# D&D movie sequel update.



## Upper_Krust (Jul 9, 2005)

Hey all! 

I spotted the following post from WotC bigwig Charles Ryan about the D&D movie sequel:

http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?t=460423



			
				Charles Ryan said:
			
		

> A submission contest, like the one that resulted in the publication of Eberron, would be a pretty cool idea for coming up with a D&D movie plot. Unfortunately, it won't happen any time soon--but not for any of the reasons cited in this thread. Let me give you a little bit of the scoop on the D&D movie saga.
> 
> *Background:* Many years ago, TSR (this was before WotC) licensed the rights to the D&D movie. The contract did not give TSR (and its successor, WotC) much ability to contribute to or oversee the movie, and the license basically can't be revoked and won't expire any time soon. So the licensee can basically make whatever movie they want, and we have very little ability to do anything about it. If it sounds to you like TSR made a pretty crappy deal for themselves, well, it sounds that way to us, too, but that's simply the reality of the situation.
> 
> ...




Fingers crossed everybody.


----------



## AdmundfortGeographer (Jul 9, 2005)

> Where We Are Now: Again, Silver Pictures could make any movie they wanted, without our input. But they figured we might know something about what makes D&D, well, D&D, so they asked us for our input. They already had a script, and we were able to help them make the script more D&D-ish. We were able to send a representative to the filming location, and to provide a lot of tips on costumes, sets, effects, and so on. They took a lot of our advice. They also ignored a fair bit of it.



This is indeed great news! ... if it survives editing... I'd like to know who the respresentative was.


----------



## Ranger REG (Jul 9, 2005)

I'm still skeptical. After all, in the first film, they did have _D&D_ co-creator Dave Arneson on as a technical consultant.

They can get as technical as they want. It all boils down to the story and whatever setting/stage they're using. Personally, I would go with featuring _Greyhawk_ right off the bat, not some Courtney Solomon's home-brewed childhood campaign.


----------



## Bass Puppet (Jul 10, 2005)

Three Letters........D.V.D.


----------



## Brother Shatterstone (Jul 10, 2005)

Bass Puppet said:
			
		

> Three Letters........D.V.D.



Two words…  Avoiding it.


----------



## Endur (Jul 10, 2005)

*Dragonlance*

Nuff said.


----------



## Aeson (Jul 10, 2005)

Endur said:
			
		

> Nuff said.



No!!! More must said. Shout it from the mountain tops. We must have a Dragonlance movie. LOTR was nothing. Dragonlance must be and will be the be all end all of Fantasy movies. Was that too much?


----------



## Kanegrundar (Jul 10, 2005)

I'm extremely skeptical on this one.  Like REG said, Arneson was a technical advisor on the first movie, though I doubt he got to add much, if anything, at all to the movie, and it still ended up as a steaming pile of poo.  Charles makes my feel a trifle bit better about it, but the fact that they still didn't listen to many of the points of the WotC folks doesn't fill me with glee by any means.  If the story is good and the characters are interesting, then even with a small budget it could still be worth to watch (though the FX may end up looking like something out of Hercules or Xena).  

Here's hoping, but cautiously so.

Kane


----------



## trancejeremy (Jul 10, 2005)

The trouble with it not sucking, is it still has that guy who wears the purple lipstick in it.    


One interesting thing is that it seems to be entirely English. All the actors seem to be from the UK, anyway.


Still, one thing I don't get, is that the guy who made the D&D movie made a lousy, but not truly awful movie (3.9 at IMDB), which probably almost broke even after DVD sales and apparently can't make another movie; yet Uwe Boll consistently makes some of the worst movies ever made (both HoTD and AITD are in the top 100 worst movies at IMDB), and yet studios seemingly can't wait to have him make more movies.

(Though now that I look on IMDB, it seems Mr. Solomon is directing a movie in 2006, apparently about the Bell Witch. But it took him 6 years to get over one bad movie)


----------



## Whizbang Dustyboots (Jul 10, 2005)

I must be the only one still wishing WotC would release their material they prepared for the first D&D movie. The teasers of their setting book were actually quite good -- needless to say, much better than the actual movie. And having the quicksand rug statted out on their site was quite nice, too.


----------



## Ranger REG (Jul 10, 2005)

Kanegrundar said:
			
		

> I'm extremely skeptical on this one.  Like REG said, Arneson was a technical advisor on the first movie, though I doubt he got to add much, if anything, at all to the movie, and it still ended up as a steaming pile of poo.  Charles makes my feel a trifle bit better about it, but the fact that they still didn't listen to many of the points of the WotC folks doesn't fill me with glee by any means.  If the story is good and the characters are interesting, then even with a small budget it could still be worth to watch (though the FX may end up looking like something out of Hercules or Xena).
> 
> Here's hoping, but cautiously so.



Well, there is nothing subtle about _D&D_ game's special effects. And I'm sure the technical _D&D_ gamers as well as rule lawyers are going to analyze the effects on screen or possibly the tactics the movie characters used. Again it all boils down to the story, and the fact that I am so spoiled by _The Lord of the Rings_ which used magic subtly or without additional flashing lights like the duel between Saruman and Gandalf inside the tower of Isengard.


----------



## Upper_Krust (Jul 10, 2005)

Hey all! 

I would be happy with a competant movie.

I was recently watching Conan the Destroyer. That is a fun, 'D&D style' movie that worked on a relatively small budget. Admittedly a touch light-hearted compared to 'Barbarian', its still an enjoyable romp. It keeps the viewers attention firmly on the party and doesn't require a cast of thousands (virtual or otherwise).

I just hope the D&D movie sequel doesn't try to over-reach itself, doesn't try to mimic 'Lord of the Rings' scale.


----------



## reveal (Jul 10, 2005)

Bass Puppet said:
			
		

> Three Letters........D.V.D.




Just because a movie is released straight to DVD does _not_ mean it will be a bad movie. I've seen many movies whose creators couldn't afford to put it into theaters and try to advertise it. These movies, while not always great, were not necessarily terrible.

With that, that does not mean I'm going to be running to the store to get this movie, that's for sure.

(Oh who am I kidding, yes I will! We all know we will, if nothing else so we can compare it to the first movie. )


----------



## Space monkey (Jul 11, 2005)

IMDB  said:
			
		

> *Plot Summary for
> Dungeons & Dragons 2: The Elemental Might <small>(2005)</small>*
> 
> Based on the phenomenally successful role-playing game, Dungeons & Dragons 2 takes you deeper into the dark and fantastical world of this fantasy epic. When the evil sorcerer Damodar braves a perilous whirlwind vortex to steal the elemental black orb he declares a sinister plan of vengeance against the kingdom of Ismir. Berek, a decorated warrior, and Melora, an amateur sorceress join four heroes representing Intelligence, Wisdom, Honor and Strength to battle against Damodar's growing army of gruesome creatures, flying harpies and an ice dragon to reach a vault room holding the orb. Together, they build their own army to retrieve the orb using elemental forces to defeat Damodar before he summons the sleeping black dragon whose omnipotent evil powers could lay waste to the entire kingdom.




Ok This has interesting ideas but to me it still looks like a linear story with no real plot.

Why don't WotC Get Ed Greenwood or Tracy Hickman and Margaret Weis. or any of the other great authors they have write out a story with great movie ideas and then work with a screen writer to turn it into a movie that actualy blows the D&D community to the edge of the seat or gaming table. 

Because the above is not promising.


----------



## Ranger REG (Jul 11, 2005)

Upper_Krust said:
			
		

> I just hope the D&D movie sequel doesn't try to over-reach itself, doesn't try to mimic 'Lord of the Rings' scale.



Nah. They'll save that epic scale for _Dragonlance,_ unless the second film bombed.

Personally, I would be satisfied if they give me as much enjoyment as _The Pirates of the Caribbean: The Curse of the Black Pearl._


----------



## Angel Tarragon (Jul 11, 2005)

I wish the talks of a Forgotten Realms show had actually seen fruition.


----------



## Upper_Krust (Jul 11, 2005)

Hey all! 

The synopsis sounds like a D&D adventure though, so you can't really criticise it for being too 'D&D'.

One good point about the sequel is this - if its straight to DVD, that means the producers will be targeting the movie towards those likely to buy the dvd...ie. D&D players. So surely we are at least going to get something that doesn't make you cringe this time.

The funny thing is, all the producers have to do is create a half way decent fantasy film and they'll have upwards of a million D&D players buying the dvd worldwide...and thats a fact.

In the long term, the D&D franchise could be bigger than Lord of the Rings, not only because D&D is an open book as it were, but there are also many worlds out there to explore that the fans are already familiar with: Greyhawk, Forgotten Realms, Ravenloft, Dragonlance, Eberron, etc. Each of these could begin their own mini-franchise, aslo each could add their own unique flavour: Ravenloft = Horror Fantasy, Dragonlance = Epic Fantasy, Eberron = Pulp Fantasy etc.

So in the same way that Superhero movies are now in vogue, fantasy movies could find favour over the next decade.


----------



## AdmundfortGeographer (Jul 11, 2005)

Space monkey said:
			
		

> Because the above is not promising.



And if a marketing person sat down at your game table to write a single, all-encompassing _paragraph length_ blurb describing what your campaign was all about, so that as many people as possible would be interested enough to come and see, how promising would that be? Would there be a bunch of other gamers sniping at how "unpromising" it was?


----------



## Henry (Jul 11, 2005)

A few points:



			
				Person quoting Charles Ryan said:
			
		

> They weren't willing to lay out the huge budget of the first film, but they were willing to make a moderately-budgeted film for DVD release.




The first movie had a budget of 30 million dollars. In Hollywood, this is not huge, it's the budget for the snack food table. 



			
				Aeson said:
			
		

> We must have a Dragonlance movie. LOTR was nothing. Dragonlance must be and will be the be all end all of Fantasy movies. Was that too much?




Speaking as a Dragonlance fan from the mid-1980's, I doubt a Dragonlance movie would be made because it would now be accused of being too derivative of Lord of the Rings because, basically, it is. Heroes start being chased from town by bad guys, Quest centered around an artifact, White-bearded wizard who dies heroically from a great fall and is reborn in his true power, Trip through a huge ruined city, trip through a Dwarven Delve (in LOTR these were combined), Fight against a big scaly creature with horns, gigantic war scenes, noble personage trying to bury his past and love with an elven woman, some heroes of moral ambiguity, etc. 

There are plenty of variations, mind you (and I'd LOVE to see Xak Tsaroth on screen), but the basic story borrows so heavily from LOTR the comparisons would be instant and merciless.


----------



## Ranger REG (Jul 12, 2005)

Henry said:
			
		

> There are plenty of variations, mind you (and I'd LOVE to see Xak Tsaroth on screen), but the basic story borrows so heavily from LOTR the comparisons would be instant and merciless.



Meh. That's why I'm a genre fan than a mainstream. Fat Ebert and "Gay-not-Gay?" Roeper can pan the _DL_ film but I still would go. In fact, I can't wait for them to review _Narnia._


----------



## GlassJaw (Jul 12, 2005)

Isn't Paris supposed to be in this movie?  If she is, I'll definitely watch it.


----------



## Truth Seeker (Jul 12, 2005)

GlassJaw said:
			
		

> Isn't Paris supposed to be in this movie? If she is, I'll definitely watch it.




Did you see her in the House of Wax?


----------



## Kaodi (Jul 12, 2005)

*D&D Movies*

Lots of D&D settings could be made into good movies... you just have to find the right story to make into a film...

While I may not be too horribly fond of it, Planescape would be cool if you could pull off the special effects and feelings for the different planes, though I wouldn't focus too much on the City of Doors, though if you introduced Sigil as the cliffhanger, it might be really cool...


----------



## barsoomcore (Jul 12, 2005)

I _liked_ the D&D movie. I'd watch more of those any day. Certainly better than _Conan The Destroyer_ or _Pirates of the Caribbean_.


----------



## Napftor (Jul 13, 2005)

barsoomcore said:
			
		

> I _liked_ the D&D movie. I'd watch more of those any day. Certainly better than _Conan The Destroyer_ or _Pirates of the Caribbean_.




Death to the troll!


----------



## Truth Seeker (Jul 13, 2005)

barsoomcore said:
			
		

> Certainly better than _Conan The Destroyer_ or _Pirates of the Caribbean_.



 I can give you the thumbs up on the former, on the latter...you got to be KIDDING me...:\


----------



## Truth Seeker (Jul 13, 2005)

Henry said:
			
		

> Speaking as a Dragonlance fan from the mid-1980's, I doubt a Dragonlance movie would be made because it would now be accused of being too derivative of Lord of the Rings because, basically, it is. Heroes start being chased from town by bad guys, Quest centered around an artifact, White-bearded wizard who dies heroically from a great fall and is reborn in his true power, Trip through a huge ruined city, trip through a Dwarven Delve (in LOTR these were combined), Fight against a big scaly creature with horns, gigantic war scenes, noble personage trying to bury his past and love with an elven woman, some heroes of moral ambiguity, etc.
> 
> There are plenty of variations, mind you (and I'd LOVE to see Xak Tsaroth on screen), but the basic story borrows so heavily from LOTR the comparisons would be instant and merciless.




Henry, that was clarity I did not see, now it sadden me, that any and all hope has been but all...diminished.


----------



## Dagger75 (Jul 13, 2005)

I didn't hate the D&D movie.  I think its gets an unfair beating by us gamers.  I saw it the day it came out and bought the DVD as well.  Could it have been better sure but it wasn't horrible.  I am personally looking forward to the new D&D movie and will more than likely see it on opening night.


----------



## Mouseferatu (Jul 13, 2005)

GlassJaw said:
			
		

> Isn't Paris supposed to be in this movie?  If she is, I'll definitely watch it.




You're kidding, right?



			
				Dagger75 said:
			
		

> I didn't hate the D&D movie.  I think its gets an unfair beating by us gamers.  I saw it the day it came out and bought the DVD as well.  Could it have been better sure but it wasn't horrible.




You're kidding, right?


----------



## Darth K'Trava (Jul 13, 2005)

barsoomcore said:
			
		

> I _liked_ the D&D movie. I'd watch more of those any day. Certainly better than _Conan The Destroyer_ or _Pirates of the Caribbean_.




I enjoyed Pirates of the Caribbean. It was a fun movie to watch. Despite the fact that you saw Sparrow "clones" at every con for a year or so afterwards (ie. Dragoncon)...


----------



## Ranger REG (Jul 13, 2005)

GlassJaw said:
			
		

> Isn't Paris supposed to be in this movie?  If she is, I'll definitely watch it.



Well, that's definitely a must-not-see movie. I'm so tired of Paris, I'd rather look at a fresh pile of poo just so I won't vomit at the sight of her.

IOW, she ain't that hot.


----------



## Ranger REG (Jul 13, 2005)

Dagger75 said:
			
		

> Could it have been better sure but it wasn't horrible.



Is that the exact same review you gave for _The Phantom Menace_?

Trust me, it's horrible. It's like giving a big-screen theatrical treatment of a made-for-TV movie, like _Star Trek V: The Final Frontier._


----------



## KenM (Jul 13, 2005)

Ranger REG said:
			
		

> Well, that's definitely a must-not-see movie. I'm so tired of Paris, I'd rather look at a fresh pile of poo just so I won't vomit at the sight of her.
> 
> IOW, she ain't that hot.




 Agreed, you can just tell she is fake, like J Lo, just something about them is not right.


----------



## Ranger REG (Jul 13, 2005)

KenM said:
			
		

> Agreed, you can just tell she is fake, like J Lo, just something about them is not right.



Fake or not, I'm just tired of her. Kinda like I am with Britney Spears (aka Mrs. Federline) and post-Genie pierced-out Cristina Aguilera. As for J-Lo, what's not right is her other half, Marc Anthony. The guy was married to an international beauty with children and he left them for Jen? That's like the Prince left Cinderella for her stepmother.


----------



## Sledge (Jul 13, 2005)

Actually I have to agree with Barsoomcore completely here.  I've seen so many entirely reprehensible fantasy movies, that D&D is nice to watch.  The really infuriating things are realizing that as an amateur to the industry he made so many mistakes.  Scenes that were necessary were cut, and acting on some parts was poor.  The DVD contains hints of this stuff in the deleted scenes part, but the novel adaptation fleshes out all those missing bits and suddenly the story is a lot less contrived.  For instance finding out that the Emperor was just days ago murdered by Profion, leaving his daughter in charge, changes the way you see her character.  Also the ending in which Snails was never supposed to be brought back, nor the power ranger teleport. (Both of which were actually insisted upon by New Line)


----------



## Ranger REG (Jul 13, 2005)

Sledge said:
			
		

> Actually I have to agree with Barsoomcore completely here.  I've seen so many entirely reprehensible fantasy movies, that D&D is nice to watch.  The really infuriating things are realizing that as an amateur to the industry he made so many mistakes.  Scenes that were necessary were cut, and acting on some parts was poor.  The DVD contains hints of this stuff in the deleted scenes part, but the novel adaptation fleshes out all those missing bits and suddenly the story is a lot less contrived.  For instance finding out that the Emperor was just days ago murdered by Profion, leaving his daughter in charge, changes the way you see her character.  Also the ending in which Snails was never supposed to be brought back, nor the power ranger teleport. (Both of which were actually insisted upon by New Line)



Are you actually defending Courtney Solomon (perhaps because of some connection or friendship with him)? Because I'd rather not change my mind about him.


----------



## Mouseferatu (Jul 13, 2005)

Ranger REG said:
			
		

> Well, that's definitely a must-not-see movie. I'm so tired of Paris, I'd rather look at a fresh pile of poo just so I won't vomit at the sight of her.
> 
> IOW, she ain't that hot.




I'm not tired of Paris Hilton.

"Tired of" implies that there was one point in time where I _didn't_ hate her with a screaming passion. But I always have, from the first day I learned who she was.

I cannot think of anyone in the spotlight these days who is less deserving of either her fame or fortune. I would be delighted--and no, I'm not kidding--to see her rendered bankrupt and unemployed.

*shudder*


----------



## David Howery (Jul 14, 2005)

wouldn't Spelljammer make a neat movie?  Sure, it's not a very popular D&D setting, but it would be visually neat... wooden ships of all kinds of bizarre shapes flying through space, propelled by magic...


----------



## AdmundfortGeographer (Jul 14, 2005)

David Howery said:
			
		

> wouldn't Spelljammer make a neat movie?  Sure, it's not a very popular D&D setting, but it would be visually neat... wooden ships of all kinds of bizarre shapes flying through space, propelled by magic...



Such as Treasure Planet?


----------



## David Howery (Jul 15, 2005)

can't say I saw that one... was that a Disney movie from a while back that was panned far and wide by critics?


----------



## Mustrum_Ridcully (Jul 15, 2005)

Mouseferatu said:
			
		

> I'm not tired of Paris Hilton.
> 
> "Tired of" implies that there was one point in time where I _didn't_ hate her with a screaming passion. But I always have, from the first day I learned who she was.
> 
> ...



I´d recommend to immediately stop talking (writing) about this ... person. You´re giving her too much attention... And I believe it isn´t good for your heat to enrage about it 

Back to topic:
The first movie was not good, I agree, but from a D&D gamer´s perspective, it had its merit. You could see most D&D rules & creatures in action. From an artistic perspective, it probably sucked


----------



## Turanil (Jul 15, 2005)

I bet that even if the new D&D movie is as bad as the first, and it still features this odious actress, most of us will rush to buy the DVD as soon as it is released. I know that I will do anyway, even if having for only expectation to be screaming of rage seeing the crap they will have done with it.


----------



## Ranger REG (Jul 18, 2005)

Turanil said:
			
		

> I bet that even if the new D&D movie is as bad as the first, and it still features this odious actress, most of us will rush to buy the DVD as soon as it is released.



Not I.


----------



## Ranger REG (Jul 18, 2005)

David Howery said:
			
		

> can't say I saw that one... was that a Disney movie from a while back that was panned far and wide by critics?



Not sure. But it was an adaptation of _Treasure Island,_ which Disney did a live-action movie way back when.


----------



## Fast Learner (Jul 18, 2005)

_Treasure Planet_ was not panned far and wide. It was liked by 3/4 of the critics that are statistically added at Rotten Tomatoes: http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/treasure_planet/

I thought it was pretty good, and definitely fits the genre.


----------



## barsoomcore (Jul 19, 2005)

Not a troll. Someone with occasionally (but not always) unpopular attitudes towards popular culture.

For example, I don't have any particular hate on for Paris Hilton. I think she's remarkably unattractive for a woman who gets her picture published so often, and I don't really understand why that happens but I don't know a blessed thing about her other than she's really rich and parties a lot. As far as I know she doesn't steal money, kidnap children or beat women, so she's ahead of a good portion of the human race, at any rate. So whatever. Save your hate for people who are bad, for crying out loud. There's no shortage of them, that's for sure.

And I still liked _D&D_ better than _Pirates_. _D&D_ was very much like a movie I would have made if somebody had asked me to make a D&D movie fifteen years ago. Nowadays I'd like to think I'd come up with something a little more interesting, but in my twenties I think I'd have come up with something pretty much like that. It was very much what my campaigns were like in those days, which is something I really liked about it. It was certainly made by somebody who'd played a lot of D&D and wanted to get that experience on screen.

They failed, no question. I'm not saying it ISN'T a bad movie. It's horrendous. But at least it gives the impression of having been made with love and imagination. And I'm fond of it for that reason. People are WAY too hard on it -- in a world where cynical crap like _Conan The Destroyer_ and _Pirates of the Caribbean_ get trumpeted as "fun", that an honest, uncomplicated (if pretty stupid and badly made) movie gets savaged with such violence strikes me as very unfair.

If it had been called _The Dragon's Staff_ people would be putting it up with _Beastmaster_ or _The Sword and the Sorcerer_, which is where it belongs (I don't think it's quite as good as either, but it's better than _Krull_, at least). It's just a cheesy fantasy movie, not out of line for that genre in terms of production value, acting ability, screenplay or direction. It's got some good stunts, okay swordfights, funny moments, charming leads, creepy (if spectacularly goofy (I'm looking at YOU, Jeremy)) bad guys, a few monsters and great big aerial dragon battle with explosions and everything.

It's just not that bad. Yes there are some spectacularly bad performances (I will never be able to take Thora Birch seriously as an actress). Yes there are some spectacularly bad costumes (what the HECK was that elf woman wearing? What was that thing?). Yes the story is simplistic beyond simplistic. Yes the beholders are stupid. Yes, yes, yes. Maybe people don't remember _Highlander_ all that well. Or _The Archer_. Or _Jason and the Argonauts_. There's a LOT of cheese in those movies. They wouldn't be what they are without the cheese. This was just one more cheesy fantasy movie, and I for one am proud to stand up say I like a little cheese in my fantasy.

It's better than peanut butter because, ew, sticky.


----------



## Masquerade (Jul 19, 2005)

> It's just not that bad. Yes there are some spectacularly bad performances (I will never be able to take Thora Birch seriously as an actress). Yes there are some spectacularly bad costumes (what the HECK was that elf woman wearing? What was that thing?). Yes the story is simplistic beyond simplistic. Yes the beholders are stupid. Yes, yes, yes. Maybe people don't remember Highlander all that well. Or The Archer. Or Jason and the Argonauts. There's a LOT of cheese in those movies. They wouldn't be what they are without the cheese. This was just one more cheesy fantasy movie, and I for one am proud to stand up say I like a little cheese in my fantasy.




I've got your back, here.  I liked the D&D movie, despite its flaws.  It may not have been a true adaptation of the game or even a well-made movie, but that doesn't mean I can't enjoy watching it.  I'll be there opening night for the sequel.


----------



## Truth Seeker (Jul 19, 2005)

GoblinMasquerade said:
			
		

> I'll be there opening night for the sequel.



Well, a opening night has several meanings.

1. At home.
2. On a portable DvD player, seen on the bus, plane or train.
3. At a matinee showing, cause, $9.50 to $10.50, is not worth the regular full price.


----------



## Ranger REG (Jul 19, 2005)

barsoomcore said:
			
		

> For example, I don't have any particular hate on for Paris Hilton. I think she's remarkably unattractive for a woman who gets her picture published so often, and I don't really understand why that happens but I don't know a blessed thing about her other than she's really rich and parties a lot. As far as I know she doesn't steal money, kidnap children or beat women, so she's ahead of a good portion of the human race, at any rate. So whatever. Save your hate for people who are bad, for crying out loud. There's no shortage of them, that's for sure.



I don't hate Paris Hilton, other than the fact that she can get things her way, like a TV series and a film role. I'm just tired of hearing her name keep coming up. And personally, I don't see the attraction most of you mainlanders see in her.




			
				barsoomcore said:
			
		

> And I still liked _D&D_ better than _Pirates_. _D&D_ was very much like a movie I would have made if somebody had asked me to make a D&D movie fifteen years ago.



With all due respect, I don't think you'd make a story that includes a kiddie-dungeon in a thieves' guild. Then again, I don't know you that well. The only one good thing from that movie I can say I like is Zoe McLellan.




			
				barsoomcore said:
			
		

> Nowadays I'd like to think I'd come up with something a little more interesting, but in my twenties I think I'd have come up with something pretty much like that. It was very much what my campaigns were like in those days, which is something I really liked about it. It was certainly made by somebody who'd played a lot of D&D and wanted to get that experience on screen.



That's why you need more than one writer to brainstorm plot elements and fit them into a good story, preferably of varying age.




			
				barsoomcore said:
			
		

> They failed, no question. I'm not saying it ISN'T a bad movie. It's horrendous. But at least it gives the impression of having been made with love and imagination. And I'm fond of it for that reason. People are WAY too hard on it -- in a world where cynical crap like _Conan The Destroyer_ and _Pirates of the Caribbean_ get trumpeted as "fun", that an honest, uncomplicated (if pretty stupid and badly made) movie gets savaged with such violence strikes me as very unfair.



For the record, I didn't say I like _Conan the Destroyer._ But for _Pirates of the Caribbeans,_ it has the required elements I expect it to have, with the terrific "skeleton crew" effect and comedic Johnny Depp as Jack Sparrow as bonuses. Of course, Orlando Bloom could be a little less stiff and relaxed in his performance.




			
				barsoomcore said:
			
		

> If it had been called _The Dragon's Staff_ people would be putting it up with _Beastmaster_ or _The Sword and the Sorcerer_, which is where it belongs (I don't think it's quite as good as either, but it's better than _Krull_, at least). It's just a cheesy fantasy movie, not out of line for that genre in terms of production value, acting ability, screenplay or direction. It's got some good stunts, okay swordfights, funny moments, charming leads, creepy (if spectacularly goofy (I'm looking at YOU, Jeremy)) bad guys, a few monsters and great big aerial dragon battle with explosions and everything.



I guess that's the thing. No one likes cheesy nowadays, not when a film is branded or titled "_Dungeons & Dragons._" You are right, any other film title, and we would have taken the film less seriously simply because it is not a _D&D_ branded film.


----------



## Mouseferatu (Jul 19, 2005)

barsoomcore said:
			
		

> Save your hate for people who are bad, for crying out loud. There's no shortage of them, that's for sure.




No worries. I have plenty of hate to go around.


----------



## glass (Jul 19, 2005)

Henry said:
			
		

> Speaking as a Dragonlance fan from the mid-1980's, I doubt a Dragonlance movie would be made because it would now be accused of being too derivative of Lord of the Rings because, basically, it is. Heroes start being chased from town by bad guys, Quest centered around an artifact, White-bearded wizard who dies heroically from a great fall and is reborn in his true power, Trip through a huge ruined city, trip through a Dwarven Delve (in LOTR these were combined), Fight against a big scaly creature with horns, gigantic war scenes, noble personage trying to bury his past and love with an elven woman, some heroes of moral ambiguity, etc.
> 
> There are plenty of variations, mind you (and I'd LOVE to see Xak Tsaroth on screen), but the basic story borrows so heavily from LOTR the comparisons would be instant and merciless.




There's is lots of stuff in DL that has some fairly close parallels with the Lord of the Rings, but there's also lots that doesn't (like the dragons and lances themselves, for instance). A good filmmaker would just emphasise those bits.

I don't think it would necesarily be a problem.



glass.


----------



## glass (Jul 19, 2005)

glass said:
			
		

> I don't think it would necesarily be a problem.




Although, paying for the locations and the FX and the large cast might be.

I'd love to see a DL movie (or six), but I'd want them to be done right. And I think done right would require $100m plus a movie.


glass.


----------



## Ranger REG (Jul 19, 2005)

glass said:
			
		

> Although, paying for the locations and the FX and the large cast might be.
> 
> I'd love to see a DL movie (or six), but I'd want them to be done right. And I think done right would require $100m plus a movie.



What was _LOTR_ film budget?


----------



## barsoomcore (Jul 19, 2005)

Mouseferatu said:
			
		

> No worries. I have plenty of hate to go around.



Okay. I was just worried you might be running out. Gotta prioritize, you know.


----------



## Darth K'Trava (Jul 20, 2005)

Ranger REG said:
			
		

> What was _LOTR_ film budget?




I think somewhere in the $100+ mil range.


----------



## Zulithe (Jul 20, 2005)

According to BoxOfficeMojo the budgets for all 3 LotR films:
FotR Production Budget: $93 million
TTT: Production Budget: $94 million
RotK: Production Budget: $94 million

Very low by blockbuster standards. Certainly the fact that they were all shot together accounts for the low cost. That, and it was shot overseas.


----------



## Ranger REG (Jul 20, 2005)

Zulithe said:
			
		

> Very low by blockbuster standards. Certainly the fact that they were all shot together accounts for the low cost. That, and it was shot overseas.



Anyone object to shooting a _Dragonlance_ film in New Zealand?


----------



## glass (Jul 20, 2005)

Ranger Reg said:
			
		

> Zulithe said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...




That might be the way to do it, make all three of the Chronicles together for the economies of scale. New Zealand might make it a bit to close to LotR looks wise though: maybe eastern Europe?



glass.


----------



## Klaus (Jul 20, 2005)

New Zealand would be a better location, since DL goes from temperate woodlands to midwest-type plains to steaming swamps to towering forests to frozen glaciers to...

Man, location scouting for a DL trilogy would be a nightmare!


----------



## glass (Jul 20, 2005)

Klaus said:
			
		

> New Zealand would be a better location, since DL goes from temperate woodlands to midwest-type plains to steaming swamps to towering forests to frozen glaciers to...




Does New Zealand have all those things?


glass.


----------



## Bass Puppet (Jul 20, 2005)

Once, shame on you. Twice shame on me.

The only thing I hope, is that WOTC get's more experience in working with filmmakers and that it eventually leads to a Dragonlance Movie....or something of substance... or ANYTHING WITH SUBSTANCE for that matter.  

I would love for a Dark Sun setting. I've never been big on Dark Sun in the gaming catagory, but have always thought it would be a great setting for a Fantasy Movie because of it's originality.


----------



## Ranes (Jul 20, 2005)

Darth K'Trava said:
			
		

> I think somewhere in the $100+ mil range.




Yep, about $125 million, IIRC. But don't forget, they saved an eight figure sum by creating a SPFX studio in New Zealand.

I didn't know who Paris Hilton was, until last night, when I saw a documentary on her. I don't hate her but I do think she's no better looking than any plain Jane with a fortune to spend on cosmetics and workouts would look. I have no reason to believe she'd make a good actress either.

 But yeah, I'm up for another D&D movie. Surely it _cannot_ be as bad as the last one. Surely!


----------



## Ranger REG (Jul 21, 2005)

Bass Puppet said:
			
		

> Once, shame on you. Twice shame on me.
> 
> The only thing I hope, is that WOTC get's more experience in working with filmmakers and that it eventually leads to a Dragonlance Movie....or something of substance... or ANYTHING WITH SUBSTANCE for that matter.



Does that method usually work for other films based on different media franchise, be it books or videogames?


----------



## Knightfall (Jul 21, 2005)

Paris Hilton is NOT in this movie.


----------



## Knightfall (Jul 21, 2005)

reveal said:
			
		

> Just because a movie is released straight to DVD does _not_ mean it will be a bad movie. I've seen many movies whose creators couldn't afford to put it into theaters and try to advertise it. These movies, while not always great, were not necessarily terrible.
> 
> With that, that does not mean I'm going to be running to the store to get this movie, that's for sure.
> 
> (Oh who am I kidding, yes I will! We all know we will, if nothing else so we can compare it to the first movie. )




The movie WILL see a theatrical release, before going to DVD. The only release date known for the movie is October 6th in Russia. However, the last I read on the IMDB Messageboard for D&D II, the movie won't be released until mid to late January of 2006. Whether or not that pushes back the International release of the film or just the North American release, I don't know.

The Distributors for this movie are Warner Brothers (USA), First Look Media (non-USA), Lizard Cinema Trade (Russia) (theatrical), and Warner Home Video (USA) (all media).

Later,

KF72


----------



## johnsemlak (Jul 21, 2005)

Knightfall1972 said:
			
		

> The only release date known for the movie is October 6th in Russia. However, the last I read on the IMDB Messageboard for D&D II, the movie won't be released until mid to late January of 2006.





Hmm, interesting...


----------



## qstor (Jul 21, 2005)

I guess I'd rent the new movie on DVD before I'd buy it. I'm sure it will be better than those goofy Sci-Fi channel monster movies 

Mike


----------



## Bass Puppet (Jul 21, 2005)

Ranger REG said:
			
		

> Does that method usually work for other films based on different media franchise, be it books or videogames?




Depends on how bad the first installment of those mediums are. With movies and books, yes. With "Video Games", not always because of technology and game play. 

Why give something a second chance when there are so many others doing it right the first time? So I won't miss out? lol! I'll take my chances.


----------



## Hypersmurf (Jul 22, 2005)

Ranger REG said:
			
		

> Anyone object to shooting a _Dragonlance_ film in New Zealand?




While I should be all for this, any Dragonlance movie would have to be made in Turkey.  After all, they've got the experience!

[gigglegigglegiggle]

(Aww... I can't find their website any more!  No more mop-on-the-face Flint!  )

-Hyp.

Edit - hmm... I _might_ have their trailers downloaded somewhere!  Must look!


----------



## Brother Shatterstone (Jul 22, 2005)

Hypersmurf said:
			
		

> While I should be all for this, any Dragonlance movie would have to be made in Turkey.  After all, they've got the experience!




Turkey?    I'm missing the joke I'm afraid... :\


----------



## Hypersmurf (Jul 22, 2005)

Brother Shatterstone said:
			
		

> Turkey?    I'm missing the joke I'm afraid... :\




If I can find the trailers after work tonight, I'll post a link and all will be revealed.

-Hyp.


----------



## Brother Shatterstone (Jul 22, 2005)

Hypersmurf said:
			
		

> If I can find the trailers after work tonight, I'll post a link and all will be revealed.




Why am I getting scared...?


----------



## Vonlok The Bold (Jul 22, 2005)

I think the first D&D movie was so bad that it was slightly funny.  Wayans was truly funny in it, though his style didn't mesh with the other actors.

I think sometimes it seems like D&D fans wanted it to be redeeming so badly that they _willed_ themselves to find positives in the movie that don't really exist.  Some of it may come from such a love of D&D that they want anything associated with it to have some sort of quality.  Some of it may come from wanting the film to be good as not to turn hollywood off to the genre all together in the hopes that truly quality fantasy films might be made more often in the fulture, or a combination of hte reasons.

I would like to hope that D&D 2 would be a great non-cheesy effort, but it doesn't sound like that will be the case.  Maybe I can hope for more of 'so bad its good' and not just plain ol' bad.


----------



## Hypersmurf (Jul 22, 2005)

Brother Shatterstone said:
			
		

> Why am I getting scared...?




I've found the trailers - three files, 15-20 MB each.

I need somewhere to upload them, though 

-Hyp.


----------



## reveal (Jul 22, 2005)

Hypersmurf said:
			
		

> I've found the trailers - three files, 15-20 MB each.
> 
> I need somewhere to upload them, though
> 
> -Hyp.




If you can zip, or rar, them up and split them up and make files under 10 megs, send each of them to me at _tonylaw74 at gmail dot com_ and I'll put them back together and host them. Gmail can't receive attachments larger than 10 megs.


----------



## Truth Seeker (Jul 22, 2005)

Hypersmurf said:
			
		

> I've found the trailers - three files, 15-20 MB each.
> 
> I need somewhere to upload them, though
> 
> -Hyp.




WHy??? WHy the evil must persist???


----------



## Phaedrus (Jul 22, 2005)

Hijack of sorts... 

Is animation cheaper (in terms of production cost) than regular movies?
If so, I'd happily pay to see cartoon (non anime, please) versions of D&D or DL. Special effects would not be a problem... as long as they were written for ADULTS, and no stupid unicorns or such thrown in to appeal to children.

If not, nevermind.


----------



## werk (Jul 22, 2005)

The Crystal Shard could easily be converted to a movie.  I'm not a Drizzt fan, but this book is one that I've read numerous times.  It is already cut into 'scenes' and has nice character diversity and action sequences.

And, like the Matrix, would open the door for at least a couple horrible sequals.


----------



## werk (Jul 22, 2005)

Phaedrus said:
			
		

> If so, I'd happily pay to see cartoon (non anime, please) versions of D&D or DL. Special effects would not be a problem... as long as they were written for ADULTS, and no stupid unicorns or such thrown in to appeal to children.




Check out record of Lodoss (if you haven't already).


----------



## werk (Jul 22, 2005)

I found this review of the first movie.  Give it a read if you want a nice laugh...
"What is absolutely amazing is that this movie supposedly has been made for only $35 million!"

[sblock]Dungeons & Dragons

SANTOS here. Being very excited over what I have seen, I wanted to post this review immediately, but I did not have access to a computer any earlier. Last night I attended the first full screening of DUNGEONS & DRAGONS in London! Let me make one thing clear. I am not familiar with the game nor the animated TV series, so I saw the film completely 'blank'. But... To use fan terminology: I would say D&D "KICKS ASS!". It definitely "ROCKS!".

D&D is an absolutely amazing debut by Canadian newcomer COURTNEY SOLOMON (it's a guy). I would dare to state that a new successful franchise has been born. I am already sure there will be a D&D2 en 3, because I think D&D is much BETTER than STAR WARS Episode One!!! I had expected a kind of MORTAL KOMBAT, but I think it goes WAY beyond that. 

The movie is a high speed adventure in which one great scene follows another, mixing the best of STAR WARS (fx, characters), INDIANA JONES (adventure, (Note: spoiler; remember the opening of RAIDERS!), DARK CRYSTAL/LABYRINTH (creatures, costumes and art direction), DARK CITY (the gloomy darkness and cinematography) X-MEN (super power fx), THE MUMMY (humor), etc. It is an excellent warm-up for EVERYBODY who's waiting for LORD OF THE RINGS!

Because it is based on the role playing game I know every D&D fan has his own version of the story in his head - a reason why I won't get into the story in this review - but the movie keeps you on the edge of your seat the whole time, because there is just no time to pause and sit back. I expect the audience to be much broader than just the gamers, because, like I saw it, the movie can be seen completely separate from the game (unlike MORTAL KOMBAT for example; without knowing the game, it's crap). 

The casting is excellent. D&D has a fresh young cast and avoided the type-casting of faces familiar to the genre. Although I did not like SCARY MOVIE or any of his earlier roles, Marlon Wayans is absolutely great. He definitely adds a lot of humor, something which SW1 lacked. (By the way, I loved Marlon's performance in REQUIEM FOR DREAM too! What a powerful movie). 

The main character, played by Justin Whalin, definitely steals the show as our new hero. He should also be a big interest for the female audience. Should they ever be looking for a young Han Solo in SW3, try this guy! 

The male audience can enjoy the attractive Zoe McLellan who is the female part of the heroic trio we follow throughout the story. The chemistry between the three is great.

The absolute bad ass of the movie is the very believable Bruce Payne who stays in his villainous character chillingly well. I would want to mention a couple of others, but unfortunately there were no credits yet and IMDB is not much of help either (I am not even sure if Bruce Payne is the right name with the right character). Fact is, that because you can identify with the characters so well, you are sucked in right away. Only minor flaw is the performance of the in AMERICAN BEAUTY so promising and powerful Thora Birch. Her acting (and character) is very reminiscent of Queen Amidala /Natalie Portman. D&D proves how important the human characters still are; even in a genre that rests heavily on the SFX (Qui-Gon, Jar Jar anybody?). 

The SFX are absolutely amazing: the dragons (especially the ending) and the 3D landscapes and buildings are breathtaking. Think the fabulous imagery of Naboo and know you'll get vistas like that at least six times as many in D&D and I would dare say: far more impressive! Art direction, set pieces and costumes are equally outstanding.

What is absolutely amazing is that this movie supposedly has been made for only $35 million! Even more amazing is the fact that COURTNEY SOLOMON never directed a movie before ("Not even a student movie" he told me, when I got a chance to talk to him briefly after the screening outside of the theater.) He has been working on this project practically all his life so it is his dream come true.

I would not be surprised that this modest and shy young director will soon get a call from a Mr. Spielberg or Lucas. Should the last-mentioned be looking for a director for SW3 I tell you his search is over! I applaud the bravery of producer Joel Silver to put his confidence in Solomon and giving him this chance. It's gonna pay off! I am confident that in the US the film is in excellent hands with NEW LINE who are experts in marketing the genre.

They will get a head start on THE LORD OF THE RINGS with similar subject matter, reaching the same audience, so expect the LORD OF THE RINGS trailer before this one as of December 8th! In the rest of the world it's up to the independents!

With the limited budget and the fairly inexperienced cast (except for the great-and-mean-as usual Jeremy Irons) Solomon has made a movie that definitely delivers all the thrills you want. Can't wait to see it again.

Greetings from the dungeon, 

SANTOS[/sblock]


----------



## reveal (Jul 23, 2005)

All 3 are now posted.

Wow. They are just... Wow....   

http://www.rpgcentric.com/files/dcmeeting.avi (18 megs)

http://www.rpgcentric.com/files/dcobsess.avi (20 megs)

http://www.rpgcentric.com/files/dcpain.avi (15 megs)

I'll edit this when the last one gets here. Man, these are just... Wow....


----------



## Hypersmurf (Jul 23, 2005)

They require the Div-X codec to play; you can find it here.

You'll all see that a Dragonlance movie could never be made anywhere but Turkey!

-Hyp.


----------



## Brother Shatterstone (Jul 23, 2005)

Hypersmurf said:
			
		

> You'll all see that a Dragonlance movie could never be made anywhere but Turkey!




Downloading now…  I guess I will soon know why that is true.


----------



## Hypersmurf (Jul 23, 2005)

Well?  

-Hyp.


----------



## Truth Seeker (Jul 23, 2005)

Hypersmurf said:
			
		

> Well?
> 
> -Hyp.




Well, that was interesting...interesting.


----------



## Ranger REG (Jul 23, 2005)

Phaedrus said:
			
		

> Hijack of sorts...
> 
> Is animation cheaper (in terms of production cost) than regular movies?
> If so, I'd happily pay to see cartoon (non anime, please) versions of D&D or DL. Special effects would not be a problem... as long as they were written for ADULTS, and no stupid unicorns or such thrown in to appeal to children.
> ...



With all due respect, _Dragonlance_ has to be for both adults and children. It's not like you're going to make a _Heavy Metal_ version of _DL._

. o O ( Goldmoon's bathing in a lake while Riverwind watches )

*gets back to reality*

Anyhoo... you can do a serious anime _Kirby_-free version of _DL. Lodoss War_ did just that.

But my personal preference is live-action with CG effects. I'm spoiled by _LOTR_ and soon _Chronicles of Narnia._


----------



## CrusaderX (Jul 23, 2005)

A Dragonlance movie would be good, a Forgotten Realms movie would be cool, but my choice would be a Greyhawk movie, featuring Vin Diesel as The Justicar from the Paul Kidd novels.







Talk about perfect casting!  Vin IS the Justicar.


----------



## Ranger REG (Jul 24, 2005)

CrusaderX said:
			
		

> A Dragonlance movie would be good, a Forgotten Realms movie would be cool, but my choice would be a Greyhawk movie, featuring Vin Diesel as The Justicar from the Paul Kidd novels.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Actually, I want to see Vin portray his own favorite character, a half-drow Melkor.


----------

