New Dungeons & Dragons movie...?

[Mordar]

My first notice came from here (https://www.yahoo.com/entertainment/chris-pine-star-dungeons-dragons-201523182.html).

Chris Pine...meh.

"...film that will feature an ensemble cast and take a subversive approach to the game..."

Oh good, I was hoping for more movies with a subversive bent. Or maybe that is sarcasm. <sigh>

So, it looks like a plan to overpay a star and then to subvert the subject matter that it is supposed to be portraying/representing.

- M

[Ajustusdaniel]

I mean, most tables I've played at, the players have something of a subversive bent themselves, so that seems pretty accurate to the D&D experience.

Unless they're going to subvert that by playing all the tropes entirely straight.

[JadedDM]

I half wonder if they're going to make it a comedy, where the heroes do a bunch of stupid stuff like PCs normally do. Like, the Rogue tries to steal everything not nailed down, or the Bard tries to seduce everyone they meet, even monsters.

At the end of the film, during the climatic final battle with Evil, it appears hopeless, but then Pine's character says, "Wait, I have an idea! All we need are a few hundred peasants and as many ten foot wooden poles that you can find..."

[JoshL]

Don't get me wrong, I love the Gamers movies, but can't we have an actual GOOD D&D movie that takes itself reasonably seriously before we start with the "subversive takes"? Please?

[t209]

"Subversive bent"...hoping if it was Slayers Anime-style rather than Game of Thrones-knock offs.
Or maybe switch between DnD and Fantasy sessions like Princess Bride but in DnD seissions.
Or they can just adapt Forgotten Realms novels or comics.

[Saintheart]

Don't get me wrong, I love the Gamers movies, but can't we have an actual GOOD D&D movie that takes itself reasonably seriously before we start with the "subversive takes"? Please?

You're expecting way too much from the writer/directors hired for this incoming B-movie. Daley and Goldstein were responsible for Horrible Bosses 1 & 2, 2018's forgettable Game Night, and the particularly excremental remake of National Lampoon's Vacation. Having presumably run out of original ideas with Burt Wonderstone, they're now just surviving off the usual Hollywood algae of poorly-budgeted semi-comic remakes, do-overs, and parodies, which is okay provided you've got the talent of the Zucker brothers or the underrated Wayans boys (which these guys don't).

Some directors have certain actors they like to work with a lot. Good directors attract and use good actors. Robert deNiro works with Scorcese, Everett McGill and Kyle McLachlan worked with David Lynch, Michael Biehn and Sigourney Weaver worked a lot with James Cameron.
These guys use Jason Bateman.

Sure, they were two of the 6 writers on Spider-Man Homecoming, and there too consciously "subverted" the large-stakes Marvel films, but they did have the benefit of having a massively successful franchise on screen that audiences were getting tired of. And there's a big difference between writing and directing, specifically that Homecoming wasn't directed by them and all the other premium mediocre stuff they've given us was.

[Dire_Flumph]

Don't get me wrong, I love the Gamers movies, but can't we have an actual GOOD D&D movie that takes itself reasonably seriously before we start with the "subversive takes"? Please?

You have higher expectations than me. I'm expecting them to use a D&D movie as a springboard to do "subversive takes" on Game of Thrones and Lord of the Rings more than actual gamer stuff.

[GentlemanVoodoo]

"Landing Pine, who has been the linchpin of the Star Trek film series for Paramount, is a strong start for what the studios hope will be a new franchise launch."

Yeah...after Paramount's last bound of successes, I am sure they are looking for an new franchise launch. Also can't say Chris Pine was the right choice for this. But either way it is going to be a cluster.

[Palanan]

Originally Posted by JoshL
Don't get me wrong, I love the Gamers movies, but can't we have an actual GOOD D&D movie that takes itself reasonably seriously before we start with the "subversive takes"? Please?

I agree with this. I’d much rather have a decent fantasy movie that takes itself seriously and stands on its own merits.

I just don’t need “subversive” right now. A little straight-up heroism is fine by me.

[Keltest]

I agree with this. I’d much rather have a decent fantasy movie that takes itself seriously and stands on its own merits.

I just don’t need “subversive” right now. A little straight-up heroism is fine by me.

I dunno. Maybe the subversive element is that its actually just a good movie on its own merits? That would certainly subvert my expectations.

[Hopeless]

Is the same movie that other teen actor or whatever he was called was involved in?

So will Pine be part of the main cast or playing the role of the Prince in distress or pseudo bad guy for the movie?

There's literally doezens of options here, I'm curious to see where they're heading with this!

There was a movie with Natalie Portman a few years ago where the lead "hero" was a wastrel prince and his retainer ended up being chased by a I think was a gay Ogre I think?

Edit: Ah there you go "Your Highness"

Is this likely to follow that kind of movie given some of the responses here?

[Sapphire Guard]

Usually you get films playing things straight before the subversive ones. Skipping ahead seldom ends well.

[Rogar Demonblud]

I can't think of a D&D media project that did end well.

[Hopeless]

For whom?

Jeremy Irons did a fine job as a villain in one of them, Bruce Payne deserved more recognition for his efforts though.

Will they go the Gamers movie route or try a regular fantasy adventure movie?

[Rogar Demonblud]

If they're trumpeting their 'subversion', they're going to be trying to impersonate the Gamers movies.

[Spiderswims]

Wtf? We don’t need a subversive version of DnD. We need a faithful, mature, adult adaptation, treating the content seriously and not like it’s a teen CW vehicle. This has a Star Wars/ Marvel level potential with so many potential worlds and characters, it’s truly amazing how Hollywood continues to screw it up.

[JadedDM]

We need a faithful, mature, adult adaptation, treating the content seriously and not like it’s a teen CW vehicle.
You are playing very different kinds of D&D games than I've ever seen before in my life.

[Tvtyrant]

Considering even B Drizzt stories make it on the New York Times sellers list, it is weird they haven't just made live action movies or shows about him.

[Dire_Flumph]

Considering even B Drizzt stories make it on the New York Times sellers list, it is weird they haven't just made live action movies or shows about him.

Fair or not, the only adaption of a D&D novel to date was the 2008 "Dragons of Autumn Twilight" movie (also on the NYT bestseller list), and that probably hammered the nail into the coffin pretty deep.

[Tvtyrant]

Fair or not, the only adaption of a D&D novel to date was the 2008 "Dragons of Autumn Twilight" movie (also on the NYT bestseller list), and that probably hammered the nail into the coffin pretty deep.

Agreed. It's pretty sad though IMO, D&D is hot right now and a lot of those books are now nostalgia pieces. With some actual acting and a decent vision they could make bank.

Heck they could make another Arkham knockoff using Drizzt instead of a Gondorian Ghost or Spiderman and it would make a lot of money. The setup is there, they just need to push forward.

[Hopeless]

It ultimately depends who they go with.

The Gamer movie which requires a back story for the cast members at the table and maybe they're dressed up as their "idealized" selves for whilst in the game?

Or just go with the atypical group of adventurers' using your chosen cast and hope they're up for the task.

Not everyone can make a role from literally nothing, which is why I'm wondering why they haven't gone for a live action Exandria movie?

Get Matt and company involved and it should be incredible!

But this is Disney after all so who knows!

[warty goblin]

Considering even B Drizzt stories make it on the New York Times sellers list, it is weird they haven't just made live action movies or shows about him.

Since my state is having Fun With Covid Lockdowns again, I've been rereading a bunch of the old Drizzt novels, and I suspect they'd be kinda hard to adapt.

For starters they're all action. The Crystal Shard has two entirely separate invasions, and a whole welter of smaller fight scenes. Streams of Silver is basically the traveling monster murder roadshow, and I recall The Halfling's Gem involving a backflip off a galloping camel. All of which would be mega-expensive to film, since there's a ton of stunts and monster effects needed. Plus there's all the effects for the heroes, since only Wulfgar and Cattie-brie are human.

Aside from the expense, this is also really gonna limit the audience. The biggest action movies these days are superhero stuff, which are like 70% melodrama, 20% plot nonsense, and 10% people punching each other. Maybe up to 25% punching for something like Aquaman. Its mostly very clean, fun action stuff where nobody's tongue is torn out of their mouth by a whip.

But the Legend of Drizzt stuff is like 60% hardcore R rated stabbing, 30% travelogue between stabbing locations, and 10% exposition and character development. Most of which is also exposition, instead of dialog - like 80% of the main characters have stoicism as a defining personality trait. It's perfect for adolescent boys (or reading during lockdowns if you're a mid-30s meganerd who remembers being 14), but this is not a setup with large, cross-demographic appeal.

This is without getting into the obvious landmine infested swamp of the main character coming from a race of hyper-evil matriarchal black skinned cave-dwelling BDSM murder-elves. Just wait until Twitter gets ahold of that.

[GravityEmblem]

I think it's a bit soon to be making assumptions, I suppose? I'm not sure how I'd express this, but we know nothing about the movie. The movie being "subversive" doesn't count for anything. Chris Pine doesn't count for anything (zing!)

I really love JadedDM's idea of an adaptation of real D&D, not the D&D official settings or some generic fantasy story with the D&D label on it. You know, the kind of crazy stuff players actually do. Though if that's the case, I'd be interested if it would use an actual D&D game as a framing device (think Darths and Droids/DM of the Rings), or just be a dense and wacky story where the heroes completely ignore the instructions of every authority figure they meet.

[Hopeless]

A Darth & Droids treatment or their version of the Lord of the Rings?

Either would be fine, but as its Disney they'd likely play it safe perhaps too safe for it to be a hit given how they handled Star Wars and Captain Marvel for instance.

[Rogar Demonblud]

We already know it's going to be set in the Realms so they can flog that horse some more, so set your expectations accordingly. Honestly, if they want me to watch it they'd pretty much have to drive a truck full of money to John Rogers' house and tell him to write a Fell's Five movie, as that is far and away the last D&D story arc I liked.

[Kitten Champion]

But this is Disney after all so who knows!

It's not Disney. Neither Hasbro or Paramount are Disney. Not yet at any rate.

[Palanan]

Originally Posted by Spiderswims
We need a faithful, mature, adult adaptation, treating the content seriously and not like it’s a teen CW.

I second this wholeheartedly.


Originally Posted by JadedDM
You are playing very different kinds of D&D games than I've ever seen before in my life.

I guess I must be playing in those very different games as well.


Originally Posted by Kitten Champion
Neither Hasbro or Paramount are Disney. Not yet at any rate.

This year isn’t over yet.

[Ajustusdaniel]

I guess I must be playing in those very different games as well.

Well, and there's the rub in making a movie out of a tabletop RPG. Even people who've played the same edition and the same settings are going to have very different experiences and ideas of what D&D is. This goes for any media adaptation, of course- meaning is generated by the interaction of reader and text- but especially with something fundamentally more interactive like an RPG.

[Hopeless]

Good point wasn't the first D&D movie basically advertising 3.0?

Is this movie going to advertise D&D 6.0?

If its still dealing with 5.0 it could easily be used to advertise a new setting maybe Mystara as very unlikely as that is or even Eberron.

The problem with Faerun is that so much has been done with that it would be easier and less likely to mess things up if they went with another setting to avoid screwing up continuity.

Is this me worrying too much especially as its still early days for this?!

[GravityEmblem]

I guess I must be playing in those very different games as well.

I mean...probably?

I've played in and ran very few games which could be called serious. One of my characters had an aspect of his backstory called the Cheese Shop Incident. Another was the frontman of a rock band called "We Fling T's," who threw T's (the letters) into the audience at shows. One of the members played the goat synthesizer (ie. a synthesizer that looked like a goat and made goat noises). In one of my current games, one of the players is a Dwarf named Dabbo Mac Lit who has a vendetta against people without beards.

Even more serious games can get off the rails. In one game I ran, the party left a town almost immediately after getting there, and ended up missing several shops and a fairly major sidequest. In another I played in, the party went the wrong direction while trying to rescue a hostage. By the time they returned, she had been rescued without them.

To me, crazy, unpredictable stuff is part of the appeal of D&D, and that you've never played in any games like that...I dunno, I kinda feel like you're missing out. I mean, it probably works for you, but in my experience, the only way to stop hijinks is to step in and forbid it, and that kind of takes the fun out of the game.

[Filibuster over]

[JadedDM]

Good point wasn't the first D&D movie basically advertising 3.0?
No...not that I remember. Granted, it has been a long time since I saw that stinker, but I don't remember anything specifically 3E about it. It did come out in the same year as 3E, but I think that was coincidence; the movie was in development hell for like 10 years.

[Dire_Flumph]

No...not that I remember. Granted, it has been a long time since I saw that stinker, but I don't remember anything specifically 3E about it. It did come out in the same year as 3E, but I think that was coincidence; the movie was in development hell for like 10 years.

It came out the same year as 3E released (2000), but nothing in the film referenced anything 3E specific (and most was just generic fantasy to boot).

The only real cross promotion I remember was an online PDF release of a D&D movie Fast Play game (still have mine!), but I don't recall it being promoted much at the time.

[Scarlet Knight]

I agree with this. I’d much rather have a decent fantasy movie that takes itself seriously and stands on its own merits.

That got me thinking: what makes a D&D movie different from a straight up Sword & Sorcery movie? The rules? "Quick, Father, he's dying! Heal him!" "I cannot until I pray again for the spell at dawn! Hold his spleen in place until then."


Will they go the Gamers movie route or try a regular fantasy adventure movie?

They can do the whole "players trapped inside their characters" route, like "Jumanji: Welcome to the Jungle"


A Darth & Droids treatment or their version of the Lord of the Rings?


I can see them doing a "DM of the Rings" version, where the comedy is around the interactions between player archtypes ( min-maxer & role player & gamer girl & frustrated DM, etc...) with everyone doing stupid things the rules allow without caring how unrealistic it would be.

They might need to spend a fortune on the rights to use Monty Python quotes throughout...

[Silly Name]

I don't really have any high expectations for this. I sorta hope it ends up being on the campier side simply because that'd be more fun than generic Forgotten Realms hogwash.

I'm not a big fan of the Realms (I seriously dislike Greenwood's prose, and most of his characters), but WotC seems fully committed to making them front and centre of everything D&D, so no luck for me. I suppose they're either going to use Drizzt, do something connected with Baldur's Gate (although I'm not super clear on how copyright would work in that case), or try for an original story - most likely set in Waterdeep, and most likely forgettable with forgettable characters.

Whatever they do, I'm sure there'll be a module tie-in.

Honestly, "a D&D movie" means nothing to me, and probably to most people. It could be anything, from straight high-fantasy to The Gamers to making the Tippyverse a cinematic reality. "A Drizzt movie" would be a much more informative tagline, for example.

[Ajustusdaniel]

That got me thinking: what makes a D&D movie different from a straight up Sword & Sorcery movie? The rules? "Quick, Father, he's dying! Heal him!" "I cannot until I pray again for the spell at dawn! Hold his spleen in place until then."


Unless it is a GM Of the Rings/Gamers/Darths & Droids type set-up, I can't imagine Vancian casting playing a major role, though I'd be happy to be wrong!

[Dire_Flumph]

They can do the whole "players trapped inside their characters" route, like "Jumanji: Welcome to the Jungle"

Ugh, I hope not. I got tired of that device in the 80's and 90's, and it's been used well only a very few times (Die (https://imagecomics.com/comics/series/die) would be the best recent example I can think of).

Like Jumanji it would probably work best to spoof the generic character types and I'd rather see something played straighter.

[Hopeless]

There's also Sword Art Online or Log Horizon.

Where they deal with gamers stuck within a game although in Log Horizon it was more gamers trapped on the world their game was inspired by as preparation for when they were summoned across during a game session.

Of course there's Gate the anime where a portal between the worlds opens and after an attack from that world causes a military force to be sent through to establish a fort to prevent another attack and hijinx insues when they discover its anime related and of course the soldiers are anime fans!

How far would you go with this?

Stick with a fairground ride that accidentally sends the occupants of a ride through a portal into another world like the original d&d animated series?

How would you handle THAT scenario today?

High School Jock (Hank)

Wealthy Kid (Eric)

Smart Kid (Presto)

The Gymnast (Diana)

The Popular Girl (how would you describe Shiela?)

The Kid (Bobby)

Lets assume you get to pick the new group to stumble into the Realms who would you pick?

Let me try...

Morgan a former ESA Engineer currently divorced a bit upset ended up as babysitter to the kids of a friend when she ended up on this ride. Is a former child soldier and kept in shape being the survivalist of the group.
When she ends up crossing over she is transformed into an elf a particular plain looking one but still an elf apparently a cleric of an elven deity something that plays into her back story with the reveal her ancestors fled the Realms and went to Earth turning human in the process so she has literally come home though she doesn't know that,

Greg the son of a Marine and a CIA operative he's trying to play the adult in this new world and a bit irked his babysitter has turned into an elf whilst he is trying his hand as a Bard with his guitar and an interest in any musical instrument he comes across.

Evelyn the baby of the group she starts developing celestial warlock abilities due to her worship of her babysitter whose patron deity has seen fit to empower her in an effort to help Evie help her babysitter who is clearly experiencing problems with the situation.

Glenn a US Navy Seaman who came along to keep an eye on them, but was actually on a date with Morgan who he's interested in and she is reciprocating, but then she turned into an elf and he's just a skilled sailor with military training and the group's Fighter almost tempted to say Monk instead.

Lester a friend of Greg's from school who came along for kicks and was the wealthy kid and now stuck on another world he's trying to adapt coming into possession of a book which he's busy trying to learn how to cast magic as a Wizard.

Deidre the red headed athlete is keen on Greg, but is often just as friendly with Lester as the trio are friends but its early days before she has to choose between them if she does and whether they manage to get home.
She's the Rogue.

Someone set up an artefact along the route and when Morgan comes into range it automatically activates sending them into the Realms where they wake up with the ride nearby and no sign of how they got there.

Establishing a camp and making sure everybody is okay Morgan and Glenn check out the area as Greg and Lester have an argument over Deidre and end up walking out forcing Glenn to keep an eye on the others as Morgan goes looking for them.

They encounter some frog-like creatures (Bullywugs) and end up in a brief fight until Morgan turns up and chases the Bullywugs off as Lester finds his book and annoyed Greg starts playing with his guitar as they return to the others.

Unseen they're being watched as one figure turns to the other and in sub titled their weird language tells the other,"Alert the master an elf has intervened with one of his raiding parties."

That sort of thing.

What would you like to see?

[Rogar Demonblud]

The Popular Girl (how would you describe Sheila?)

Pro forma love interest. It says something about the people running the show that the girls had to share the thief-acrobat class while the boys each got their own.

[Anonymouswizard]

Pro forma love interest. It says something about the people running the show that the girls had to share the thief-acrobat class while the boys each got their own.

I mean, you know that's just because they were avoiding the Cleric class.

[JadedDM]

The Popular Girl (how would you describe Shiela?)
Wasn't she a shrinking violet? Fitting in with the whole 'becoming invisible' theme.

[Peelee]

I half wonder if they're going to make it a comedy, where the heroes do a bunch of stupid stuff like PCs normally do. Like, the Rogue tries to steal everything not nailed down, or the Bard tries to seduce everyone they meet, even monsters.

Do bards normally do that, though? I know the jokes, but I've never had a friend play a bard like that (and I certainly wouldn't).

[Anonymouswizard]

Do bards normally do that, though? I know the jokes, but I've never had a friend play a bard like that (and I certainly wouldn't).

In actually play it seems to be sorceresses. Or at leat in my experiences. Although that group also limited roleplaying the act to after-session privacy.

[Peelee]

In actually play it seems to be sorceresses. Or at leat in my experiences. Although that group also limited roleplaying the act to after-session privacy.

That's another thing, I've often wondered why bard's get that rap and sorcerers don't. Both hot Charisma out the wazoo.

[GravityEmblem]

Do bards normally do that, though? I know the jokes, but I've never had a friend play a bard like that (and I certainly wouldn't).

I once played a Bard like that, though he was always getting slapped for it. Though things never got more explicit than asking if the NPC was attractive.

[Anonymouswizard]

That's another thing, I've often wondered why bard's get that rap and sorcerers don't. Both hot Charisma out the wazoo.

Because bards are two editions older? And have guitars?

[GravityEmblem]

Because bards are two editions older? And have guitars?

Exactly. Nothing more attractive than a man with a guitar, who can also do magic.

[Tvtyrant]

Exactly. Nothing more attractive than a man with a guitar, who can also do magic.

The attractiveness of street Buskars had never been equaled.

[Rogar Demonblud]

That's another thing, I've often wondered why bard's get that rap and sorcerers don't. Both hot Charisma out the wazoo.

Basically, we treat them as rock stars with lots of groupies. LOTS of groupies.

[tomandtish]

Morgan a former ESA Engineer currently divorced a bit upset ended up as babysitter to the kids of a friend when she ended up on this ride. Is a former child soldier and kept in shape being the survivalist of the group.
When she ends up crossing over she is transformed into an elf a particular plain looking one but still an elf apparently a cleric of an elven deity something that plays into her back story with the reveal her ancestors fled the Realms and went to Earth turning human in the process so she has literally come home though she doesn't know that,


If they did this I'd love to see them duplicate what happened in Guardians of the Flame by Joel Rosenberg. The cleric can't regain spells because she (the player occupying the cleric) doesn't believe in the god.

[Hopeless]

If they did this I'd love to see them duplicate what happened in Guardians of the Flame by Joel Rosenberg. The cleric can't regain spells because she (the player occupying the cleric) doesn't believe in the god.

I wonder if they've read that book?

[Spiderswims]

That got me thinking: what makes a D&D movie different from a straight up Sword & Sorcery movie? The rules?

Just about nothing. The only unique thing about D&D is a couple of copyrighted words, like illithid.

They could go straight up Sword & Sorcery movie:

A "popular" Realms place like Waterdeep or Baldur's Gate is attacked by a dragon, so a group of heroes must get the orb of dragonslaying from the dungeon of doom and then slay the dragon.

Chris Pine would be an obvious fighter/knight type, but could work just as well as a rogue, bard or even warlock. He'd be his typical 'slightly goofy' self, and it also a great warrior. And in the cleric, wizard and whatever class Chris is not. I'm sure they will have a tefiling warlock as that is pure D&D.

Hopefully they can avoid the campy "play fighting that knocks people down" and do a bit more "kill and death", but you never know. They could go for the soft middle like the Marvel movies. Might be likely to have a lot of CGI non human foes so they are safe to "kill" , like skeletons or empty suits of armor.

OR

They go with the people in the real world, playing REAL D&D. Have the nice mix of different people to show that "D&D is for everyone". Then...well...a magic roller coaster to the Realms. Then you get the fun "fish out of water" type adventure....though maybe more 'they are awesome' to over promote D&D.

This provides them the long running gag for the whole movie that the people can "remember" real D&D rules and then use them in the world.

Maybe even have them metagame up to eleven if they find themselves in , maybe Waterdeep: Dragon Heist, the people in the movie can remember all the game details from what they played through that playing D&D. Maybe a character might even have a d20 in their pocket and roll it to make a "real" action "in" the movie.

Or it could be a lot worse....

[Saintheart]

If they did this I'd love to see them duplicate what happened in Guardians of the Flame by Joel Rosenberg. The cleric can't regain spells because she (the player occupying the cleric) doesn't believe in the god.


I wonder if they've read that book?

If they have you can pretty much guarantee most of it won't be appearing in the movie. I personally liked the first book (since it's about the only Isekai book I've read and because the idea was good enough to carry one novel) but given it contains

dragons being enslaved for centuries to flame away a city's excrement, PCs gang raped by NPC bandits, PCs dying kicking on the end of a spear in the guts, and a wheelchair-bound kid winding up literally flamed to death in the real world

I very much doubt we're going to see that sort of stuff in This Summer's Lighthearted Take On The Eighties Most Enduring Game Franchise.

[Grey Watcher]

I half wonder if they're going to make it a comedy, where the heroes do a bunch of stupid stuff like PCs normally do. Like, the Rogue tries to steal everything not nailed down, or the Bard tries to seduce everyone they meet, even monsters.

At the end of the film, during the climatic final battle with Evil, it appears hopeless, but then Pine's character says, "Wait, I have an idea! All we need are a few hundred peasants and as many ten foot wooden poles that you can find..."

I... honestly would be interested in seeing that movie. The idea has potential. I dunno if the conventions, tropes, and such associated with the brand have reached quite enough mainstream familiarity for the suits to greenlight a big budget film, though.

[Hopeless]

Or have a group of grown ups turn up after a dare to play a game the home owner picks.

He pulls out a set of the three 5e d&d books along with a very aged 1980's red box basic D&D.

He pulls out the pre generated characters which they pick from (select cast for those characters unless your cast is happy playing that character in medieval outfits maybe ask Peter Jackson for help with that!) and the game starts with Pine's character walking up a hill towards a small ruin whose catacomb he's intent on exploring.
Use the introductory adventure to introduce the characters so you have the Fighter, the female Cleric and the human Wizard.
Of course the Wizard player is a douche bag so he kills the Cleric and flees forcing the fighter to carry the Cleric out and back down to the temple in hopes of getting her raised from the dead.
Its now the fourth player turns up so we learn the Cleric player is now running a Rogue, the Wizard's player has switched to a Druid and the fourth player decides on running a Halfling Wizard (Warwick Davies available anyone?).
Now we learn the rogue Wizard is hiding in a castle and seeking revenge the group go after him.

Would that work?

Dungeons and Dragons: Get Bargle!

[Clertar]

They might go the Guilded Age way. Start out like a vanilla fantasy adventure, and then pull a 180 and show the players.

[Anonymouswizard]

Alternative idea: after his latest meeting with Ed Greenwood Elminster goes for some tacos and accidentally casts the spell to return to the realms while Chris Pine is in the area of affect. Of course by the time Mr Pine realises he's in another world Elminster has wandered off.

Thus Chris Pine must team up with a dears barbarian, a half-elf warlock, and a lizardfolk rogue (or cleric) in order to find his way back home.

[Hopeless]

Even better Pine was attending a Star Trek Convention when he encounters Elminster.
First person he runs across he assumes is a cosplayer dressed oddly for a Vulcan, a Scotty impersonator and a well dressed Uhura fan.
Completely unaware he's now in a fantasy world he uses the lessons he learnt trying to imitate Shatner to defeat an army of what he thinks are in character klingons and Romulans (Orcs and Dark Elves) before he gets to realise what is going on a fleeing foe casts banishment on him and he finds himself back at the convention and decides to head to the toilet to freshen up...

[Mordar]

I'm a little surprised by the number of people with a dominant "D&D Slapstick" bent. Sure, every campaign (or one-shot) in which I took part had moments of goofiness/levity/quote-flinging, but they all had serious intent and undertone.

Maybe it is a matter of selected preference, faded memories or style of the times...but with the exception of limited games (like Toon or Macho Women with Guns), that was my experience and so bias makes me think it is the common experience.

In any event, I don't want any slapstick, comic relief1, Jumanji-swapping or fourth-wall breaking in a D&D movie. I want it to explore a world, show recognizable D&D monsters, present an adventure (with most definitions of the word), and have recognizable character classes. Magic should be costly, but no Vancian issues (can hedge around that, and have magic consume energy or something like that). Give us something recognizable, consumable by the masses and not juvenile.

Good luck, right? :smallwink:

- M

1 - that is the thing that sank the first D&D movie for me. Sure, it was pretty lame, but the insertion of a Wayans playing a Wayans for comic relief rendered it a joke, exactly as Mallack did for CtD. Keep comic relief for comedic movies.

[Xyril]

I'm a little surprised by the number of people with a dominant "D&D Slapstick" bent. Sure, every campaign (or one-shot) in which I took part had moments of goofiness/levity/quote-flinging, but they all had serious intent and undertone.


I think that either your definition of "slapstick" is different than mine, or else your experience with D&D is different than mine. In my experience, I'd say that acknowledging the quirks or humor inherent in the D&D system is something that finds its way into most games, but progressing to the point of slapstick does not. For example, thieves stealing everything for fun or bards seducing everyone doesn't literally happen in every adventure... but in general, if you're a hammer everything looks like a nail, and if you don't occupy people with goal-focused tasks that suit their unique skills, they tend to start finding or creating those tasks in a way that sometimes adds a bit of humor to the campaign.

[Tyrant]

I'm a little surprised by the number of people with a dominant "D&D Slapstick" bent. Sure, every campaign (or one-shot) in which I took part had moments of goofiness/levity/quote-flinging, but they all had serious intent and undertone.

Maybe it is a matter of selected preference, faded memories or style of the times...but with the exception of limited games (like Toon or Macho Women with Guns), that was my experience and so bias makes me think it is the common experience.

In any event, I don't want any slapstick, comic relief1, Jumanji-swapping or fourth-wall breaking in a D&D movie. I want it to explore a world, show recognizable D&D monsters, present an adventure (with most definitions of the word), and have recognizable character classes. Magic should be costly, but no Vancian issues (can hedge around that, and have magic consume energy or something like that). Give us something recognizable, consumable by the masses and not juvenile.

Good luck, right? :smallwink:

- M

1 - that is the thing that sank the first D&D movie for me. Sure, it was pretty lame, but the insertion of a Wayans playing a Wayans for comic relief rendered it a joke, exactly as Mallack did for CtD. Keep comic relief for comedic movies.
Yeah, I'm definitely in the camp that says lots of "slapstick, comic relief, Jumanji-swapping or fourth-wall breaking" aren't going to be in the movie and I'm not really sure why anyone thinks they would be. This is purely speculation on my part, but I assume at least one preferred outcome of this venture is to set up the ability to make more movies. That is unlikely under any Jumanji-esque scenario. Either it will be terrible (highly likely in my opinion), or the novelty won't be sustainable past 1 or 2 movies. Likewise with the other things outlined above. Likewise with the various tropes people keep bringing up. Would I watch a movie filled with D&D tropes? Sure I would. Would Joe Public who has no idea what the joke is about or that there was a joke? Probably not (and if they did they wouldn't do so again). I think folks are grossly overestimating the cultural penetration of D&D. Do lots of people know that it is a thing which exists in the world? Sure. Less of them have a vague idea of what it is, even less a firm grasp, fewer still have actually played the game, and fewer still know about the various tropes that some people associate with the game. A few in jokes and references are to be expected (I assume), but you can't build a movie around things 90% of the audience have no connection or frame of reference to. Well, I mean, you can do that, you just won't make any money.

I think people need to take a more rational (or monetary) look at this. Is the goal to make money? Obviously the answer is yes. That eliminates a lot of ideas right there. Is the goal to start a franchise or shared universe? I have to assume it is. The IP is perfectly capable of supporting that. The Realms alone has over 200 novels (not that all of them are movie worthy, to be clear). Given the other two goals, is another goal to simulate playing the game? I don't think that's a given. As others have said, it is difficult (to be it mildly) to simulate a game that is different for everyone that plays it. And if it is the goal, towards what end? Selling more copies of 5E*? That would be very shortsighted. For one, it is unlikely to seriously move the needle on 5E sales. A decade of Marvel absolutely dominating the box office hasn't done anything to improve comic book sales., and reading those doesn't require lots of free time and a group of people that can reliably meet up. For another, the potential box office sales of a successful, ongoing series far outpaces any potential gain from moving more copies of 5E.

So, having said all of that, I think the most likely outcome is a movie set in the Forgotten Realms**. Maybe it's based on an existing book/module/game, maybe not. It will be a story that sets up a larger world for other movies to explore while hopefully wrapping up whatever main plot emerges. It might not have the D&D name on it, instead focusing on the FR name and waiting for a sequel to make it something like Forgotten Realms: A D&D Campaign World. That way they don't scare off the folks who still associate D&D with devil worship or nerds and if it flops they can more easily try again later without dirtying the name like certain other attempts. If enough people in the production crew are D&D players then there will be some in jokes and references. If not, probably not.

*5E is a stand in for whatever edition happens to be the edition when this comes out.

**I think FR is the most likely setting. It has the most material, by far, of any of them. It's also close enough to what people are used to that it won't be too jarring. Eberron is a possibility too. It is fantasy but different enough to stand out. Ravenloft has one story they would go with and people already have Dracula, so I don't see that happening. Dark Sun would be interesting, but the setting is insanely bleak and most plots would break the setting or be relentlessly hopeless. If they were only going to do a few movies, this would be more likely as you could do one narrative across a few movies and then never go back there. Starjammer is probably too bizarre and/or silly. Greyhawk isn't as widely known (at this point) as the Realms (though see above about how widely known in this context doesn't really mean widely known among the general populace) and I believe doesn't have as much material, but it is in the realm of possibility from what I know about it.

Edit to add: I also don't think the right move is some "save the world" plot. Save the city/kingdom? Maybe. You don't have to have dragons (especially if you don't actually use the D&D name) if you make a compelling movie that doesn't need them. Waterdeep: City of Speldors is a story I feel could easily serve as the building blocks to a decent movie. It would need some work to have reasons to talk about/show things outside of Waterdeep and the plot probably needs work to be screen worthy, but it's self contained and doesn't have world shattering consequences. Build on that. Sometime down the road, make the Drizzt movie we all know they are dying to make.

[Rogar Demonblud]

Leaving aside how Hasbro has decided to Ride-Or-Die on the Realms, Eberron's technomagic is probably too sci-fi for a fantasy movie. Dark Sun might work for some small-scale Mad Max style stuff, but you won't build a multiverse on that. Ditto for Ravenloft and horror.

[Silly Name]

-snip-

For me it's because if those tropes aren't present (or at least toyed with or referenced), it wouldn't feel like a D&D movie. Perhaps a Forgotten Realms movie, but not a movie about Dungeons & Dragons.

That said, I do agree with your analysis for why it's unlikely it will happen, and that we're most likely getting a "straight" story set in the Realms.

[Anonymouswizard]

For me a lot of it is that they've tried a serious D&D film, multiple times, and at best reached the heights of 'okay'. Maybe a bit of silly is what's needed.

[Mordar]

...A few in jokes and references are to be expected (I assume), but you can't build a movie around things 90% of the audience have no connection or frame of reference to. Well, I mean, you can do that, you just won't make any money.

I think people need to take a more rational (or monetary) look at this. Is the goal to make money? Obviously the answer is yes. That eliminates a lot of ideas right there. Is the goal to start a franchise or shared universe? I have to assume it is. The IP is perfectly capable of supporting that. The Realms alone has over 200 novels (not that all of them are movie worthy, to be clear). Given the other two goals, is another goal to simulate playing the game? I don't think that's a given. As others have said, it is difficult (to be it mildly) to simulate a game that is different for everyone that plays it. And if it is the goal, towards what end? Selling more copies of 5E*? That would be very shortsighted. For one, it is unlikely to seriously move the needle on 5E sales. A decade of Marvel absolutely dominating the box office hasn't done anything to improve comic book sales., and reading those doesn't require lots of free time and a group of people that can reliably meet up. For another, the potential box office sales of a successful, ongoing series far outpaces any potential gain from moving more copies of 5E.

[SNIP]

Edit to add: I also don't think the right move is some "save the world" plot. Save the city/kingdom? Maybe. You don't have to have dragons (especially if you don't actually use the D&D name) if you make a compelling movie that doesn't need them. Waterdeep: City of Speldors is a story I feel could easily serve as the building blocks to a decent movie. It would need some work to have reasons to talk about/show things outside of Waterdeep and the plot probably needs work to be screen worthy, but it's self contained and doesn't have world shattering consequences. Build on that. Sometime down the road, make the Drizzt movie we all know they are dying to make.

Obviously lots snipped...

I think there will certainly be Easter eggs. It is in the GAMP (generally accepted movie principles) specifically to provide fan service without distracting or alienating non-fans walking in.

Firmly agree that any needle moving on RPG sales is strictly gravy. It would be revenue for an effectively distinct entity and could make a dent in the catering budget for a feature film. Definitely needs to be a standalone, but tying it to an IP will help mollify producers/investors as opposed to making a "generic fantasy epic".

Huge agreement on it not being a "save the world"...the one meta-element I hope they make use of is the idea of starting small. Big enough to be interested and visual, but small enough to have room to grow without massive escalation.


For me a lot of it is that they've tried a serious D&D film, multiple times, and at best reached the heights of 'okay'. Maybe a bit of silly is what's needed.

I'm...um...uncertain of a serious D&D film with anything other than a shoestring budget. The only feature was a buddy cop movie. Wrath of the Dragon (something) was direct release, I think (and maybe the one that reached "okay"), and Vile Darkness was again direct and maybe sorta okay.

I'm sure they'll try some MCU-style levity, but it'll probably fall flat because that seems to be pretty hard to manage.

- M

[Scarlet Knight]

Hmmm, what about a Galaxy Quest style movie?

Somehow the players at GenCon get mistaken for real heroes by a doddering wizard, but the world they get transported to is more Game of Thrones than Grey Hawk?

After a few horrible deaths they realize this is for real and basically have to metagame their way to escape?

That allows more comedy (which fits Pine) and all the D&D inside jokes. Since people mentioned Bards, you can have a villain drag a player to his Red Room, taunting the characters about the "sport" he has planned for her.

Before long she returns with the villain & several henchmen following like a puppies asking when they can see her again. When asked how this happened, she simply says: "Bard: name level."

[Spiderswims]

I'm a little surprised by the number of people with a dominant "D&D Slapstick" bent.

Unfortunately everyone, except a couple of serious players, everyone...the makers of D&D, movie writers, RPG writers, and the "common person" on the street all think D&D is ONLY: a wacky, goofy, slapstick game for kids and socially awkward overweight white loveless geeks. As seen in nearly any depiction of D&D ever. So unfortunately when making the movie, they will likely be "stuck" in this way of thinking. They are so deep in the rabbit hole of "this is the only way of things" that they would never consider anything else. Even the Lord of the Rings and related movies could resist this with things like "Goofy Gimily" and "surfboard elf".

So this leads to the goofy, slapstick fights too, so a lot less Braveheart or LotR and much more Hercules/Xena and Jackie Chan movies.

It would be a big deal for Wizards and all the people involved in the movie making to think outside this trap. Even though it would make sense from a business sense to show a diverse cast of player characters and make a SERIOUS fun movie....the chances are slim.

[Tyrant]

Unfortunately everyone, except a couple of serious players, everyone...the makers of D&D, movie writers, RPG writers, and the "common person" on the street all think D&D is ONLY: a wacky, goofy, slapstick game for kids and socially awkward overweight white loveless geeks. As seen in nearly any depiction of D&D ever. So unfortunately when making the movie, they will likely be "stuck" in this way of thinking. They are so deep in the rabbit hole of "this is the only way of things" that they would never consider anything else. Even the Lord of the Rings and related movies could resist this with things like "Goofy Gimily" and "surfboard elf".
I seriously doubt that the common person on the street thinks most of that about D&D. Most of the geek part, maybe (not sure why specifically white geeks). This is the kind of thing I meant about overestimating the cultural penetration of D&D. As for LotR, that is not even in the same ballpark of what we are talking about. Those movies had occasional moments of levity and some occasional silly moments (like surfing Legolas). Those things existed amid a very serious plot that was played completely straight and with no joking from the overwhelming majority of characters. Subject matter aside (given that it is fantasy), those were played as serious movies. We would be "go out and buy lottery tickets" lucky if we got that level of movie. I'm saying we need to avoid "Your Highness" level movies and people seem to think those would be a good idea for some reason.

[Hopeless]

I agree.

Now imagine this starts out as looking like a slapstick comedy until one of them is killed because they aren't taking this seriously.

For me what I'd like to see is if they go with a group transported from Earth to lets just call it the Realms but whilst say three of them are keen roleplayers, the two adults are former military veterans and have experienced warfare and the misery it brings.
The fifth is the Bobby of the group (the youngest) I'll go with an Evie because I liked the lead of the Fraser Mummy movie.

So they find a spell book and one of the roelplayers starts learning how to cast becoming the Presto but its a slow process another takes the Bard liking music and finding their own magic along the way.

Then they find out they're not the first such group to end up here, but unlike the others they have a common purpose the two adults want to get the kida home and when faced with the fact they can't all go home one of them chooses to stay behind making sure they make it home before as far as they're concerned facing certain death as the kids are returned to their parents with the remaining adult the US veteran grudgingly accepting their thanks as all are worried about the one they left behind.

To set up a sequel the last scenes after the credits reveals her walking out of the complex looking beaten up and stares down the army waiting for her.

"Okay either get out of my way or I go through you!" she glares starting walking forward using her new enchanted armour, shield and staff knowing she has little to no chance as her newly earned clerical abilities summon forth a wave of spirits to her defence!

[Silly Name]

I don't think anyone here is arguing in favour of d&d being depicted in media exclusively as goofy slapstick - but rather, embracing the campiness and silliness that often comes up during games.

Your average d&d group is a bunch of friends sitting at a table to have some fun, and this means that in-between delving in undead-infested ruins and foiling the plots of evil chancellors, they'll crack jokes and make puns and do generally silly stuff. And if you take all this out, you are left with a mostly generic fantasy movie.

Look at Baldur's Gate: Minsc and Boo are beloved characters, and despite being silly and humorous, they exist perfectly fine in a dark and serious storyline. There's tongue-in-cheek humour about the rules of the time, and references to the shared knowledge of d&d players.

I don't want an Avenger-style movie, either. Constantly quipping in battle and subsisting "witty" one-liners for plot and personality is not what I want. I don't want a poor attempt at replicating LotR, either: I love LotR, but d&d isn't Tolkien.

[Hopeless]

I don't want an Avenger-style movie, either. Constantly quipping in battle and subsisting "witty" one-liners for plot and personality is not what I want. I don't want a poor attempt at replicating LotR, either: I love LotR, but d&d isn't Tolkien.

Not any more.

It's been decades since it was released in print after all and over a decade since the movie trilogy.

[Eldan]

It's been 20 years, I'd quite like another series fantasy movie.

[Mordar]

Unfortunately everyone, except a couple of serious players, everyone...the makers of D&D, movie writers, RPG writers, and the "common person" on the street all think D&D is ONLY: a wacky, goofy, slapstick game for kids and socially awkward overweight white loveless geeks. As seen in nearly any depiction of D&D ever. So unfortunately when making the movie, they will likely be "stuck" in this way of thinking. They are so deep in the rabbit hole of "this is the only way of things" that they would never consider anything else. Even the Lord of the Rings and related movies could resist this with things like "Goofy Gimily" and "surfboard elf".

So this leads to the goofy, slapstick fights too, so a lot less Braveheart or LotR and much more Hercules/Xena and Jackie Chan movies.

It would be a big deal for Wizards and all the people involved in the movie making to think outside this trap. Even though it would make sense from a business sense to show a diverse cast of player characters and make a SERIOUS fun movie....the chances are slim.

I do think this assumes facts not in evidence. Yes, Gamers is very popular and plays the dysfunction to the hilt, but I believe that is because it is a well done trope-fest for the in crowd. I think most depictions in mass market, while not necessarily presenting glowing visions of what RPGs could be, don't seem to follow this path. Sure, they seem to present the geeks, but as serious geeks involved in geekery, not jokesters in stained black t-shirts.

Maybe it is a mass market vs. niche market issue...stuff made for the insiders leans way in to the insider tropes, mass market presents the nerd cliche.

Yup, LotR "had" to drop in comic relief and once Merry and Pippen were off screen it fell to Gimli. Don't even get me started on that! Surfing Legolas was an effort at cool action much like the oliphant kill, though, not at a funny Feng Shui or 7th Sea moment, IMO.

- M

[Scarlet Knight]

OK , let's assume the Movie Makers are similar in intelligence to the lot who thought "the Hobbit" would be improved by an elf/dwarf romance.

Now they decide they want to grab the "Game of Thrones" crowd and think a D&D movie can be their ticket. They want violence, nudity, gore and sex with it.

"Guardians of the Flame", with it's :




dragons being enslaved for centuries to flame away a city's excrement, PCs gang raped by NPC bandits, PCs dying kicking on the end of a spear in the guts, and a wheelchair-bound kid winding up literally flamed to death in the real world


suddenly makes sense.

I can even hear the tag line: "D&D...it's not for kids anymore...."

[Clertar]

For me a lot of it is that they've tried a serious D&D film, multiple times, and at best reached the heights of 'okay'. Maybe a bit of silly is what's needed.

That used to be the case for superhero movies, and the problem with D&D is not that serious failed, it's that those movies were horrendous.

That can do it straight, in a fun adventure tone, and maybe crack it this time. General audiences are way more open to fantastic genres nowadays.

[Vahnavoi]

@Scarlet Knight:

If they actually followed that train of thought, we'd get the equivalent of live action Goblin Slayer or Berserk.

And I'd be fine with that. :smallamused:

[Ajustusdaniel]

OK , let's assume the Movie Makers are similar in intelligence to the lot who thought "the Hobbit" would be improved by an elf/dwarf romance.

Now they decide they want to grab the "Game of Thrones" crowd and think a D&D movie can be their ticket. They want violence, nudity, gore and sex with it.

"Guardians of the Flame", with it's :



suddenly makes sense.

I can even hear the tag line: "D&D...it's not for kids anymore...."

As a theatrical release (assuming those are ever a thing again...) I think that's unlikely, because the R-rating can hurt the box office. If you get a successful D&D franchise going, and there's money to throw around, I can see someone with a passion for the material and/or a specific vision making an R-rated D&D film (see: Logan and Deadpool) but I wouldn't expect them to launch the franchise that way.

Now, a D&D show on HBO or Starz or what have you I could definitely see going that way.

[Tyrant]

I don't think anyone here is arguing in favour of d&d being depicted in media exclusively as goofy slapstick - but rather, embracing the campiness and silliness that often comes up during games.

Your average d&d group is a bunch of friends sitting at a table to have some fun, and this means that in-between delving in undead-infested ruins and foiling the plots of evil chancellors, they'll crack jokes and make puns and do generally silly stuff. And if you take all this out, you are left with a mostly generic fantasy movie.

Look at Baldur's Gate: Minsc and Boo are beloved characters, and despite being silly and humorous, they exist perfectly fine in a dark and serious storyline. There's tongue-in-cheek humour about the rules of the time, and references to the shared knowledge of d&d players.

I don't want an Avenger-style movie, either. Constantly quipping in battle and subsisting "witty" one-liners for plot and personality is not what I want. I don't want a poor attempt at replicating LotR, either: I love LotR, but d&d isn't Tolkien.
Yeah, to be clear, I am not saying I wouldn't expect some humor and levity. I imagine there will even be some inside jokes, easter eggs, etc. Maybe even some jokes that focus on better known D&D tropes. What I don't expect is for the movie to be built around those things. If I were to guess, I would say it would be more serious than the average Marvel movie, but engaging in some of that type of humor (hopefully when appropriate). The big difference being the Marvel movies are starting from a point of "our world but slightly different" so jokey comments on the absurdity of the situations they are in make sense as a way to lighten the mood in the face of death/defeat/destruction. With a D&D movie, that is the world they know. Those situations won't seem absurd to them, so the joking about it will be questionable if not done well (though that applies to any humor* really).

*That's actually a big reason why I get worried when I hear talk of making these types of movies comedies. Humor is hard and rarely ages well. Modern humor and the obsession with referencing current events that will only really make sense in the moment even more so. I think comedic undertakings run a far higher risk of failure.

[Rogar Demonblud]

The only comedy I've seen that has managed to age remotely well is 9 to 5, because it really hasn't at all.

[Peelee]

The only comedy I've seen that has managed to age remotely well is 9 to 5, because it really hasn't at all.

Oh, hey, a chance to recommend In Bruges!

Also most Mel Brooks stuff (my favorite being the newer Producers) and Blues Brothers, off the top of my head, but In Bruges is both funny as hell and also incredibly and unexpectedly incisive.

[Scarlet Knight]

The only comedy I've seen that has managed to age remotely well is 9 to 5, because it really hasn't at all.

No love for Laurel & Hardy?

[Peelee]

No love for Laurel & Hardy?

It's sad to say that Frye and Laurie is old now, but it's old now, and if anything most of it has gotten more relevant. At least, the ones I've seen.

[dancrilis]

The only comedy I've seen that has managed to age remotely well is 9 to 5, because it really hasn't at all.

Personally still a fan of Blackadder.

Which I suppose could easily translate into DnD ...

[Rogar Demonblud]

No love for Laurel & Hardy?

Well, I do still send people a link to the piano movers bit any time they ask me to help them move.:smallcool:

[Eldan]

Personally still a fan of Blackadder.

Which I suppose could easily translate into DnD ...

Oh man. I'd kill someone for a Blackadder in the Forgotten Realms series.

Can we get Rowan Atkinson to play snarky old mentor to the adventuring party?

[Anonymouswizard]

Hmmmmmm... Lord Blackadder would probably be a Noble Rogue with Baldrick as his retainer, maybe Percy could be a Fighter? Or would that more be Bob? Lord Flashheart is clearly a Bard, I think we might be onto something here!

[Hopeless]

The real question is will he eventually become the BBEG or used as a henchman by the BBEG to dispose of the party when the BBEG no longer needs them and he can't refuse the order as the whole deal has been a charade to help him rise in the ranks of the nobility unaware he himself was being used to set up the nobility to be taken over or wiped out at the whim of the true villain whose been playing him the entire time?

[JoshL]

OK , let's assume the Movie Makers are similar in intelligence to the lot who thought "the Hobbit" would be improved by an elf/dwarf romance.

Been rewatching the Hobbit films, and they're not entirely wrong here, it was just executed poorly. First, to the plus, the dwarves in the book have literally no personalities ("good at starting fires" is NOT a personality) and some don't even get dialogue. Expanding the characters is a great idea, and a romance plot is not a terrible place to go, to get the elves invested emotionally. Tauriel is not a bad character either. However, starting that "romance" with a joke about checking what's in his pants is cringey at best. But the dialogue between them afterwards isn't terrible. Trying to build tension with a triangle with Legolas was a terrible choice, since Legolas has no chemistry with anyone without a beard. Again, not a terrible idea, but executed poorly. Where this all falls apart is having Tauriel, well, fall apart at the end, and having Legolas get the revenge kill. If she did, and maybe even used that as the motivation to distance herself from the rigid elven society, that could have been a strong moment. Instead, we get a climax with Legolas once again telling physics to frell off, and she becomes a weepy stereotype (not really how Tolkien wrote elf ladies).

Anyway, I like the Hobbit movies more than most, but they were sooooo....close.....to being great. A greater sin was spending way too much time with the Laketown advisor. Like, any time, really.

[Clertar]

Been rewatching the Hobbit films, and they're not entirely wrong here, it was just executed poorly. First, to the plus, the dwarves in the book have literally no personalities ("good at starting fires" is NOT a personality) and some don't even get dialogue. Expanding the characters is a great idea, and a romance plot is not a terrible place to go, to get the elves invested emotionally. Tauriel is not a bad character either. However, starting that "romance" with a joke about checking what's in his pants is cringey at best. But the dialogue between them afterwards isn't terrible. Trying to build tension with a triangle with Legolas was a terrible choice, since Legolas has no chemistry with anyone without a beard. Again, not a terrible idea, but executed poorly. Where this all falls apart is having Tauriel, well, fall apart at the end, and having Legolas get the revenge kill. If she did, and maybe even used that as the motivation to distance herself from the rigid elven society, that could have been a strong moment. Instead, we get a climax with Legolas once again telling physics to frell off, and she becomes a weepy stereotype (not really how Tolkien wrote elf ladies).

Anyway, I like the Hobbit movies more than most, but they were sooooo....close.....to being great. A greater sin was spending way too much time with the Laketown advisor. Like, any time, really.

I see it almost the same way as you. These were terrible ideas, and executed horrendously :smallwink:

[Silly Name]

-snip-

The issue plaguing the Hobbit movies is taking a fairy tale and trying to turn it into an epic movie trilogy.

The Hobbit, as the title implies, is about Bilbo and how the quest for the Lonely Mountain affects him. Yes, any dwarf that's not Thorin is barely a character in the book, but they are serviceable for what Tolkien wrote and why he wrote it.

Your point about Tauriel serving to expand the character of other dwarves is fair, but the problem a lot of fans like me have with the movies is that they seem to completely miss the point of the book by getting lost into all the subplots about other characters and making every thing grandiose and incredible when it doesn't need to - and relegating Bilbo's growth and learning to the sidelines.

Which, I guess, is sorta the same thing I've been thinking about a D&D movie: yes, they certainly make a fantasy movie, with good actors and effects and music, but can they capture the spirit of the thing?

[Ajustusdaniel]

The issue plaguing the Hobbit movies is taking a fairy tale and trying to turn it into an epic movie trilogy.

The Hobbit, as the title implies, is about Bilbo and how the quest for the Lonely Mountain affects him. Yes, any dwarf that's not Thorin is barely a character in the book, but they are serviceable for what Tolkien wrote and why he wrote it.

Your point about Tauriel serving to expand the character of other dwarves is fair, but the problem a lot of fans like me have with the movies is that they seem to completely miss the point of the book by getting lost into all the subplots about other characters and making every thing grandiose and incredible when it doesn't need to - and relegating Bilbo's growth and learning to the sidelines.

Which, I guess, is sorta the same thing I've been thinking about a D&D movie: yes, they certainly make a fantasy movie, with good actors and effects and music, but can they capture the spirit of the thing?

I mean, we have a reasonable group of intelligent, well-meaning and devastatingly attractive posters here. Can we agree as to what the spirit of D&D is?

[Keltest]

I mean, we have a reasonable group of intelligent, well-meaning and devastatingly attractive posters here. Can we agree as to what the spirit of D&D is?

A bunch of people sitting in a room together eating food thats bad for you and yelling at inanimate objects and imaginary creatures.

[Kitten Champion]

I've always assumed the "spirit" of D&D is American pulp fantasy/weird fiction from the early-to-mid 20th century. Predominantly Howard, Vance, and Anderson.

Though - more functionally speaking - it owes quite a lot to the Western.

[Anonymouswizard]

A bunch of people sitting in a room together eating food thats bad for you and yelling at inanimate objects and imaginary creatures.

When you state it like that, how does it differ from my free time when not roleplaying? :smallwink:

[Keltest]

When you state it like that, how does it differ from my free time when not roleplaying? :smallwink:

Presumably there are fewer people in the room with you.

[Spiderswims]

I mean, we have a reasonable group of intelligent, well-meaning and devastatingly attractive posters here. Can we agree as to what the spirit of D&D is?

I'd say that spirit is creativity and imagination and role playing in a very unique way that can often help improve a person. Just like arts, sports and many other social activities. On the basic level an RPG can help with learning piratical things like reading and math; to other more advanced things like teamwork, leadership and problem solving. Sure, some people just have "fun fun" rolling a d20, but some people get so much more from the game.

And I think this would be the perfect spot for a D&D movie. The bunch of 20 somethings that are a bit "stuck" in life(that is they have stuck themselves).

Chris Pine makes for the perfect young dad, who has a bland job like ID Associate and just lives live 'wasting' for something to happen.

Character two is a young doctor, stuck doing 'simple' operations. Character three is a lawyer doing boring law work. Character four is a stay at home parent. Character five works at valu mart. They each play D&D for the fun escape from their boring normal lives.

Until the day they bump into Elminster and he takes them to the Realms. The meta story is simple enough each character 'grows' while in the fantasy world to become a better person. That is they "play D&D" for real in the fantasy world to become better people.

So the movie has the ending wrap up where they take there "D&D skills" and use them in real life. Chris becomes the great dad and goes for a better job. The doctor picks the right specialty. The lawyer picks cases that help people. The stay at home parent 'rules' the kid kingdom. The last one gets a better job/life.

Picture the lawyer...say Jennifer Lawarence....they had out cases and hand her the stack of boring stuff. She says something like "No, Ellanandra of the elven realms will not do this work!" Everyone looks at her like she is crazy. Then she picks some case to help real people "it's what Ella would do..." she'd say with a smile.

[Anonymouswizard]

Presumably there are fewer people in the room with you.

Not under the current circumstances.

[Hopeless]

The Spirit of d&d?

I like the idea listed above for the remake of the cartoon series into alive action movie especially the Jennifer Lawrence bit!

Strikes a chord here actually.

We all look for something we don't have in life whether its just for a short time imagine we're doing something else, something unexpected and interesting unlike most people's lives especially right now...

Some just want to kick down a door, fight the monster, loot their bodies then go back for a bar room rumble after getting drunk at the inn.

Others are invested in the story hoping for something tangible they don't have right now and of course not every DM is into that kind of stuff preferring one off adventures with nothing to link despite players trying to do just that.

How much details do you go into for your characters?

So for this movie how much detail do you think they will go into?

Not much I suspect the idea above sounds much better in that respect.

So we need a story then explain why the characters are involved, why are they bothering to go on this adventure and where they hope it will lead.
Obviously it won't fit the bill for most of them perhaps the loot whore or the power gamer might go overboard I doubt they'll handle that as well as the Gamers Dorkness Rising mind you!

[DavidSh]

I think I was once assured that the spirit of D&D was Tullamore Dew. Assuming that cheap beer doesn't count as "spirits".

[Anonymouswizard]

Honestly, I think that the cartoon captured the spirit of the game pretty well. The group not quite getting along, plans but always working, the Dungeon Matter being frustratingly unhelpful, the animal companion being incredibly annoying*...

If the film takes the basic tropes of the cartoon and replaces the character archetypes with ones that feel a bit more natural to modern audiences I think it could turn out rather well. Heck, if what they're being subversive of are the basic tropes of that cartoon rather than a generic fantasy film or the D&D game it might come out better

* Okay that one is more 5e specific.

[Hopeless]

Given the heavy emphasis on Faerun in 5e so far it seems more likely thats where this movie might be based within.

A shame really there are plenty of others including Nentir Vale, Mystara, Oerth, Eberron, Exandria and others that could fit too.

Ultimately its what they're allowed to mess with and how much they can mess with.

So no Drizz't movie then!

[Rogar Demonblud]

You do know Drizzt is a Forgotten Realms character, right?

[Hopeless]

You do know Drizzt is a Forgotten Realms character, right?

And you know no matter what they try any attempt to make a live action Drizz't movie will fail despite the effort to make them?

An animated movie however might work though.

[Spiderswims]

And you know no matter what they try any attempt to make a live action Drizz't movie will fail despite the effort to make them?

They could do it....all they need to do is:

Do the whatever normal way to make a script for the movie. And then DON'T make that movie.

Do this, maybe up to five times. Destroy all the crappy scripts.

Then hire a true Hollywood outsider that IS a TRUE FAN of the content. Then hire five or so other true fans to keep watch on that one and have over ride power. And you want a Hollywood script maker, but one that is clueless about the content, but understands things like pacing and visuals.

And to make sure the movie will be good, make it Rated R. Specifically make the movie NOT for kids.

And...ta da....a good Drizzit movie!

And sure, take good Rated R movie...and water it down to PG 13 and make a second movie just for the kids. If you want to be really fancy, go ahead and make TWO movies: Real rated R and the Kids movie. You can shoot both at the same time, and use 2/3 of the shot scenes for both movies. So have the R version Drizzt kills foes in fights.....and the kid version just 'taps' the bag guys and they fall down and take naps. The R version has nudity, the kid version just has a bare shoulder for a second and fades out.

[warty goblin]

If you're gonna do Drizzt, it'd work way, way better as a tv show. The books are all structured around action set pieces anyway, so they're already plenty episodic. And the ambient gore level is pretty much right there with the Witcher. A show that also demonstrates pretty well that you can do well with a protagonist who doesn't really talk all that much.

[Rogar Demonblud]

Frigging NCIS showed that with Gibbs.

[No brains]

I think the 'spirit' of D&D is people trying to have fun and the complications that arise from that.

The DM wants to have fun with a creative vision for the players, and that goes wrong when the story's rails are bent.

Fighters want fights, but struggle with reasons.

Thieves want to steal, but forget that consequences are tedious.

You can probably think of stuff like that for every arche/stereotype of player for the game.

I feel like a D&D story would have a feel somewhere between It's Always Sunny in Philadelphia and The LEGO Movie* where the characters feel like they're on the verge of the best way to play the game and then the fact that other people want to enjoy it gets in the way. The times that work out the best is when everyone can be at least the same kind of selfish for a while. There's probably ways to make allegories of this so that the fact these are characters people are playing is only alluded to, but whether or not the characters in the story would be played by other characters or just be themselves could work either way.

*I guess this D&D needs Charlie Kelly as a consultant.

[Mordar]

They could do it....all they need to do is:

And to make sure the movie will be good, make it Rated R. Specifically make the movie NOT for kids.

And...ta da....a good Drizzit movie!

And sure, take good Rated R movie...and water it down to PG 13 and make a second movie just for the kids. If you want to be really fancy, go ahead and make TWO movies: Real rated R and the Kids movie. You can shoot both at the same time, and use 2/3 of the shot scenes for both movies. So have the R version Drizzt kills foes in fights.....and the kid version just 'taps' the bag guys and they fall down and take naps. The R version has nudity, the kid version just has a bare shoulder for a second and fades out.

I admit I am co-mingling "successful" and "good" here, but I can't help but think it needs to be both.

I really have to disagree with this. Yup, it worked for Deadpool, but that was because the existing MCU was so overwhelmingly successful there was room for a superhero movie that was R-rated but still in the MCU feel (mixing melodrama and humor), and was specifically meant to be Hot-Topic-Edgy, if you get my meaning. Yup, it worked for GoT because that was HBO reprising the Sopranos as a swords and (itty bitty bit of) sorcery epic. But this is neither coat-tailing on a hyper successful franchise nor a premium cable channel series. It is likely going to be a tentpole movie that is hoped to launch the franchise.

Drizz't became (the most?) popular (A)D&D inspired character (ever) because of books that were advanced young adult. The "rating" of the books was solidly in the PG range throughout, and leaning on boobs and blood doesn't make the story better. Any mass-market appealing version of Drizzt that isn't in Menzoberranzan wouldn't need an R rating. The level of violence and visible gore required is already available on TV. I believe, for instance, were Braveheart to be released now it would be PG-13. Just 6 or so years later we had beheadings and hero pincushionings in LotR, and that came in at PG-13. That is the level necessary here, I think.

In my opinion it needs, most of all, to be thought of/written/directed as either a solid drama with physical conflict where the cast happen to wear medieval wardrobe, or a semi-serious adventure film without slapstick comic relief.


I think the 'spirit' of D&D is people trying to have fun and the complications that arise from that.

The DM wants to have fun with a creative vision for the players, and that goes wrong when the story's rails are bent.

Fighters want fights, but struggle with reasons.

Thieves want to steal, but forget that consequences are tedious.

You can probably think of stuff like that for every arche/stereotype of player for the game.

I feel like a D&D story would have a feel somewhere between It's Always Sunny in Philadelphia and The LEGO Movie* where the characters feel like they're on the verge of the best way to play the game and then the fact that other people want to enjoy it gets in the way. The times that work out the best is when everyone can be at least the same kind of selfish for a while. There's probably ways to make allegories of this so that the fact these are characters people are playing is only alluded to, but whether or not the characters in the story would be played by other characters or just be themselves could work either way.

I'm not sure I follow because you use archetypes for characters but refer to players.

I think you advocating for a film that goes meta (clear or subtle acknowledgment that the story is a game being played by regular people), and tries to represent the mix of things that bring the players to the table even if we never see the players. I just can't picture how that would work well, but I am open to the idea. I fear slippery slope though, for any but the most subtle of meta. Additionally, wouldn't it rely really heavily on the simplest reduction of motivations?

Bah, it is all immaterial anyway. They got Chris Pine as their flagbearer for casting. Almost certainly overpaying for talent that will not pay off. Would have rooted for a cast full of "Hey, isn't she that girl from that one show?" and "Don't I know that guy from something?" and a couple of non-primary Names that fill important but tertiary roles. Like how Harry Potter started off, perhaps.

- M

[Spiderswims]

I really have to disagree with this.

The point is not to really make a rated R movie....but more make a movie that is not bland modern super safe politically correct Hollywood and general movie making. It's like the modern view that they MUST take the word 'police' off the Doctor's TARDIS because the people making the show don't like 'the police', so the "new" TARDIS will say something like 'Social Worker Call Box".

Or maybe the best geek example is Han shot first. Way back when, Han was 'ok and cool' for shooting evil criminal thug Greedo FIRST. A couple years later and that HAD to be changed because "good guys never fire first".

So to make a good Drizzt movie you need to show bad and evil stuff. The whole point of Drizzt is that he rejects the evil ways of the drow. But in modern Hollywood you would not see much evil directly in a PG 13 movie. You'd just get that soft implied evil.

The movie works much better with Drizzt cutting up foes and killing them....not the "taps them with the blade and they fall down and take a nap". Guewayvar works better as a great cat killing and mauling foes...not "chasing them around or knocing them down with a paw like a cute kitty cat does".

The same way the elven village attack, works best as a big evil event....not a vague off screen "oh the Drow did bad things over there".

But, like I said, you'd still make the rated G version for all the kids anyway.

[Palanan]

Originally Posted by Spiderswims
Or maybe the best geek example is Han shot first. Way back when, Han was 'ok and cool' for shooting evil criminal thug Greedo FIRST. A couple years later and that HAD to be changed because "good guys never fire first".

In the original version, Han wasn't glorified for shooting first; it was meant to show that he lived in a tough world and survival meant doing unheroic things. This establishes Han as decidedly unheroic, and provides the baseline for his character at the start of the movie, contrasting with his selfless decision at the end.

And the change to Greedo shooting first wasn't "a couple years later," it was twenty years later. I don't know the details of Lucas' thinking on that point, but it was highly controversial then, because it clashed with how everyone knew the character and undermined his arc.

[Peelee]

In the original version, Han wasn't glorified for shooting first; it was meant to show that he lived in a tough world and survival meant doing unheroic things. This establishes Han as decidedly unheroic, and provides the baseline for his character at the start of the movie, contrasting with his selfless decision at the end.

And the change to Greedo shooting first wasn't "a couple years later," it was twenty years later. I don't know the details of Lucas' thinking on that point, but it was highly controversial then, because it clashed with how everyone knew the character and undermined his arc.

Lucas gave an interview about a decade back on this:

The controversy over who shot first, Greedo or Han Solo, in Episode IV, what I did was try to clean up the confusion, but obviously it upset people because they wanted Solo to be a cold-blooded killer, but he actually isn't. It had been done in all close-ups and it was confusing about who did what to whom. I put a little wider shot in there that made it clear that Greedo is the one who shot first, but everyone wanted to think that Han shot first, because they wanted to think that he actually just gunned him down.
In this interview he shows that he himself doesn't quite understand what people connected with; Han was being openly confronted at gunpoint and his livelihood and life both threatened. While not "good", Han shooting Greedo was certainly justifiable and in no way made him a "cold-blooded killer," as Lucas puts it. But that's what he saw it as.

[Hopeless]

I assumed that quip about removing the police part off the TARDIS was a joke intended to reveal she had repaired the chameleon circuit turning the TARDIS into a refuse bin on fire?

Well as I have no plans to watch that until they figure out how badly they messed up so naturally I'm not holding my breath on that!

Heard about that change in the special edition regarding who shot first never bothered looking further into that.

So you don't expect them to go with an original party of adventurers?

I was assuming Pine was playing the damsel in distress a prince who keeps getting into trouble and the party who rescue him are completely unaware of his actual identity just wondering why the bad guys are chasing after them!

[Mordar]

So you don't expect them to go with an original party of adventurers?

I was assuming Pine was playing the damsel in distress a prince who keeps getting into trouble and the party who rescue him are completely unaware of his actual identity just wondering why the bad guys are chasing after them!

I do expect a party of adventurers that are either unknown to (most) of us or are, perhaps, the current version of the default characters (do they have those in 5e? Like Tordek, Lidda and Mialee back in 3rd edition).

Nah, Pine is (IMO) b-list action cutie, so he'll be our party face and likely martial-type.

- M

[JadedDM]

Honestly, if they did make a Drizzt movie, whether it's super violent and gory or not is probably the last thing I'd be concerned about. I'd be far more worried about whether they would intend to keep the extremely clumsy racism metaphors, and the rather squicky relationship with Catti-brie (she was 8 when they first met; he basically helped raise her).

Also, I wonder who they would cast to play Drizzt? I'm having trouble thinking of anyone who would fit the role well.

[Mordar]

and the rather squicky relationship with Catti-brie (she was 8 when they first met; he basically helped raise her).

An interesting point...from an elvish ecology perspective.

I suspect the Drow would be properly pasty white, Catti would start in her full adulthood because the story would need a female action lead.

- M

[Peelee]

Honestly, if they did make a Drizzt movie, whether it's super violent and gory or not is probably the last thing I'd be concerned about. I'd be far more worried about whether they would intend to keep the extremely clumsy racism metaphors, and the rather squicky relationship with Catti-brie (she was 8 when they first met; he basically helped raise her).

Also, I wonder who they would cast to play Drizzt? I'm having trouble thinking of anyone who would fit the role well.

Maybe Chang (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ken_Jeong)?

[Dargaron]

And sure, take good Rated R movie...and water it down to PG 13 and make a second movie just for the kids. If you want to be really fancy, go ahead and make TWO movies: Real rated R and the Kids movie. You can shoot both at the same time, and use 2/3 of the shot scenes for both movies. So have the R version Drizzt kills foes in fights.....and the kid version just 'taps' the bag guys and they fall down and take naps. The R version has nudity, the kid version just has a bare shoulder for a second and fades out.

That's an extremely dismissive caricature of a PG 13 movie. The Fellowship of the Rings is PG-13, and ends with a showdown between Aragorn and Lurtz that results in Lurtz' arm being sliced off above the elbow and pulling himself onto a sword before getting decapitated. This is after Boromir gets repeatedly impaled with arrows and is nearly killed in what is the medieval equivalent of a pistol-to-the head execution. The Two Towers was perfectly capable of conveying the Burning of the Westfold without showing every rape and execution, GOT-style (and in fact ended up presenting the Dunlandings as more monstrous than they were in the books, where they are essentially treated as wayward men bamboozled by the wiles of Saruman, while they receive no such redemption in the movie). For a more recent example: Hunger Games features a 12-year-old girl getting speared and the graphic neck-snap of another child.

If there's one thing that the "spirit of Dungeons and Dragons" is not, then it's "for adults only." My introduction to Dungeons and Dragons was a beginners' group at a gaming store renting space over a police station, and they specifically got a discount on rent because they were a fully-legal place for local teens and young adults to socialize instead of getting into drugs or gangs. The adults-only stuff is there, but it's niche-market or homebrew material, not front-and-centre.

[Dire_Flumph]

Also, I wonder who they would cast to play Drizzt? I'm having trouble thinking of anyone who would fit the role well.

Mahershala Ali would work for me (though I think there are several good choices), has a good body type for the role and is someone who could handle the stunt work an action film requires, and has some good acting chops. I think it's important the character of Driz'zt be played by an actor with naturally darker skin, but remove a lot of the problematic aspects by making all elf races diverse in skin tone, Drow and Surface elf alike.

[Anonymouswizard]

That's an extremely dismissive caricature of a PG 13 movie. The Fellowship of the Rings is PG-13, and ends with a showdown between Aragorn and Lurtz that results in Lurtz' arm being sliced off above the elbow and pulling himself onto a sword before getting decapitated. This is after Boromir gets repeatedly impaled with arrows and is nearly killed in what is the medieval equivalent of a pistol-to-the head execution. The Two Towers was perfectly capable of conveying the Burning of the Westfold without showing every rape and execution, GOT-style (and in fact ended up presenting the Dunlandings as more monstrous than they were in the books, where they are essentially treated as wayward men bamboozled by the wiles of Saruman, while they receive no such redemption in the movie). For a more recent example: Hunger Games features a 12-year-old girl getting speared and the graphic neck-snap of another child.

If there's one thing that the "spirit of Dungeons and Dragons" is not, then it's "for adults only." My introduction to Dungeons and Dragons was a beginners' group at a gaming store renting space over a police station, and they specifically got a discount on rent because they were a fully-legal place for local teens and young adults to socialize instead of getting into drugs or gangs. The adults-only stuff is there, but it's niche-market or homebrew material, not front-and-centre.

A very good explanation of why an 18-rated D&D film might not be a good idea. Heck Fellowship was rated PG here, only The Two Towers and Return of the King got the 12 stamp.

I've also seen PG rated films with nudity, so that's not even a reason to want an 18 rating. Sure it would have to restrict itself to an appropriate context, not be sexual, and limit itself to nothing below the waist on the front. Oh, and be brief, 'recieving a letter while in the bath' brief.

But the classification system I'm used to is both more and less lenient than in the US.

So the ideal audience to aim for is teens, which for all it's glasses the first D&D film did understand. You want something between a 12 and a 15, with a good amount of action but little blood (characters should bored, especially if it makes it dramatic, bit nowhere near gore levels), while including a very pretty young man with an aversion to shirts (I vote a Warlock who made a pact with a fairy queen), and a woman with a low cut blouse (say the Paladin when she takes her armour* off). Or something less stereotypical but still with a bit of eye candy for the hormone-addled ones and plenty of action.

Or maybe go the Jackie Chan film route: plenty of action, minimal on the actual violence. But you'd need a very good choreographer to make it work, so it's probably the most risky option.

* Unisex full plate, of course.

[Hopeless]

So have Gibbs play the veteran with Pine the up and coming soldier who requires his help as the situation will clearly put him out of his depth without some experienced advice?

Now I'm wondering what the story is going to be about?!

[Scarlet Knight]

Honestly, if they did make a Drizzt movie, whether it's super violent and gory or not is probably the last thing I'd be concerned about. I'd be far more worried about whether they would intend to keep the extremely clumsy racism metaphors, and the rather squicky relationship with Catti-brie (she was 8 when they first met; he basically helped raise her).


An interesting point...from an elvish ecology perspective...
- M

I thought about this for a different conversation; the change of a human from a child to a woman, in the eyes of an elf, is no more than the length of a ballplayer rehabbing from Tommy John surgery.

I don't know if this was covered in the books, but the elf knows he will bury his lover, and all their children, and probably their grandchildren as well. There lies a decent tragic plot line.

Plus you can have all the racism you want as long as the moral at the end is "Racism is bad".

[Keltest]

I thought about this for a different conversation; the change of a human from a child to a woman, in the eyes of an elf, is no more than the length of a ballplayer rehabbing from Tommy John surgery.

I don't know if this was covered in the books, but the elf knows he will bury his lover, and all their children, and probably their grandchildren as well. There lies a decent tragic plot line.

Plus you can have all the racism you want as long as the moral at the end is "Racism is bad".

Not only was it covered, it actually happened. Drizzt has had to bury all of his friends save Wulfgar, and that one only because he went back north before he died of old age. Catti-bre and Regis were killed in the Spellplague, Bruenor was killed in battle against a Pit Fiend in ye olde Dwarf Homeland. They reincarnated because Forgotten Realms, but he did have to watch them all die. His lesson there was "its one thing to know its going to happen and be at peace with that, another thing to live through it."

[Dargaron]

Not only was it covered, it actually happened. Drizzt has had to bury all of his friends save Wulfgar, and that one only because he went back north before he died of old age. Catti-bre and Regis were killed in the Spellplague, Bruenor was killed in battle against a Pit Fiend in ye olde Dwarf Homeland. They reincarnated because Forgotten Realms, but he did have to watch them all die. His lesson there was "its one thing to know its going to happen and be at peace with that, another thing to live through it."

In addition to that, basically half of The Lone Drow was Drizzt interacting with an elf whose primary narrative purpose was to exposit on how elves interact with the shorter-lived races, because he believed all his companions had died. The jist of it was, "live in the moment and make sure to forget after a while."

[BloodSquirrel]

Honestly, if they did make a Drizzt movie, whether it's super violent and gory or not is probably the last thing I'd be concerned about. I'd be far more worried about whether they would intend to keep the extremely clumsy racism metaphors, and the rather squicky relationship with Catti-brie (she was 8 when they first met; he basically helped raise her).


I'm with you on that one. There's plenty of compelling material to work with there, but quite frankly the Drizzt books I read were embarrassingly clunky, with emphasis on the "embarrassing" part. I've been caught by co-workers playing boffer larps and I wasn't half as embarrassed as I was after reading some of R.A. Salvatore's prose to myself in the privacy of my own home.

I feel sorry for anyone rooting for a truly faithful adaptation, but any actual Drizzt stories from the books are going to need a lot of polishing before they're ready for general audiences.

[dehro]

Coming in late in this debate..
I have the feeling that the only way they can possibly do a "good" D&D story is by crafting a good original story set in Faerun, where the main characters encounter the various factions and maybe a few interesting cameos by named heroes of Faerun...
lots of fanservice, but served on a bed of quality storytelling, decently acted and with some good CGI.
anything else has a high risk of starting mediocre and devolving in terrible..
they could insert the players/DM in the plot and pull a jumanji..but it's been done, and everybody is going to start nitpicking the choices of those who would necessarily be self aware characters.. and anything other than that would just be a generic fantasy or fantastic comedy...both of which, no thank you.

[Hopeless]

They've done an animated Dragonlance movie which had problems, the Scourge of Worlds was set in Greyhawk and the animation was so so but still better than the Dragonlance movie.

The first d&d movie was apparently rushed to prevent the Fellowship of the Ring beating it, which it did anyway.

The Wrath of the Dragon God was better, though still not as good as the Lord of the Rings obviously.

The Book of Vile Darkness well like the Jeremy Irons one ignored clerics other than Tom Baker, this one stuck to one god who turned away from the world despite there being a freaking pantheon!

The second at least had a decent cleric despite what happened.

I hope they don't go Faerun for this as there are far too many ways to go wrong, I'd rather they'd go with something similar to Dorkness Rising but only time will tell.

There are hints it might go Jack Black in tone (without him), but here's hoping its actually good.

[Anonymouswizard]

They've done an animated Dragonlance movie which had problems,

I enjoyed that film, but it really needed to be two movies. And either do everything in 2D animation or everything in 3D.

Also, didn't the first D&D movie end up having to use an earlier script instead of a later one which fixed some of the issues?

[Rogar Demonblud]

I think they shot part on one script, stopped for a heavy rewrite, then shot the rest of the movie without reshoots on any of the stuff already done.

[dehro]

They've done an animated Dragonlance movie which had problems, the Scourge of Worlds was set in Greyhawk and the animation was so so but still better than the Dragonlance movie.

The first d&d movie was apparently rushed to prevent the Fellowship of the Ring beating it, which it did anyway.

The Wrath of the Dragon God was better, though still not as good as the Lord of the Rings obviously.

The Book of Vile Darkness well like the Jeremy Irons one ignored clerics other than Tom Baker, this one stuck to one god who turned away from the world despite there being a freaking pantheon!

The second at least had a decent cleric despite what happened.

I hope they don't go Faerun for this as there are far too many ways to go wrong, I'd rather they'd go with something similar to Dorkness Rising but only time will tell.

There are hints it might go Jack Black in tone (without him), but here's hoping its actually good.

you missed the part where I said a "Good" story, lol..

If they are going the "Dorkness rising" route, then I'd rather they didn't.
Dorkness rising works so well because it's a low budget amateurish tribute to something everybody involved loves.
scale that up to Hollywood standards and you end up with, at best, another knights of Badassdom, which was fun, but really barely memorable and a far cry from what the existing DnD movies could have been if they'd been given proper love, funding and care.


Whether it be Faerun or an entirely new setting (that would/could concurrently become a new setting to play in with a book published alongside the distribution of the movie), DnD as a concept and as a "world" offers the potential to create an entire movie universe in the style of the MCU..
Think of it as of a generic, high quality fantasy story with an original plot, that rests on a backdrop of a known and shared universe, much like your Harry Potter movies are set in a world that responds to the logics and dynamics of the real world as we experience it, plus an extra scoop of magic.

Not that I think it will ever come to that, unless the initial movie really knocks it out of the park, but a guy can dream.
the point really is that the experience of playing DnD is just not replicable on screen in any other format than watching a bunch of people play.. (and maybe visualize the scenes of what they're doing?).. and doing so exposes whoever writes the script to the hordes of "well.. actually, that rule doesn't work that way/the logical action of that player should have been/he's metagaming"...

so.. I'd rather have a straight up fantasy movie, where the connection with DnD is in the setting, the occasional cameo, the generic "roles" of the characters and so on.. than some attempt at recreating a gaming experience, which is most likely doomed to fail.
does that still make it a D&D movie? I won't know until I see it.

If d&d inspires a few Hollywood people to make a good new fantasy themed franchise, I'll be happy enough as it is.

[Dargaron]

so.. I'd rather have a straight up fantasy movie, where the connection with DnD is in the setting, the occasional cameo, the generic "roles" of the characters and so on.. than some attempt at recreating a gaming experience, which is most likely doomed to fail.
does that still make it a D&D movie? I won't know until I see it.

If d&d inspires a few Hollywood people to make a good new fantasy themed franchise, I'll be happy enough as it is.

I definitely agree with this take.

I mean, it's not like WotC is starved for bite-sized adventure concepts. Even just an adaptation of a low-level mystery adventure like Jerimond's Orb or a short dungeon crawl like Tomb of the Overseers would have enough content to fill 75-90 minutes of runtime, would be unquestionably Dungeons and Dragons, but would require almost no explanation of setting to casual viewers. Jerimond's Orb is a fairly self-contained story about travelers coming upon an isolated village and dealing with the curse within while surviving attacks by strange nocturnal beasts. Tomb of the Overseers is a fairly easily-understandable "King in the Mountain" plot where the PCs are hired to find and awaken a Hero of Old in order to deal with <Magic Bad Guy #3>.

You have to play the genre straight a bit before you start taking the mickey at it's eccentricities. Otherwise it's just mean-spirited.

[Rogar Demonblud]

You say mean-spirited, I say incoherent. If you don't know what someone is riffing on, they're just speaking gibberish.

[Gam]

With Chris Pine and Michelle Rodriguez, the d&d movie will definitely be Forgotten Realms...it has pretty much become the default campaign setting at this point. Critical Role Tal Dorei is of course very popular too but doubt that for the first movie, they will do anything else besides FR.

[Rogar Demonblud]

Why would anyone expect otherwise, when Hasbro has locked away every other setting and publicly declared repeatedly that only the Realms is worthy of their time and their dime?

[Anonymouswizard]

Why would anyone expect otherwise, when Hasbro has locked away every other setting and publicly declared repeatedly that only the Realms is worthy of their time and their dime?

I'm still shocked that a decent setting got a book, but Rising from the Last War was the first nonPhB book I bought for 5e. I plan to not see the film and thus suggest that maybe they should invested in settings that aren't the PreciselyDocumented Realms.

[Tvtyrant]

On what I would like to see: An Aboleth movie would be fun. The God in the Lake adventure as a horror movie where a group of established but low level adventurers go to a town run by an Aboleth and eventually fight it would be fun.

[Rogar Demonblud]

Truly I want them to create something new. Not just to avoid the feeling of reheating last year's leftovers while fighting off waves of whining fanbois and/or fangrrls, but because I am frankly bored to tears with most of their settings. And let's face it, anybody who would be drawn in by %%% Setting in the promo material would already be showing up because of the D&D Movie subtitle===and the total of such people isn't even a rounding error in the box office.

[Hopeless]

What setting or set up for this movie would you hope for?

1) A take on the Sinbad series where it deals with a trade ship that either goes off course or ends up on a quest following arriving at a location and discovering something terrible has happened and they need to get the warning out?

2) A regular meet up at a tavern and end up on a treasure hunt to a ruin that's home to a lot more than a long forgotten treasure?

3) A dragon attack causes massive havoc and a group of survivors end up teaming up to survive the trek to the nearest point of safety eventually forming the bonds that lead to them becoming adventurers'?

Care to add your own option?

[Rogar Demonblud]

No Save-The-World plots. I am so ****ing tired of Save The World.

You want this to be a D&D movie, you pretty much need to set it up so the monster to fight is WOTC IP. That's not a deep bench. Beholders, Illithids and Aboleth are the strongest candidates.

[Hopeless]

No chosen one tropes too I assume?

I'd like a regular adventure where we initially think the humans are the main cast then discover some of the cast aren't who we thought they were.

For example a small group of adventurer's composed of locals from a village meeting and they're accompanied by a grizzled veteran former soldier and a local herbalist.

The four are still finding their feet as they encounter threats such as a group of goblins, a skeleton uprising and that sort where they initially don't listen to the veteran forcing the herbalist to intervene until they finally get a clue.

Its only after they find themselves the future they want joining other adventuring groups that they upon looking back as they attend the veteran's funeral and notice their cleric's behaving strangely in the presence of the herbalist who doesn't appear to have aged at all.

Then in the closing scenes we learn she's almost 250 years old and a legendary hero who knew the veteran back from the war he fought in as a child and she only came along as she knew this would be his last adventure and wanted to be there at the end.

Just because we know what elves look like that doesn't mean we can't be surprised to learn nobody is what they appear after all!

[Ogre Mage]

Rege-Jean Page, star of the alternate history English period drama Bridgerton has been cast in the D&D movie.

http:///www.hollywoodreporter.com/heat-vision/bridgerton-breakout-rege-jean-page-to-star-in-dungeons-dragons-exclusive

[Saintheart]

Rege-Jean Page, star of the alternate history English period drama Bridgerton has been cast in the D&D movie.

http:///www.hollywoodreporter.com/heat-vision/bridgerton-breakout-rege-jean-page-to-star-in-dungeons-dragons-exclusive

Well, at least he has experience with fantasy settings that casually do burnouts over reality...

[Mordar]

Newly announced...Hugh Grant will be phoning in a performance as a "villain" in the film.

Anyone think that a good choice? Unless it is a clever rom-com triangle storyline, I'm not thrilled. His more serious turns have been okay, but somewhat limited.

- M

[Rogar Demonblud]

As if I wasn't already in the 'wait until I can see it for free on SyFy' camp...

[Tyrant]

Newly announced...Hugh Grant will be phoning in a performance as a "villain" in the film.

Anyone think that a good choice? Unless it is a clever rom-com triangle storyline, I'm not thrilled. His more serious turns have been okay, but somewhat limited.

- M

I kind of liked him as the cannibal in Cloud Atlas.

[Kitten Champion]

Having seen Paddington 2. Grant gets a free ride from me from now on.

[Dire_Flumph]

Having seen Paddington 2. Grant gets a free ride from me from now on.

I kind of felt the same way about The Pirates! In an Adventure with Scientists!, but anyone dissing the Paddington movies gets the hard stare.

[dehro]

I haven't seen them, and I have a hard time picturing Grant as a serious villain.. this worries me in terms of what they will use him for and what it means for the general tone of the movie.
it reeks of do-over of that thing with that one Wayans family member in it (can't remember which one of the terrible D&D movies that was).

[Scarlet Knight]

Hugh Grant works only if he's the villain in plain sight, who no one suspects because no one respects him. All the while he using that to his advantage & is pulling strings.

[Rogar Demonblud]

I haven't seen them, and I have a hard time picturing Grant as a serious villain.. this worries me in terms of what they will use him for and what it means for the general tone of the movie.
it reeks of do-over of that thing with that one Wayans family member in it (can't remember which one of the terrible D&D movies that was).

The first live action one.

[Rodin]

The first live action one.

I remember being vaguely interested when it came out, but ultimately not going to see it. Praise be to lethargy.

Ah-chachachacha!

[warty goblin]

I remember being vaguely interested when it came out, but ultimately not going to see it. Praise be to lethargy.

Ah-chachachacha!

The first D&D movie is bad. Like so bad it makes the Dragonlance animated movie look good, and that's so bad that typing the words 'makes the Dragonlance animated movie look good' causes me searing psychic pain. It's quite arguably the worst movie I've ever actually watched all of. Bonus terrible trivia: when I watched it a zillion years ago on DVD it had an alternative ending, which was actually almost sort of OK. I nearly felt an emotion. The actual ending they went with was just plain terrible though.

That's right, the first D&D movie is literally worse than itself. It's a singularity of badness; a suckularity.

[JadedDM]

I remember being vaguely interested when it came out, but ultimately not going to see it. Praise be to lethargy.

Ah-chachachacha!

I saw it in theaters when it came out.

Even my huge crush on Thora Birch at the time was not enough to save that movie for me. It was the first time I ever wanted to just walk out. I only stayed until the end due to the sunk cost fallacy.

[Anonymouswizard]

The first D&D movie is bad. Like so bad it makes the Dragonlance animated movie look good, and that's so bad that typing the words 'makes the Dragonlance animated movie look good' causes me searing psychic pain. It's quite arguably the worst movie I've ever actually watched all of. Bonus terrible trivia: when I watched it a zillion years ago on DVD it had an alternative ending, which was actually almost sort of OK. I nearly felt an emotion. The actual ending they went with was just plain terrible though.

That's right, the first D&D movie is literally worse than itself. It's a singularity of badness; a suckularity.

I'm honesty not sure which ending is the one I prefer, I've heard it's the theatrical one but the DVD I saw called it an alternate ending. For the record my preferred one is the one where Ridley walks away from the grave instead of the weird crystal light balls one.

But that movie had potential, it just needed a lot of editing and rewriting. I fully believe that the script they wanted to use was mediocre instead of the worst tabletop RPG related project to have been released to the public at the time (sadly it was surpassed within a couple of years).

[Mordar]

But that movie had potential, it just needed a lot of editing and rewriting. I fully believe that the script they wanted to use was mediocre instead of the worst tabletop RPG related project to have been released to the public at the time (sadly it was surpassed within a couple of years).

I...it...I can still just barely speak of it. I remember being torn between my intense dislike for the movie and my hopes that we would get more fantasy theatrical releases...so even though I hated it in theaters I bought the VHS when it came out...and never watched it again.

I can't even see rescuing it...it felt like a "burn it to the ground and start over" opportunity.

- M

[Dire_Flumph]

I can call out some positives (and I'll list the 1st sequel as a guilty pleasure), but yeah, it was a stinker. Worse than the Dragons of Autumn Twilight movie though? I wouldn't go that far.

I missed it in theaters and watched it on DVD, I grabbed the disc used shortly after I got my first player. The behind the scenes stuff on there was actually fascinating. I hope he's learned from the experience, but this guy had no business being put in charge of a film like this, and some of the stuff in the commentary and making of is just jaw-dropping.

Like, the entire backstory was given to a scene delivered by a CGI creature that they ran out of money to actually render. So they skipped over all the exposition actually explaining the backstory and plot! (It's between the scenes where the two leads teleport into the scroll and when they pop back they're arguing)

[Hopeless]

I still wonder why the son of what I assume was an inventor that came across like a minor wizard or artificer had the ability to do that when not even a fully trained wizard noticed?

Now if only they made better use of his past in the prologue so it actually meant something when that came up!

Always felt weird they'd feeble mind his father and not have some kind of payoff where we discover its because he solved that riddle of that scroll and his refusal got him and his family killed. His son (Ridley) only escaping because he was out frolicking on the rooftops with Snails as a form of teenaged rebellion only to witness his mother being escorted off by someone later revealed to be Damodar.

Perhaps reveal his family are blood descendants of that imprisoned lich who tried to control the dragons with his version of the dragon rod so it was also his destiny to redeem his family for what his ancestor did.

And don't use beholders as freaking guard dogs!

Oh and someone explain to Marlon Wayans how rogues are supposed to work!
(Don't leave the rope behind as thats evidence you've broken in so you could then use said rope to either clamber down that wall or use it to distract Damodar whilst you snuck out the way you got on that rampart in the first place!)

Now a remake done properly would be nice wouldn't mind Jeremy Irons reprising his role along with Bruce Payne if he's interested!

[russdm]

Personally still a fan of Blackadder.

Which I suppose could easily translate into DnD ...


The show has always been great, but it is at its heart, historical comedy. So probably not DnD translatable, at least not easily.



Oh man. I'd kill someone for a Blackadder in the Forgotten Realms series.

Can we get Rowan Atkinson to play snarky old mentor to the adventuring party?


It is a fun idea, just not sure how much that would work though.



Hmmmmmm... Lord Blackadder would probably be a Noble Rogue with Baldrick as his retainer, maybe Percy could be a Fighter? Or would that more be Bob? Lord Flashheart is clearly a Bard, I think we might be onto something here!


You do know that each of the characters would work best as Bards, due to their amazing comedic timing? Lord Flashheart is a Bard/Fighter. Bob is Bob, Lord B is Bard/Rogue, Baldrick is a Bard/Bard, Percy is Bard/Rogue.



I enjoyed that film, but it really needed to be two movies. And either do everything in 2D animation or everything in 3D.

Also, didn't the first D&D movie end up having to use an earlier script instead of a later one which fixed some of the issues?


Actually going with 2D animation would have worked, while the film was appallingly bad with that 3D animation that was available at the time. And I happen to think that the entire crew deserves an Oscar nomination for actually deciding to release the film at the stage it was in rather than spend time to get more money and resources to finish it more. Plus, it is pretty good, if you accept that it was made in Hollywood principle and existences for the "lowest common minded viewer/viewers-are-goldfishy" film methodology.



I'm honesty not sure which ending is the one I prefer, I've heard it's the theatrical one but the DVD I saw called it an alternate ending. For the record my preferred one is the one where Ridley walks away from the grave instead of the weird crystal light balls one.

But that movie had potential, it just needed a lot of editing and rewriting. I fully believe that the script they wanted to use was mediocre instead of the worst tabletop RPG related project to have been released to the public at the time (sadly it was surpassed within a couple of years).


The original cut ending is actually good, and works better. Just add in the glowing ruby and Ridley walking away taking it with him (no weird light silly) and you have a rather good sequel thing as well.

As for the wraith in map seen...That shot is actually some decently nice bit of CGI, even if the Wraith is a paper/cardboard cut-out being hung up and some of the other bit. The scene is also a vital bonding moment for Ridley and Melina/Malina/Mage-Chick.

The better scene to have been cut is actually the one with that depicted Ridley's dream of the plant life. It doesn't work very well, is funky.

To be honest here, I actually liked the first DnD, because it works if you remember that its a Hollywood take, and Hollywood has always viewed DnD with a staggering degree of disrespect and disgust. Am I the only one who remembers the Tom Hanks' movie about/based on the investigation of the missing kid and how DnD was supposedly related? Dark Dungeons maybe, or Maze and Monsters? Then the general treatment that Hollywood has given to the game for a long time? I also liked the 2nd DnD movie, and Dorkness Rising more than the Gamers.

For movies:

Creating any kind of DnD film is going to have the requirement of establishing what the baseline idea is: is the story going to a party of players and DM bonding? a real world adventure (set in the fantasy setting) style? something else? That defines how you make the story.

Personally, I don't think it will be anything other than a by the numbers plotted summer action film. that's because, unlike Order of the Stick and a few other things, it's not exactly easy to create humor and plot from the rules mechanics and have it be compelling. (A problem displayed by the 2nd DnD movie) You really need to sell why I the viewer should care about your story, you person you.

So that means:

Any story selected is going to have enough exposition to make the characters both interesting and answer way stick with watching the characters go through the film. That means some things will naturally have to be cut out, the biggest of which should be everything relating to Raise dead and such spells because otherwise, i don't think anything in the story will become meaningful. Would Boromir's death scene in the Fellowship of the Ring have been as impactful if Aragorn could have had Boromir raised from the Dead after a short amount of time?

Because to be honest, the characters' abilities and levels are going to have to be low in order for making things work. Once you add some of what the higher level characters do, it completely changes the plot. Why go exploring the dank tomb when you can teleport right into the central chamber if you need? and with scrying available (if still is), you don't need the exploration. Then you have raise dead plus speak with dead. Someone assassinates the King? just employ raise dead or stronger such spells, or just cast speak with dead and find out. Both remove the dramatic tension in a snap.

Also, give the slightly lowered NPC power craze from what it was in earlier editions (looking at FR here, since people naturally die or pass the torch in dragonlance), finding somebody who can raise the dead king becomes a thing to be done, making the death pretty meaningless. Sure, you can go after the responsible parts, but the king is back and can do that too. Another part of Forgotten Realms' NPC power craze, most of why you should do the plot versus the others goes away.

Which is were the basic metagame-metaplot in FR has never worked. The NPC power craze of so many NPCs and how if you actually used them as being their actual alignments were and acting as such. A holy Paladin who fights evil is not going to care about being over-leveled for that measly aspiring necromancer raising zombies for some army. It's a big amount of total BS over the "Concerns of the Mighty" in the 3rd FR core rulebook. Don't give an alignment to a character even an NPC one without expecting it to be used. Or items in treasure that can easily solve problems with the belief in them being used. Looking at Red Hand of Doom on that one.

That brings up healing and Healing Magic. A person can experience a serious amount of various injuries and such that would kill a real person after a bit of time has passed, but with a few spells, that person will in near prefect condition afterward. That is not really going to work as well for dramatic near death scenes, since a quick few heals and boom that person is back on their feet and fully healthy again. unless you are playing the awkward near death love declarations.

which puts me in mind of another Red Hand of Doom point: the same item that applies to the above point as applies again in regards to the order of the stick. Had the item, a staff of life, been given to the party before going into the dungeon and fighting xykon, the story/comic would have been way over by now. Why, might you ask? well, because the staff of life has the spell "Heal" in it and Xykon is a Lich. Make the addition, seriously.

So, for making a movie, I think that we are looking at going with a group of persons that work together to becoming an adventuring group/band that also deals with their hometown issues. That would work the very best in my opinion for a story. Easy to make with the background exposition you need, the special effects won't be hugely expensive, and you can rely on pretty easily relatable plots and you don't have the other major issue for dealing with storytelling.

That problem being Linear Warriors, Quadratic Wizards. Which was more a problem in 3rd and 3.5 really. Along with the Tiers, CoDzilla. That affects what you can write in terms of interesting plots.

I think that they could do some Drizzt, but really, I would lean more heavily into an original story that could be made from the ground up, no angry fans complaining about something Drizzt, since you know that is going to happen. A new original group and story will be able to do stuff better than anything else could really, plus you have the benefit of not treading on anything favorited. Drizzt could do a cameo. Important events and things could be name dropped.

What I would like to see:

A holy knight or paladin type that smites evil, or a knight more towards a Knight Templar that smites enemies

A cleric or worshipper that follows a made up deity or follows an ideal that actually works as something that would give you divine power, especially since WotC will probably not make any deity serving clerics, but Atheist ones.

a nature type that is not a freaking hippie. One that is either about the value/need of nature with the cycles of nature, or one that is all about that "Nature red in tooth and claw" and goes all Kar from Star Wars Legends Shatterpoint style

a spellcaster that does not, for the love of gygax and every designer of the game, employ vancian casting without some good explanation of how it works and doesn't conform to some wizard thing. Make a sorcerer, or warlock, or how about a wizard character that has a bunch of words that mean stuff which they combine to then cast spells, like taking the word "fire" and "ball/orb/etc" to cast the Fireball spell

a rogue type that has decided if they are going to be a thief or a robin hood rob the rich give to the poor, or a self-centered rogue who is only interested in providing for their personal benefit.

As for races: Definitely one or more humans, a tiefling or dragonborn, a half-elf with an actual elven side that isn't just Human but the immortal/long lived guy, (I am thinking this should be like Spock or Elrond), some elves that aren't just discount Tolkien elves, so like Vulcans or Romulans, or how the different elves are portrayed in the LotR movies, not the usual DnD, long lived human semi-different wannabe. Also for that Half-elf, get rid of their pasty Emo thing, and give them actual stuff about the mixing of Human and Elf, like Spock again. Drop that crappy unrealistic, "I don't know if I want to live with elves or humans" angsty crap.

If you are going to include a half-orc, then don't shy from any of the racist crap they get. And don't try to equate any of it with the Half-elf's usual moping. Being viewed as a product of Rape from a savage race is not the same as dealing with just not being sure about living with pointy eared humans and non-pointy eared humans with neither elves or humans being ever as unwelcoming of half-elves as half-orcs always get. That crap was pretty dumb before, and half-elves should be like Spock more, if you want to make which heritage they (half-elves) follow actually worth me caring about.

Lastly, cut the short folk in the party out. You don't need a dwarf, you don't need a halfling, and you sure don't need a gnome. especially if you aren't going to give them any interesting charactizations. How many basically scottish dwarves do we need here?

so, yeah.

[Hopeless]

Some interesting ideas there.
I wonder whether they'll go for some link to d&d like that suggestion about the Hand of Vecna?
If you had the chance to choose the setting or the adventure which one would you pick?

[russdm]

Some interesting ideas there.
If you had the chance to choose the setting or the adventure which one would you pick?

i like the idea of them using baldur's gate as a setting or maybe waterdeep. Both are pretty well known, Baldur's gate from the games, and waterdeep for how much a "London" capital place the realms has in portrayal.

Plus, being decently sized cities allows for WotC to indulge in as much diversity they may want to have, with appeals to as many different demographics as possible.

[dehro]

Some interesting ideas there.
I wonder whether they'll go for some link to d&d like that suggestion about the Hand of Vecna?
If you had the chance to choose the setting or the adventure which one would you pick?
A whodunit in the style of the name of the rose or a heist movie, but with magic and dragons, set at Candlekeep.. By the end of the movie, the protagonists can go explore the wider universe/sword coast..
Or an original setting

[Hopeless]

A whodunit in the style of the name of the rose or a heist movie, but with magic and dragons, set at Candlekeep.. By the end of the movie, the protagonists can go explore the wider universe/sword coast..
Or an original setting

Perhaps the villain is hunting a member of the order unaware they're mentoring a monk whose actually a gold dragon in disguise and the villain's minions deaths is what starts off the mystery as it appears some unknown monster is targeting the monks when its actually protecting them?

[Splinterverse]

I want so badly for there to be a good D&D movie, but I'd prefer a series. There's so much lore out there to mine. Maybe they'll make a successful movie and then it will spawn a series?

[Clertar]

A whodunit in the style of the name of the rose or a heist movie, but with magic and dragons, set at Candlekeep.. By the end of the movie, the protagonists can go explore the wider universe/sword coast..
Or an original setting

Baldur's Gate :smallwink:

[dehro]

Baldur's Gate :smallwink:

or.. the name of the rose...

[Palanan]

Originally Posted by Dire_Flumph
Like, the entire backstory was given to a scene delivered by a CGI creature that they ran out of money to actually render. So they skipped over all the exposition actually explaining the backstory and plot!

They couldn't have just...given the lines to a real actor? Changed the character so it was no longer CGI?

[Eldan]

Yeah, that. I mean, "I will now transform into a human to talk to you". Done.

[Hopeless]

I wonder how they'd handle a fantasy version of The Name of the Rose?

Perhaps it starts off with a monastery that has a few villages nearby providing what they normally can't obtain without help.

An unexplained death causing some confusion and eventually the go to the monastery seeking aid.

Whilst they send off for aid from a nearby settlement to get them to send a sheriff and perhaps a party to assist the monks sent to help allied with the local villagers try to investigate.

Except the problem appears to be actually supernatural in origin rather than in the movie's case a poisoned book.

A couple of more deaths occur but these aren't locals but visitors who were staying out in the wilds as they were apparently linked to the first death as the trio were suspected of causing some theft and acts of violence in the area that was largely overlooked.

The reason they were overlooked is because the first death was the son of a local Mayor or village leader and has been protected from the local law until his untimely death.

The reason the cause appears supernatural is that all three have injuries caused by some form of magic, one due to a massive blow that cauterised the victim's body and the others by some kind of necrosis that may have caused their death.

The monks call in what few true students of the arcane they have with one suspecting its not arcane in nature but divine however there are only a couple of divine casters in the area one a travelling herbalist and the other hasn't left the monastery in the last two decades.

Talking with the herbalist who turns out to be a plain faced woman who claims to have been attacked but drove off her attackers although she doesn't know how badly they were hurt.

The party of monks and villagers who examine where she said the attack took place find nothing to suggest it was the same group who were slain.

Then the sheriff and his party arrive and we get the inquisitor who questions why the herbalist has been allowed to practice her profession despite not being a follower of his faith.

Its clear she hasn't been trying to convert anyone, but has refused to convert herself as she follows a family faith.

The Inquisitor discovers the presence of others he consider profane and begins trying to bring them to "justice" despite them not committing any crime other than what his extremist views consider abhorent.

This leads to a violent encounter that gets a couple of villagers killed as he eggs on more devoted followers to deal with these trangressors.

Ultimately the inquisitor is killed and when the sheriff attempts to locate his killer the monk who was sent to investigate finally figures out what had happened.

The monk presents his argument that the village leader's son and his two friends whilst drunk attacked a local who swiftly drove them off but the injuries killed the village leader's son and locals drove off the pair where they died out in the wilds at the hands of other similar lawless wanderers out there.

The Inquisitor's actions got himself killed as he attacked a local woman thinking her defenceless only to be driven off, before he ended up drowning when he fled the scene making his death purely accidental.

As we see what transpired via his description we also discover he spoke to the cleric in the monastery who revealed the herbalist is actually a fey creature whose son the cleric had killed during one of the various pograms intended to weed out the impure when he was just as fanatical as the inquisitor.

The Herbalist hunted down and killed everyone involved in the murder of her son and his wife and had remained watching over the monastery in case the cleric broke his word to remain here until he died to fulfil his pledge as an apology to her.

Its then we learn she's actually been watching over her grandson who was the one who actually killed the three men and drowned the inquisitor.

The Grandson we learn is one of the villager's helping the monk.

The sheriff accepts the Inquisitor's death was accidental and eventually relents on the others heading back to the city with the inquisitor's body so it can be properly cremated.

The monk speaks to the herbalist as its now he is finally introduced to her grandson who seems intent on leaving the area with his grandmother who was never intent on watching the elderly cleric die in his isolation but was trying to guide her grandson back from the vengeance he wanted.

The monk decides to accompany them firmly believing he can help the pair and maybe see some of the world before returning to the monastery.

Very different but how would you handle that movie in a fantasy setting?

[dehro]

I wonder how they'd handle a fantasy version of The Name of the Rose?

Perhaps it starts off with a monastery that has a few villages nearby providing what they normally can't obtain without help.

An unexplained death causing some confusion and eventually the go to the monastery seeking aid.

Whilst they send off for aid from a nearby settlement to get them to send a sheriff and perhaps a party to assist the monks sent to help allied with the local villagers try to investigate.

Except the problem appears to be actually supernatural in origin rather than in the movie's case a poisoned book.

A couple of more deaths occur but these aren't locals but visitors who were staying out in the wilds as they were apparently linked to the first death as the trio were suspected of causing some theft and acts of violence in the area that was largely overlooked.

The reason they were overlooked is because the first death was the son of a local Mayor or village leader and has been protected from the local law until his untimely death.

The reason the cause appears supernatural is that all three have injuries caused by some form of magic, one due to a massive blow that cauterised the victim's body and the others by some kind of necrosis that may have caused their death.

The monks call in what few true students of the arcane they have with one suspecting its not arcane in nature but divine however there are only a couple of divine casters in the area one a travelling herbalist and the other hasn't left the monastery in the last two decades.

Talking with the herbalist who turns out to be a plain faced woman who claims to have been attacked but drove off her attackers although she doesn't know how badly they were hurt.

The party of monks and villagers who examine where she said the attack took place find nothing to suggest it was the same group who were slain.

Then the sheriff and his party arrive and we get the inquisitor who questions why the herbalist has been allowed to practice her profession despite not being a follower of his faith.

Its clear she hasn't been trying to convert anyone, but has refused to convert herself as she follows a family faith.

The Inquisitor discovers the presence of others he consider profane and begins trying to bring them to "justice" despite them not committing any crime other than what his extremist views consider abhorent.

This leads to a violent encounter that gets a couple of villagers killed as he eggs on more devoted followers to deal with these trangressors.

Ultimately the inquisitor is killed and when the sheriff attempts to locate his killer the monk who was sent to investigate finally figures out what had happened.

The monk presents his argument that the village leader's son and his two friends whilst drunk attacked a local who swiftly drove them off but the injuries killed the village leader's son and locals drove off the pair where they died out in the wilds at the hands of other similar lawless wanderers out there.

The Inquisitor's actions got himself killed as he attacked a local woman thinking her defenceless only to be driven off, before he ended up drowning when he fled the scene making his death purely accidental.

As we see what transpired via his description we also discover he spoke to the cleric in the monastery who revealed the herbalist is actually a fey creature whose son the cleric had killed during one of the various pograms intended to weed out the impure when he was just as fanatical as the inquisitor.

The Herbalist hunted down and killed everyone involved in the murder of her son and his wife and had remained watching over the monastery in case the cleric broke his word to remain here until he died to fulfil his pledge as an apology to her.

Its then we learn she's actually been watching over her grandson who was the one who actually killed the three men and drowned the inquisitor.

The Grandson we learn is one of the villager's helping the monk.

The sheriff accepts the Inquisitor's death was accidental and eventually relents on the others heading back to the city with the inquisitor's body so it can be properly cremated.

The monk speaks to the herbalist as its now he is finally introduced to her grandson who seems intent on leaving the area with his grandmother who was never intent on watching the elderly cleric die in his isolation but was trying to guide her grandson back from the vengeance he wanted.

The monk decides to accompany them firmly believing he can help the pair and maybe see some of the world before returning to the monastery.

Very different but how would you handle that movie in a fantasy setting?

for starters, clearly the book is a mimic

[Hopeless]

Just "a" book, why not an entire library....:smalleek: