoma

2007-10-22, 07:57 PM

doliest

2007-10-22, 08:01 PM

Can't say I remember much about the book - can't even remember my favorite character's name; he was the stoic-warrior type - but I have to hand it to them for daring to make a 2-D animation in this day and age. I think I'll buy the DVD on that general principle.

I seem to recall a very annoying subplot with dimwitted dwarves - hope they cut that one.

That would probably be caramon or if its a paladin...i forget his name.
They better not cut out the gully dwarfs, they were my favorite part....bupuxraistlin forever.

....

2007-10-22, 08:40 PM

Um...

Look, I'm really not tying to be a downer on anyone, I know lots of people love Dragonlance. I myself have never read any of the books or played the setting but...

That looks bad. Really bad. Like, I've seen Saturday morning cartoons with better production value. Maybe they'll improve it, but it seems like they've got a lot of it already done. I suppose the excelent plot/voice acting could make up for it but...man.

Seraph

2007-10-22, 08:45 PM

Holy god that looks bad.

seriously. it looks like the old DnD cartoon, with some early 90's CGI thrown in for the hell of it.

Tallis

2007-10-22, 08:48 PM

Reminds me of the old animated Lord of the Rings. It looks like it'll be okay for kids, but the style probably won't go over well with mainstream adults. Another opportunity missed. Too bad.
I'll watch it, but my expectations aren't high.

thubby

2007-10-22, 08:55 PM

animation and cgi can be blended well, really they can, i just don't get why American cartoons suck at it so badly. :smallconfused:

this looks pretty bad i gotta say.

Rowanomicon

2007-10-22, 09:01 PM

The "paladin" or Solamnic Knight was Sturm Brightblade.

I have to agree that the animation looks bad and the presentation of the trailer was kinda crappy; I am quite disappointed given how incredibly awesome it could have been (even as an animated/cgi piece).

I'll definitely still watch it though.

Manticorkscrew

2007-10-22, 09:21 PM

Hmm... the cartoons and CGI monsters really don't mesh well together. They're not even internally consistent in quality: the CGI varies from 'not bad' to 'that looks... really awful', and the anime bits range from lazy to lazier.

And why does the narrator pronounce it "Dragends"? At least, that's how I heard it.

I'm not really a fan of the Dragonlance series, but I think the books deserve better than this.

Catch

2007-10-22, 09:26 PM

I choked back a little bile. And I don't even read Dragonlance books.

I'm a little hesitant on fantasy novels being translated to film, anyway. If you get Peter Jackson--and a hundred million dollar budget--the product might be downright excellent. Then again, Eragon had a same sized budget and look how that turned out.

As far as this Dragonlance business is concerned, it's a straight-to-DVD release featuring B-List actors in tandem with mediocre and animation special effects. Maybe it'll sell well among Dragonlance fans but this appears to be much like the '78 LOTR film--a low-budget quiet release aimed at a niche market. Again, I'm not a Dragonlance reader but I can at least pretend to be offended; if this was, say, a Wheel of Time movie, I'd be violently appalled.

Then again, if they had that $100 mil and Peter Jackson, maybe it'd consider not hating it...

StupidFatHobbit

2007-10-22, 09:36 PM

ray53208

2007-10-22, 09:43 PM

um. sorry, but, i didnt like it.

i realise its just a trailer, but the animation looks like crap. the mix of poorly done cgi with poorly done animation just looks... poorly done.

i remember playing dragonlance way back in high school (circa 1989). i had a lot of fun. more fun than this trailer promises.

....

2007-10-22, 09:48 PM

...

Um.

Are we sure this isn't some elaborate hoax? I mean, this is seriously a movie that was made recently and is coming out soon? It looks like a Saturday morning cartoon from the '80s. I can't believe anything this crappy is for real.

First time I saw that site I thought it was fake.

It may be, since they just claim names, but none of the voice actors speak.

Does anyone have any info on this movie that DOSN'T come from that one website?

Matthew

2007-10-22, 10:02 PM

Try the Margaret Weis Website: http://www.dragonlance.com/

Manticorkscrew

2007-10-22, 10:04 PM

...

Um.

Are we sure this isn't some elaborate hoax? I mean, this is seriously a movie that was made recently and is coming out soon? It looks like a Saturday morning cartoon from the '80s. I can't believe anything this crappy is for real.

And, "Without further adieu"? Oh lordy, add that to the trailer and I'm spitting my drink all over the keyboard here. It shows great promise for being a movie so bad it will be watched and mocked forever.

*Pounds his forehead*

D'oh. That would explain it. Stupid me for taking the word of the people above me that this was a movie that was coming out. Yeah, it's a bad hoax. Yeah. Please say it's a bad hoax.

EDIT: As usual, Wikipedia has the answer, and it's not pleasant:

"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dragonlance:_Dragons_of_Autumn_Twilight"

Rowanomicon

2007-10-22, 10:12 PM

Yes, I saw on imdb quite some time ago that an animated DragonLance was in production. That's when I found out that Sutherland was voicing Raistlin.
I hope this particular trailer is a hoax, but I doubt it.
Anyway, I'm kinda glad that it's being made in crappy animation style; it means that I can still direct the totally awesome live action version at some point.:smallbiggrin:

Raistlin1040

2007-10-22, 10:25 PM

:frown: I...I think I died a little inside. Excuse me...I think I have something in my eye.

Rowanomicon

2007-10-23, 12:09 AM

It's OK Raist, let it out.

Humbug

2007-10-23, 01:01 AM

I can't say much about the story, but the animation is terrible, the Disney sequels have better animation and CGI combination than that, considering that Disney sequels are a far cry from their predecessors in terms of quality.

Hawriel

2007-10-23, 01:03 AM

teen turbo looked better.

Setra

2007-10-23, 01:45 AM

:smallfrown: When I first heard about the movie I had thought it was going to be, ya know, an actual movie.

I want it to be good, I really do... but I doubt it will be. Honestly I actually kind of like the art style, sure it's not anime, but it's not supposed to be, it looks kinda old school, though I wish they would toss the "CG".

Really though, I almost know it's going to suck, and yet my heart will clinging to hope.

I will, probably, get this, but hey if (when?) it sucks at least I can give you a warning.

Actually, I have the unique ability to enjoy things that suck (ie. Most Superhero movies, and a lot of other things), since I can turn off my ability to critique things. So yeah, even if it sucks I'll force myself to enjoy it at least once.

Ossian

2007-10-23, 03:32 AM

Stang! This is bad...
I'm ok for that kind of animation so long as the dialogues and the screenplay are compelling and well paced (a little less ok if it's the other way around)
but the blend of CG and traditional animation is just horrible. CG looks like it comes from an old console and it just does not work well with the rest. Draconic hordes are done with the "copy+paste" function and it looks more like they are the baddies from one of thos "Barbie and the [insert fantasy creature with doe eyes] of [insert good feeling]" DVDs aimed at 3 years old girls who are dying to have the doll and the CD included.

It also says it's "Dragons of the Autumn Twilight" which is only the first volume of what is basically the first trilogy of the 3467 trilogies written by Weis and Hickman. So prepare for Dragons of the Winter Night and Dragons of the Spring Dawn! Ach...Hopefully the money they will make and the feedback they'll receive will prompt them to do better with episodes 2 and 3, unless ep. 1 is a fiasco and the whole project just dies.

O.

Hallavast

2007-10-23, 03:55 AM

Not the greatest thing since sliced bread, I'm guessing. But it will be an instant cult classic. And hopefully, it will help gather a fanbase for the story.

After all, when you think about it, Tolkien's Lord of the Rings came out with an animated movie about 20 or so years after his books were published. And 20 years after that we had Peter Jackson's internationally acclaimed masterpiece. Now, hopefully we die hard Krynn-walkers won't have to wait another 20 years for a feature length live action version... *Knocks on wood*

Logic

2007-10-23, 04:32 AM

I dislike that they are doing it 3D and 2D animation, and htat they couldn't be bothered to blend the 2 styles so it looks somewhat presentable. As it stands, the differences are enough to jar me out of it and right back to reality.

Matthew

2007-10-23, 05:45 AM

Don't forget that the Trailer is incomplete. I'm not hopeful, but the CGI and Animation may be better blended in the complete product.

Swordguy

2007-10-23, 07:41 AM

I choked back a little bile. And I don't even read Dragonlance books.

I'm a little hesitant on fantasy novels being translated to film, anyway. If you get Peter Jackson--and a hundred million dollar budget--the product might be downright excellent. Then again, Eragon had a same sized budget and look how that turned out.
...
Then again, if they had that $100 mil and Peter Jackson, maybe it'd consider not hating it...[/SIZE]

It's not the budget. It's a committment from the production staff on down to take what they're doing seriously, and to have a love for the source material (ie, to not treat it as simply a quick money grab). THAT'S why Jackson's LOTR didn't suck.

It's why Eragon did.

And it's why this Dragonlance movie is going to.

StupidFatHobbit

2007-10-23, 08:44 AM

Ah. Reading Wikipedia and what Catch said, it isn't meant to be released in theatres, then. So basically it's on the same level as every other no-name straight-to-DVD pile of crap that will end up in the kiddie section alongside titles like "Barbie and My Little Pony Save The World" and we can regard it as a final stake through the heart of Kiefer Sutherland's serious acting career.

I feel a lot better about the sanity of the world now.

Everything is back to normal.

Attilargh

2007-10-23, 08:51 AM

All this needs is a Finnish dub by Mobile-TV (http://everything2.com/index.pl?node_id=1254480), and we'll have a cult classic in our hands.

Yeah, I'm hoping it'll be polished properly. I really liked the books.

Pokemaster

2007-10-23, 01:32 PM

The computer animations look like they're at least 5 years old and the cartoon-style animation in the trailer looks about 35 years old. Really, if this is the best they could come up with, they should have spent less money on the cast (which I think is excellent, really) and more money on animation.

JadedDM

2007-10-23, 01:50 PM

Wow, tough crowd.

Well, hey, this doesn't look nearly as bad as everyone keeps making it out to be. I'll still go buy it.

Humbug

2007-10-23, 07:56 PM

Having a major in animation makes me very critical about animation in general. Who knows? It might be awesome despite the poor animation, but I find it very hard to enjoy a movie if it looks bad, that's just me tho. :smallsmile:

EricP

2007-10-23, 08:48 PM

I have to concur that this appears to completely half-azzed. If you are going to go 2D, GO 2D!!! Make it the best 2D film you can. Like the Last Unicorn or Titan AE or something like that. If you are going to go 3D, Go 3D!! like Final Fantasy. But this "blending" of styles looks a lot like what they were trying to do with 80's Lord of the Ring movie. Even with all the lame songs, I still prefer the Rankin-Bass "Return of the King" and "the Hobbit" more. Don't experiment with fantasy. Experiment with Yu Gi Oh or something like Pokeman. Then make a good movie of the fantasy story.

This looks like it was done by the old GI Joe animators. "And knowing is half the battle." They are going to turn off a generation of viewers just like they did with the DnD movies. It is going to be another 20 years before they can convince ANYONE that something entitled Dragonlance is worth the money to see.

JadedDM

2007-10-24, 12:21 AM

EricP, this movie is straight-to-DVD. I don't know the exact figures of their budget, but I'm pretty sure it wasn't as high as Titan A.E. or Final Fantasy.

Ashtar

2007-10-24, 04:40 AM

That looks bad... very bad. I died a little bit inside. At least we might be able to claim that it was done at the same time as the original D&D cartoon, it might not be too much out of place there.

From wikipedia:
The animation is being developed by the Korean based studio Toonz, which has studios both in Korea and India.

I've found the website (http://www.toonzanimationindia.com/toonz.htm) and their samples look like 20 year out of date animations.

SadSquirrelDay it is. :yuk:

Emperor Ing

2007-10-24, 04:56 AM

Wow that trailer SCREAMS (understatement) cliche! I mean seriously!

Seemingly invincible army?
Ragtag group of heroes? Set out to fight the invincible army?

I wont check the movie to see if in late plot, they get captured by the enemy, then set out after they get rescued to kill the big bad in charge of the invincible army.

SmartAlec

2007-10-24, 05:13 AM

Some of the voice talent's pretty good, mind. The guy who did Samurai Jack, as Riverwind? Makes sense to me.

Haruspex

2007-10-24, 05:48 AM

The animation looks pretty dated. Maybe it'll get cleaned up or something. Hopefully.

Querzis

2007-10-24, 06:35 AM

Oh boy, this is bad. Like REALLY bad. I loved the books and the characters and it look like this is just going to be another crappy movie based on an awesome book. I just hope that eventually, Peter Jackson will do a live action movie of Dragonlance or even an animation movie. As long as its not as crappy as this, I think Dragonlance would make an awesome animation movie. No matter how much I loved the books, I'm just not gonna watch this.

DraPrime

2007-10-24, 07:04 AM

Just weird.

Darken Rahl

2007-10-24, 08:25 AM

EricP

2007-10-24, 09:57 AM

Yeah, Yeah, it's a straight to DVD release. So was the marvel line and the Ultimate Avengers, UA2, Dr Strange, and Iron Man are all light years ahead of what this trailer looks like. The thing that surprises me is the fact that so many known actors and actresses (you can debate whetther they are A-list or B-list) would sign on to this project considering its lack of style.

I wonder if we are to blame for this. I bought the DnD cartoon in a bout of nostalgia, like many other fans. It was NOT an indication of the type of animation I prefer. If the sales were good enough on that product, perhaps the powers that be (Wizards of the Coast) decided to make a similar product with Dragonlance. Since it was written in the 80s, maybe they decided to go retro with the animation. But I don't think so. I think, rather, that they assumed that die-hards like myself would buy it anyway, whether it was good or not. Since you have a loyal fanbase, you can produce cut-rate work and they will still buy it and you will make a profit.

This is rather short-sighted on their part. If this was their intention, and they are making lousy products on purpose, the blacklash will hit them eventually. Like the Dungeons and Dragons movie, this cartoon will end up in the bargain bin of every video store and comic book/hobby store. The name Dragonlance will become known only for this crappy movie and not for the great series of books that spawned the movie. Like DnD. You know, you can buy that movie for like $3.98 at Half-Price Books? It is on the same level as the "Disney clone" movies (like Aladdin and Little Mermaid). (some other animation studio created movies about the same characters and timed their release to coincide with the DVD/video release of the Disney movie, thus using Disney's advertising budget to promote their products. "Oh, you want Little Mermaid, oh well, this Little Mermaid is like 5 bucks cheaper that the Disney movie, let's get that one.") You can always tell when a movie is crappy because it ends up in the bargain bin and stays there until the store just throws it away. The DnD movie set the DnD game back by telling people that the name DnD stands for low-budget, low-quality crap. How about some pride in your products, huh? Like the Books, or the game. If they put as much time, effort, and money into making quality movies as they have into 4E, they could redeem the brand name in the eyes of critics and fans alike and maybe even pick up a few new ones to boot.

But they probably won't. And that makes me sad. :( Nobody really cares if Mel Gibson or Tom Cruise does the voice of a character, they care if the movie is both well-made and true to the source material.

JadedDM

2007-10-24, 01:28 PM

Nobody really cares if Mel Gibson or Tom Cruise does the voice of a character, they care if the movie is both well-made and true to the source material.

But it IS true to the source material. Weis and Hickman have overlooked the entire thing. Weis even made them go back and re-add a scene they had planned on deleting (one involving Raistlin and Bupu).

I mean, come on, people. What were you expecting? Some million dollar blockbuster? They did the best with what they had...not to make money, but for the sake of putting the story to film.

And I actually prefer it this way. I mean, at least Hollywood Execs weren't given the chance to 'retool' it for a bigger audience. Then we'd all be talking about how GREAT it looks, but complain about how it has nothing at all to do with Dragonlance.

EricP

2007-10-24, 09:49 PM

Okay, Jaded, I'll wait and give it a chance. (I mean I DID buy the dang DnD movie even though it sucked big time) Maybe it will be alright. But I still think that they are putting too much into who's doing the voices and not enough on making sure the movie is great.

I think I have too much disposable income at times.

Darken Rahl

2007-10-25, 08:15 AM

Some million dollar blockbuster? They did the best with what they had...not to make money, but for the sake of putting the story to film.

Somehow this rings wrong to me. You think that any old movie will work, just so a BOOK, which is written words, can be watched?

So you're telling me that just any old crappy movie version of a book is better than not having a movie and being forced to, *gasp* READ THE BOOK?

I ought to smack you upside the head with Ralph Bakshi.

JadedDM

2007-10-25, 05:43 PM

What? That's ridiculous. I'm saying that the people who love the book want to see a film adaptation. In other words, this film is mostly for people who have all ready read the book. Odds are, if you've never read Autumns of Dragon Twilight, or are even familiar with Dragonlance, you'll never even hear about this film.

lamguin

2007-10-25, 10:28 PM

That trailer looked like ass.

Does anyone remember the terrible DnD themed Saturday Morning Cartoon from back in the 80s? I'd rather watch that.

Whoever (can't be bothered to check. :smalltongue: ) said that if it makes enough revenue, it may encourage the company to make the rest of higher quality has obviously never ... I can't think of anything ludicrous enough to explain the state of insanity it must take to believe this. So, I'll go with crazy.

Do you know why the big Disney theatrical releases look so damn good, while the straight to video sequels suck so badly? They both have the same general animation style. It's because Disney invests a boatload of money into the original, knowing that their high production values keep bringing people back. Since they've already made all their money on the original, and the sequel is straight to video (a much smaller market), there's no reason for them so spend more money on it that a couple episodes of a regular animated series (The Atlantis sequel WAS a couple episodes of a regular animated series). Anyone that buys the thing is just encouraging more of this kind of tripe.

Why aren't there any good movies with video games as the source material? Because gamers will support the bad ones. The studio makes money anyway, so why try harder. Why aren't there more good video games based on anime licenses? Because fans of the anime will pay money whether it's good or not. So why try harder?

The moral of this rant is to stop you from encouraging this kind of horrid marketing based on putting out the worst possible product that still resembles the brand name enough to sell. Stop buying it. Please.

If they don't make money on this, they may not make another Dragonlance movie. That would be a shame. The far worse shame would be if they made another Dragonlance movie that is just as bad or worse, because you keep paying for it.

Grow some standards, people!

[/rant]

*pant* *huff* *pant*

Also:

Somehow this rings wrong to me. You think that any old movie will work, just so a BOOK, which is written words, can be watched?

So you're telling me that just any old crappy movie version of a book is better than not having a movie and being forced to, *gasp* READ THE BOOK?

I ought to smack you upside the head with Ralph Bakshi.

Damn straight, Mr. Rahl. (Looking forward to some fine reading this November.)

Setra

2007-10-25, 11:36 PM

Odds are, if you've never read Autumns of Dragon Twilight, or are even familiar with Dragonlance, you'll never even hear about this film.
Probably.

I'm still gonna get it.

Hey if that Hobbit cartoon thing can be fun to watch then why not this?

JadedDM

2007-10-26, 12:09 AM

Standards are the problem, but I think it's the other way around. People were apparently expecting WAY too much from this.

Look, folks...Dragonlance isn't popular. It isn't mainstream like Harry Potter or Final Fantasy. I wish it was, but it isn't. Hell, Dragonlance isn't even popular among other D&D franchises. Hell, Wizards of the Coast have pulled the plug on it twice now, and it only still exists due to the dedicated fans' support (like Nexus and MWP).

So when the idea of a Dragonlance movie was proposed, how many million-dollar companies do you think lined up to invest gobs of money in it? Answer: None. Dragonlance just isn't popular enough to invest that much money into.

So it's low budget. And yeah, if it does very well, it may encourage the folks at Hollywood to take a chance on it, and make something bigger and more elaborate down the road.

But you know, odds are it won't do very well. And it has nothing to do with the animation style. It's because Dragonlance isn't popular. This movie will quietly come out on DVD and only be purchased by people who are all ready fans.

But this ISN'T an attempt to make money. It's just a project started by some very dedicated people who merely want to tell a story that they love on a different medium. This isn't to attract new fans, this is for the old fans.

So all this talk about the people involved being lazy or intentionally not trying hard in hopes of suckering us out of our cash is nonsense. Yeah, you could cobble together something horrible and slap the words "Final Fantasy" or "Harry Potter" on it, and millions would purchase it on that alone. But Dragonlance does not inspire that kind of mindless spending.

Furthermore, this absurd idea that if the movie does poorly, it will 'damage' the good name of Dragonlance and D&D (like the D&D movie) holds no water. It won't be showing in theaters, and if the movie really does turn out horrible, probably nobody will even remember in a few years.

And also, none of you seem to realize that A) this is a ROUGH trailer and B) youtube has a tendency to lower the overall quality of things. Take a look at these links of still shots that have been cleaned up to have a better idea of what the movie will look like:

http://img141.imageshack.us/img141/8833/trailer1vx7.jpg
http://img138.imageshack.us/img138/4895/trailer2md3.jpg

I think the animation style chosen is just fine.

Setra

2007-10-26, 12:14 AM

The animation style looks like a very watered down (understatement) Lodoss, well to me anyways.

But as I said before I actually kinda like it.

toysailor

2007-10-26, 01:21 AM

I had fun watching Conan The Adventurer cartoons when I was a kid and I'll probably enjoy watching this too. I think alot of us are just too spoilt for choice when it comes to animation and special effects these days but honestly, old-school type animation isn't all that bad. So what if it doesn't look like LOTR? If they stay true to the story, I believe this can be entertaining.

Honestly, I didn't really enjoy Peter Jackson's LOTR after the first chapter. They went "commercial" and did overly dramatic stuff like dwarf tossing and elf shield surfing/oliphant climbing which is just tacky. And gay hobbits. So what if they spent millions? I really don't understand why so many people are using LOTR as an excellent example of good translation of literature to a different medium. It isn't for me. I want Tom Bombadil dammit.

I'll certainly like to see a live action version of Dragonlance someday, but cmon, let's give the animated version a chance. This is just a trailer afterall.

JadedDM

2007-10-26, 01:24 AM

I just can't picture a live-action Dragonlance movie for one very important reason--the vast majority of non-DL fans would deride it for being a LotR rip-off.

Behold_the_Void

2007-10-26, 02:03 AM

I've been looking forward to this, I really have. However, the animation quality makes me groan. Low budget or not, if they can afford the CG effects they're using they can afford to not make it look like it's out of the 80's. 80's style animation is good for nostalgia, sure, but modern animation techniques would make one assume that it doesn't look so... well... terrible.

Dragonlance has a great story, one I've read many times and one that I grew up on. As film is a visual medium, it should be given an artistic style that is at least somewhat evocative of the series itself, one that fits with it. Instead, we have this.

I'm terribly disappointed.

And yet, it's highly likely I'll still watch it. Like I said, I grew up on this.

starwoof

2007-10-26, 02:08 AM

Excluding the really pointless CG, I like the animation style a lot. Dragonlance introduced me to DnD, so I feel obligated to buy this. :smallbiggrin:

JadedDM

2007-10-26, 02:26 AM

What's this about eighties animation? I wonder if those of you who say that have actually watched any cartoons since the 80s.

http://scramblenetwork.files.wordpress.com/2007/06/supermandoomsday1.jpg
http://www.newsarama.com/movies/SupermanDoomsday/doomsday_moon_t.jpg

Those shots are from the new Superman Doomsday DVD that came out last month. This is what was invested into a title that has a lot more clout than Dragonlance has, and it looks pretty much exactly the same. The exception is that there are 3D monsters in the DL movie.

If it's good enough for Superman, it's good enough for Dragonlance.

Kajal

2007-10-26, 03:20 AM

I'm very disappointed so far, one can only hope this "MOVIE" will serve a mere storyboard for some future production with some real money behind it!
But go ahead, buy it, even if it's purely to remember the good ol' days, for I believe thats exactly what the investors linked to this predictable crapfest expect you to do. So save up your money now and vote with your dollars!
Vote for selling out great stories for a short term straight to DVD buck!
:smallmad:

Hallavast

2007-10-26, 04:03 AM

:smallsigh: It's amazing that some of us are so willing to damn this movie to hell before it is even released.

What do we really know about it thus far?

1. Yes, it's a B movie. It has a low budget and will be shot straight to dvd.

2. It's a "rough cut" trailer. Nothing is really set in stone, and it definately needs some fine-tuning.

3.It has an older style of animation. As mentioned before, it looks like an old 80's movie (my favorite cartoons of all time are from this period).

4. It is not an anime (yes, I know, utter blasphemy, right?).

5. It is (from what we've heard and seen) reasonably true to its source material.

6. It has at least one good mainstream voice actor that we've seen (Kiefer Sutherland).

So far, it's been implied that:

1. A "movie" (as if a B movie is not actually a movie at all) will suck if it doesn't have gobs of money invested into it.

2. The final version has no hope of having quality based on what we've seen of this preliminary "rough cut" trailer.

3. Older animation styles suck on principle (because we've come a long way in animation since the 80's, right?). :smallamused:

4. Anime is the end all be all of 2D animation. :smallyuk:

5. Whether it is true to it's source material is irrelavant. If you want to bear witness to this story then go "read the book". Any other adaptation is pointless.

6. Quality voice acting will not improve the "movie's" quality, so spending a lot of money on mainstream stars is pointless. :smallconfused:

I think we've lost track of what's important here, but hey, now you know. And knowing is half the battle! :smallwink:

Darken Rahl

2007-10-26, 08:00 AM

I'm saying that the people who love the book want to see a film adaptation.

That's typically very untrue, considering the lack of quality most adaptations receive. LotR was the exception that proved the rule, a far as I'm concerned.

dwaro

2007-10-26, 09:27 AM

Wait, how can an exception prove the rule? That doesn't make any sense. In any case, I have a very low opinion of Jackson's Lord of the Rings.

The thing about animation is that good animation can mask a boring and trite story. If the animation is sub-par, though, the story had better be damn good to keep my attention. From what I remember of Dragonlance, the story isn't all that great. It might have entertained me when I was twelve years old, but it's pretty much eclipsed by better, more original, and less derivative fantasy novels. To me, at least.

Setra

2007-10-26, 11:44 AM

Darken Rahl

2007-10-26, 01:53 PM

Wait, how can an exception prove the rule? That doesn't make any sense. In any case, I have a very low opinion of Jackson's Lord of the Rings.

The true origin of the phrase lies in a medieval Latin legal principle: exceptio probat regulam in casibus non exceptis, which may be translated as “the exception confirms the rule in the cases not excepted”.

http://www.worldwidewords.org/qa/qa-exc1.htm

Rowanomicon

2007-10-26, 08:04 PM

I definitely agree that we should give this movie a chance.
So it wont be the best movie ever, it might even suck as horribly as some people now predict. I know I had my hopes up way too high and therefore the let down was harsh when I first saw that trailer, but it is a rough trailer so maybe they'll fine tune things (especially if they get wind of this thread).

I personally think that the DragonLance books I have read (The original trilogy and Soulforge) were the best writing I've seen in a D&D setting. granted the only other books I've read in a D&D setting were a couple of R.A. Salvatore's FR books so saying they're better than that isn't really saying much. (If you take offense at my evaluation of R.A.S. and feel an irresistible impulse to correct then please me PM me instead of responding in this thread).

Also I have to say that if the movie were anime some heads would have to roll and I would not watch it. I might listen to the audio, but I wouldn't let my visions of the characters be marred by anime adaptations. (If you take offense at my opinion of anime and feel an irresitable impulse to correct then please PM me instead of responding in this thread).

Two disclaimers in one post, huzzah!
Actually I don't thin disclaimer is the right word (if you know what the right word is pleas PM me :smallbiggrin:)

TheLoveInterest

2007-10-26, 11:16 PM

*Sigh* That was...not what I wanted for a Dragonlance movie....
Quite frankly they could have done much better. :smallfrown:
I would really enjoy a live action movie if I had a say in it and Raistlin's voice wasn't what I wanted it to be. Next I would say that the art style is not my tase and the dragons they did...were horrid. It's just so...dissapointing that Harry Potter(:the BS continues) gets so much time and effort and this gets pushed aside like a plate of stemed vegtables given to a child.

Don't get me wrong, I am not a super Dragonlance fan but I've picked up a few books becaue I wanted to see what a old flame liked so much about them and they were...tolorable, unlike some other fantasy books I won't mention due to the fact I'm in no mood to be flamed.

I wish they made a Heir of Autumn movie:smallwink: I love Todd and Giles