New Dungeons & Dragons movie...?

[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?