Post/Author/DateTime	Post
LaegolasGreenleaf 01-25-04, 01:10 PM	Welcome to D&D Movie Discussion This thread is for any possible ideas for other D&D movies. I'll give you some topics to work with. 1. Campaign settings 2. Characters you'd like to see 3. Actors / actresses you'd like to see portray those characters. 4. Directors & producers to make the movie 5. Composers to do the music Keep the ideas coming. Enjoy and have fun.
Kragen_Steel 01-25-04, 02:40 PM	[QUOTE]Originally posted by LaegolasGreenleaf Welcome to D&D Movie Discussion This thread is for any possible ideas for other D&D movies. I'll give you some topics to work with. 1. Campaign settings 2. Characters you'd like to see 3. Actors / actresses you'd like to see portray those characters. 4. Directors & producers to make the movie 5. Composers to do the music Keep the ideas coming. Enjoy and have fun. [/QUOTE Name change unfortunately.... cant believe how they butchered the first title.. as much passion as I have for this game... I'd compare the original movie just short of 9/11 in terms of impact Dragonlance Trilogy is the most logical choice. It may not be purist D&D but it's rich enough to compete with LOTR. I dont think the masses would fall for a Drow Elf in the other series. Hmm as for actors... I'd have to give it some thought...
Ranger REG 01-25-04, 03:33 PM	I personally do not think that Dragonlance is nowhere near the pedestal that is LOTR nor any D&D-based literary works. The late J.R.R. Tolkien was kind enough to leave a lot of background research notes (i.e., appendices) about the world of Middle-Earth, albeit incomplete. The elven writings, the Black Speech language, poems, songs, the description of cultures, etc. Mind you, Professor Tolkien was not a professional creative writer, nor one that is taught in the modern commercial publishing industry. He spent his life creating this because he wanted England to have a mythology. Can authors vividly describe Ansalon in an all-fluff, crunch-free essay? I mean we gamers are so used to it as a game world with lots of intentional gaps for us to fill in and tailor it to our own campaign flavor. Personally, I would love for Margaret Weis and Tracy Hickman to publish appendices of Ansalon. I mean add more material to the Leaves from the Inn of the Last Home book. Then go for a three-movie project. Otherwise, do a singular movie about a Drow Elf ranger with a conscience. Not an epic as LOTR nor DL but it would be a different yet refreshing direction for a fantasy film.
Capn Charlie 01-25-04, 04:20 PM	I don't care about the movie type or plot, I just want to see Sean Connery play Elminster. That is all.
LaegolasGreenleaf 01-25-04, 08:18 PM	What about Fizban the Fabulous? Any ideas? Where's my hat?! - Fizban
Ranger REG 01-26-04, 04:43 AM	Originally posted by Capn Charlie I don't care about the movie type or plot, I just want to see Sean Connery play Elminster. That is all. Well, it's probably that kind of attitude that landed D&D: The Movie a box office disaster. I mean it is so bad, Troma Production (the staple of B-type movies like Toxic Avenger and Kabukiman) could have done a better film. Sorry, but I am more concern with the story and direction the film will take.
Capn Charlie 01-26-04, 05:11 AM	I just mean that nitpicky elitists will pick apart whatever comes out, be dissatisfied, and generally gripe. This being said I just want to see a cool thing. I think swords and sorcery are cool. There is a significant segment of the population that would just enjoy getting to see some of that on screen instead of Ben Afleck and Matt Damon again. Face it, DnDs cell based nature, personal evolution of concept, and inherent customizability let people make it exactly what they want. With that many vastly different views there will always be a lot of people dissatisfied. DnD is too much of a niche market to get the Peter Jackson treatment. Why not make the best of a bad situation then. DnD wasn't all that bad. As compared to the fantasy movies to date it was fairly top notch.
Nytmare 01-26-04, 06:33 AM	Originally posted by Capn Charlie DnD wasn't all that bad. As compared to the fantasy movies to date it was fairly top notch. You'd rank it equal to or above Dragonslayer, Legend, and The Princess Bride? Beastmaster, Conan, Excalibur, Ladyhawke? Krull, Willow, Army of Darkness? Can I stop now? Everyone's entitled to their opinion, but I think you've been at sea too long Cap'n. :)
The 1MG 01-26-04, 06:59 AM	While the movie itself wasn't that great I have to give credit where it is due. The film was a first time effort not to mention a labor of love by a long time D&D fan. I wish by some miracle they could continue with what they started.
Capn Charlie 01-26-04, 07:27 AM	Originally posted by Nytmare You'd rank it equal to or above Dragonslayer, Legend, and The Princess Bride? Beastmaster, Conan, Excalibur, Ladyhawke? Krull, Willow, Army of Darkness? Can I stop now? Everyone's entitled to their opinion, but I think you've been at sea too long Cap'n. :) Right at equal to. The beholder sfx alone trumped abot anythiing to date. At the least it was on par or better than the majority of em. Gor, deathstalker 2, and a host of others so awful their names escape me. But I still watch them whenever they are playing on sci-fi. I am just saying it wasn't nearly as bad as people make it out to be. I know for sure I have read several novels that were best sellers that I and many of the people I game with thought far far less of than sopme of the more mediocre fantasy books. John Grisham? If someone is going to try and fail to take over the world it should at least be done with undead hordes. I reckon most of this outlook was doue to the fantasy poor environment our gaming evolved in. In the late 80s early 90s when you are ten or twwelve anything that has your favorite and oft looked over genre in it is great. Most of my early dming descriptions involved descriptions emphasized by vistas from what are arguably among the worst movies, fantasy or otherwise, that ever were made. But since we had virtually non existant funds and no veteran gamer support the 49 cent SF movie rack at hastings was the best influences we could get. This is why I am a devout believer in active game mentoring in new players so the next generation of gamers don't have to have awful movies as rolemodels and examples.
Drindin 01-26-04, 09:41 AM	Originally posted by Capn Charlie I don't care about the movie type or plot, I just want to see Sean Connery play Elminster. That is all. Before I continue, I should point out that if you think Sean Connery is a good actor, you REALLY need to get out more. In virtually every movie he has starred in (most of which you've probably not heard of) Sean Connery has played a character that is so frighteningly close to his own personality, you'd just need to name them Sean Connery, and it'd be a clone of him. Any movies to the contrary, have failed miserably and you've probably never heard of it. That said, an actor who could probably make another DND movie worth watching would be someone like Jonny Dep, or Al Pachino, or maybe Antonio Banderas, or that gut from "Soilders Girl' (uh... the actual guy). And then, to star as some wizard-type-character, Patrick Stewart wouldn't be a bad choice, and, I dunno, you could maybe throw Keanu Reeves somewhere in there, though I think he's slowly joining the ranks of Sean Connery. Now, for some young blood, you could probably cast some one like Elijah Wood, or that kid who played Caveman in Holes.
Mr.Waesel 01-26-04, 11:22 AM	What D&D movie? There was no D&D movie.
LaegolasGreenleaf 01-27-04, 08:54 PM	Originally posted by Mr.Waesel What D&D movie? There was no D&D movie. I see what you mean but I was really trying lean away from talking about the actual movie. Just trying to see what other people think would make a good D&D movie.
Ertai Planeswalker 01-27-04, 11:30 PM	Originally posted by Drindin Before I continue, I should point out that if you think Sean Connery is a good actor, you REALLY need to get out more. In virtually every movie he has starred in (most of which you've probably not heard of) Sean Connery has played a character that is so frighteningly close to his own personality, you'd just need to name them Sean Connery, and it'd be a clone of him. So he is the only man to ever escape Alcatraz after working for MI6 and he is immortal unless his head is cut off in RL? You don't win all the awards and credits and stuff if you're not good. People far more knowledgeable on the subject have judged him... And Sean Connery is THE man to play Elminster!
Vaalingrade Ashland 01-27-04, 11:38 PM	Originally posted by Ertai Planeswalker So he is the only man to ever escape Alcatraz after working for MI6 and he is immortal unless his head is cut off in RL? Yes, the Oddesy was based on his true life story as well. He is The One. If I could pick on celebrity to play in the movie, it would be Connery, unless its a comedy, then it would be Darryl Hammand impersonation Connery. No, wait, Connery impersonating Darryl Hammond impersonating Connery (best. interview. ever.)
Glide 01-28-04, 12:06 AM	Yep, since there was never a D&D movie, I will start fresh. 1. Campaign settings I would actually love to see it take place in the home brew campaign world I have been a part in creating. Within our world is a mega-mega-mega metropolis known as Unity. This city has provided many an urban adventure. With it's sky touching towers, near planar quality markets, and faction wars, it makes a nice setting. I would want my entire movie (well the bulk of it) to take place fully within unity. My sequel will show the same party established in the first movie in a dessert setting. Finally the party will scratch upon the planes in the third. 2. Characters I would like to see. Well in the opening scene I would like to see the iconic characters from the PHB being hung in the background. I hate the iconics. Characters would be unique while being easy to understand for general audiences. 1. Our protagonist would be a Spell Sword for lack of better terms. Someone that the story could focus on that could show the world the magic of D&D. While at the same time wielding enough sword to make any and all Harry Potter fans see no resemblance. Said character would be young and still have the tendency to screw up. 2. Friends and allies would include. A insecure Dwarven Wizard with a passion for constructs. A half elf monk, who while able to provide some guidance, is in no way above "my fist in your face or else" mentality. And alcoholic fighter that has found a way to turn the beer in his blood into fighter. Perhaps another would be introduced, but he/she would not be in the spotlight as much. 3. Actors / actresses you'd like to see portray those characters. I want my half-elf monk to be played by Owen Wilson. (Armageddon anyone?) I want Depp to be my Drunken fighter. The Dwarf Wizard is a tough one, as I am leaning towards a female role. And the Spellsword would have to be...the guy who played Private Blight in the HBO series Band of Brothers. (Episode 3 I think) 4. Directors & producers to make the movie. Mikael Salomen. Kinda unknown guy, but so was Jackson. 5. Composers to do the music Well this movie (at least the first) will be on a much much less epic scale then our favorite ring story. So I would need a fantastic (as in fantasy) gritty and meaningful soundtrack. Take what Howard Shore did, and take some of the rougher stuff that Trassiberian Orchestra does. Find a medium. Glide.
Ertai Planeswalker 01-28-04, 12:19 AM	I think the Ashardalon series would make a good film series... The lady charming /easy going but very skillfull rogue: Brad Pitt. The serious and wise elven wizard: Sean Connery The lovely and caring but hard ass when needed female cleric: Famke Janssen. The dwarven warrior, strong but just: Vin Diesel As long as whatever D&D movie comes out follows the P&P rules! (No killing Gold Dragons with fireballs :rolleyes: ) Have a traditional party, working together as it was meant in D&D.
Ice Wizard 01-28-04, 12:42 AM	I, like so many others, was so psyched to go see the "D&D Movie" and experienced a letdown of massive proportions... Although the movie was well done, the basic story left many things to be desired. As for another D&D movie, I would suggest either an original world with original characters(Possibilities are endless here), or a well-established world and trademark characters. Faerun and Elminster (I agree that Sean Connery would make a great Elminster) and maybe Szass Tam for example. For the original route the makers of the movie could hold a contest for original characters where the best five or so entries would be used in the story. You know I'd certainly enter this with my Half Aquatic Elf Eldritch Knight :mage:
Ranger REG 01-28-04, 02:08 AM	Originally posted by The 1MG While the movie itself wasn't that great I have to give credit where it is due. The film was a first time effort not to mention a labor of love by a long time D&D fan. I wish by some miracle they could continue with what they started. Yeah, but it'll be direct-to-video. Sorry, but I really do not care if it is a labor of love. This is not a high-school film project (but with bigger budget) nor it should be treated that way. :devil: Let's hope that Joel Silver's production company can turn things around since they're interested in doing the next D&D film, which I pray and hope it is NOT a sequel to the first film.
Escef 01-28-04, 02:25 AM	I'm all in favor of an animated DragonLance trilogy. The animation style would be derivitive of the original Heavy Metal movie (not that god aweful F.A.K.K.2). It would be released straight to DVD. There would be commentary from Weiss, Hickman, the director, and the writer of the screenplay. Other extras would be 3.5 editions of the original modules included as pdf files for DVD-ROM. Maybe even pdf of the original novels in question. Release the trilogy one volume per year straight to video. And make sure you release it overseas as well, the Japanese would eat it like candy.
Mjordnir 01-28-04, 05:52 AM	Have any of you ´guys seen the Hallmark production of the Dune Miniseries? Both Dune and Children of Dune miniseries are extremely well made, with great casting and effects. I figure that if you want a believable D&D movie, get an unknown anonymous setting that has everything we love about D&D that separates it from LotR and let Hallmark do a miniseries maybe in 2 or 3 parts, and let it span an entire campaign, with the typical campaign buildup. I think Dragonlance would be ideal for this sort of project, given Hallmarks ability to filmatize novels. But otherwise I think a writeup contest would be a great idea, so everyone could submit plot ideas, character ideas etc. But one thing is certain... No known actors...! We want the emphasis to be on the plot and the movie itself, rather than how we think this and that actor portrays your favourite race/class. If Hallmark did a D&D miniseries in the same style and quality as the dune miniseries, I'd be waiting in line right now to get my hands on it! I think that rather than arguing what was bad in the first D&D movie, and discuss who we want to play Elminster, I think it would be great if we could actually make a serious thread where people could submit SERIOUS plot ideas, setting ideas (that AREN'T established settings, so no DL vs. FR), and serious character ideas. If we could make such a thread, and direct the right people's attention to it.... We might actually get somewhere other than daydreaming and hoping. Just my 2 steel ________________________________________ __________- My ideas: The setting should be fairly anonymous. It should include some of the basic D&D elements like: - Divided mageschools in conflict - Dragons and dragon conflict (not as mindless drones as in the first D&D movie, but highly intelligent) - Probably tie in dragon conflict with mage conflict - Deities and their clerical orders and maybe a faith vs. Arcane magic of dragons and mages conflict. - It should atleast have one serious dungeoncrawl scene. - Different characters to separate the movie from LotR: - A Halfling fighter who still steals like a maniac. - A human cleric a la Sturm Brightblade of DL. - A female Elven wizard (no gandalf type here!) - A Gnome Rogue/tinkerer with a fanatic love for traps. - A dwarven fighter who loves to fight and drink. (though no gimli similarities please) - A half-elf ranger dual wielding type with serious issues due to race. (No legolas Aragorn rip off here either) - An evil Dragon Knight and his mount as badguy, or possible badguy turnes good guy or something. PLease give some serious comments to this, and/or your own ideas. And let's try not to argue about director, screen writer and all that. Let's see if we can agree on a plot that would rule all!
heinzk23111 01-28-04, 06:05 AM	I would like to see a DnD movie for sure but it must be high on content low on campiness (like the Wayans character, God what a terrible travesty). And for all the wisdom in the world absolutely, positively no "save the world" fantasy. What do I mean by "save the world"? Well the fantasy genera is over-populated with stories that are long drawn out adventure epics with the ultimate goal to save the world from <insert bad guy here> (Dragons, Evil Wizard, God of chaos/destruction, blah,blah, blah...). I believe the real story is in the people and their motivations, loves, loss's... their life if you will. I think a good plot would have an adventure to get an item not to save the world, but to free a slave, or one persons soul, or just the main characters farmstead. The real adventure is in the "odyssey". the Hero could meet any of the favorite races/beast. The Goblins don't have to be all bad, maybe just misunderstood. Another plot could be a ghost story in a fantasy setting (not unlike a Greek tragedy). The key in my humble opinion is to keep it simple, don't try to show every little detail of DnD in one shot. Entice the viewer to want more!
Spongly 01-28-04, 07:57 AM	I think the D&D movie was great, for what it was. Basically, I think it's impossible to make a D&D movie and NOT have it come out as utterly cheesy and campy - anything you do with D&D will likely turn out very, very cheesy. So the movie took that idea and ran with it, and ended up with a very, very funny bit of cheese. Richard O'Brian as the ludicrous head of the thieves guild was particularly good.
Sulaco 01-28-04, 02:02 PM	Originally posted by Nytmare You'd rank it equal to or above Dragonslayer, Legend, and The Princess Bride? Beastmaster, Conan, Excalibur, Ladyhawke? Krull, Willow, Army of Darkness? Can I stop now? Well, weak as the D&D movie was, it was most certainly better than Beastmaster, Krull, and Army of Darkness.
Capn Charlie 01-28-04, 02:23 PM	Better than Krull? Definitely. Better than beastmaster? Maybe. Better than Army of Darkness? BLASPHEMY!!
Nytmare 01-28-04, 03:12 PM	Originally posted by Sulaco Well, weak as the D&D movie was, it was most certainly better than Beastmaster, Krull, and Army of Darkness. Beastmaster and Army of Darkness I'll fight you on but I haven't seen Krull since I was 8. Does it fall into the "leave your past behind you" category? *sigh* My poor childhood...
Big Dawg 01-28-04, 04:09 PM	The D&D movie was Poop. could have been amazing, but I'd rather watch Masters of the Universe staring Dolph Lungren. Jeremy Irons and a Waynes Bro is aweful casting. The whole Homeboy Comic thing was absolute crap. Purple lipstck should be filed under E for Error. can we have a BBEG who is actually bad and kills more then 2 people. and for the record... for the time period it was made in, Krull is 10 times better then the dungeons and debacle movie.
Ranger REG 01-28-04, 05:14 PM	Originally posted by Sulaco Well, weak as the D&D movie was, it was most certainly better than Beastmaster, Krull, and Army of Darkness. Are you kidding? I like Krull. As for Beastmaster (the original movie, not the sequel nor the crap-filled TV series)? Liked it when I was a kid, but not when I'm an adult. No comment on the Army of Darkness. Haven't seen it yet. But all in all, I am now spoiled by the Lord of the Rings films. AFAIC, these boost fantasy film genre and moved the bar up for other fantasy films to stride for. If you can't, at least be honest and go compete with Troma "B" movies. BTW, didn't I mention that D&D: The Movie is WORST than any Troma films? :P
LaegolasGreenleaf 01-28-04, 07:12 PM	Originally posted by Ranger REG Are you kidding? I like Krull. Krull was awesome. No doubt.
Prewa_Draconis 01-29-04, 04:26 AM	Originally posted by Spongly I think the D&D movie was great, for what it was. Basically, I think it's impossible to make a D&D movie and NOT have it come out as utterly cheesy and campy - anything you do with D&D will likely turn out very, very cheesy. So the movie took that idea and ran with it, and ended up with a very, very funny bit of cheese. Richard O'Brian as the ludicrous head of the thieves guild was particularly good. I totally agree with this. You can't take an entire D&D campaign, cram it in to a 2-hour movie and have it be "The bestest, most awesomest movie of all time"... you just can't do it... And the cheesiness of the movie was what made it great... I especially loved Snails... between stealing anything and everything he touched and whining about everything, he made me laugh til I cried. I do think however that there were some aspects that needed improvement... like the whole scene where the Dwarf mercenary guy joins them.... they should have made that scene a lot more understandable.
Drindin 01-29-04, 11:57 AM	Originally posted by Vaalingrade Ashland Yes, the Oddesy was based on his true life story as well. He is The One. If I could pick on celebrity to play in the movie, it would be Connery, unless its a comedy, then it would be Darryl Hammand impersonation Connery. No, wait, Connery impersonating Darryl Hammond impersonating Connery (best. interview. ever.) *slaps his forehead* Before I continue, I should point out that if you think Sean Connery is a good actor, you REALLY need to get out more. In virtually every movie he has starred in (most of which you've probably not heard of) Sean Connery has played a character that is so frighteningly close to his own personality, you'd just need to name them Sean Connery, and it'd be a clone of him. You people were either skimming, or simply didn't bother to read this. Sean Connery is a BAD ACTOR. Ever here of Zartox? I didn't think so. That's how bad it was. Guess who the star of the film was? Sean Connery.
Drindin 01-29-04, 12:00 PM	Originally posted by Spongly I think the D&D movie was great, for what it was. Basically, I think it's impossible to make a D&D movie and NOT have it come out as utterly cheesy and campy - anything you do with D&D will likely turn out very, very cheesy. So the movie took that idea and ran with it, and ended up with a very, very funny bit of cheese. Richard O'Brian as the ludicrous head of the thieves guild was particularly good. I beg to differ. I think it was a matter of script. Get a decent script writer out there with a decent story to work with, and it'd be relatively easy to pull off a decent film. Even IF Sean Connery was in it. (Just don't have him play some really major character like Elminster. That's to strong a role for him.) Get some big names in there like Elijah Wood, Orlando Bloom, Liv Tyler, maybe even Cate Blanchette (I think that's her name...) and you'd be on the way to making a decent film.
Nytmare 01-29-04, 12:13 PM	Originally posted by Drindin Sean Connery is a BAD ACTOR. Ever here of Zartox? I didn't think so. That's how bad it was. Guess who the star of the film was? Sean Connery. Do you mean Zardoz? You're going to hold a single low budget 70's sci-fi film with a Wizard of Oz crossover against him? At the time he was trying desperately to take any role he could so he wouldn't get typecast as James Bond. Yes it was a bad film, but I'd argue heartily against you basing the entirety of his career off of it. It's the exception to the rule.
Spongly 01-29-04, 12:53 PM	Originally posted by Drindin Get some big names in there like Elijah Wood, Orlando Bloom, Liv Tyler, maybe even Cate Blanchette (I think that's her name...) and you'd be on the way to making a decent film. Hmmm...maybe your right. If you had a decent work of literature to base it on rather than a world which is pretty inherently cheesy to most tastes - say, a really popular book from the last century sometime, stick some little guys in hairy feet in, and a magic ring, and you may have a successful film there...:D
Ithilorien 01-29-04, 01:02 PM	Originally posted by Drindin Get some big names in there like Elijah Wood, Orlando Bloom, Liv Tyler, maybe even Cate Blanchette (I think that's her name...) and you'd be on the way to making a decent film. I believe that decent film was called the Lord of the Rings. Like LotR a D&D movie would have to go with relatively underused actors, having Connery, Schwarzzeneger (not even going to try to spell that correctly), or a fantasy reprise by the likes Wood serves only to shatter the fantasy setting to a degree. A "name" actor can't really help but be identified as themselves more than there character, and this is bad for presenting a fantasy world. As for LotR, like the novels it is based upon, it isn't really that great as narrative, anyway. It has cheesy dialogue, weak character development, and some pacing issues. The strength of the Lord of the Rings as books is the incredible level of detail and creativity Tolkien provided and the strength of the films is the cinematography, art direction, editting, and acting. This is perhaps the best that can be hoped for in a fantasy film because fantasy is about epics and strongly delineated good and evil. This translates into it being a quasi-medieval melodrama, which many people expect to translate into cheese (as it usually does). The LotR films are incredible because they managed, for the most part, to skirt the cheese element and present a real story. So a D&D movie would need that same epic scale and attention to detail, but also that level of maturity. For this reason I think the Dragonlance Chronicles is the best choice. They have a semi-original story (returning the green gemstone to the column is bit too "the ring must be cast back into the fiery chasm from whence it came" to me, but that's fantasy for you) and certainly an original world, which I think is important. While to some degree a D&D film could play of LotR success it would also have to try and avoid direct imitation as much as possible to retain any credibility. Dragonlance, with its lack of some of the standard Tolkien creatures (orcs for example) and its focus on a sort of massive moral battle between gods, dragons, and mortals sets it apart whereas say, the Forgotten Realms would ring a bit too much like Middle Earth in my opinion.
WhtKnt 01-29-04, 01:16 PM	I had devised a long post describing my problems with the existent film, as well as some advice on how to do it better, but my computer glitched and ate it, so you'll have to settle for the condensed version (sans commentary on the first film). In a nutshell, here's how I would handle it: Four heroes, a typical adventuring party meet in the obligatory tavern. They already know one another and they are introduced to the audience as we hear them discussing their last adventuee while having dinner. There should be a warrior-type, a cleric or paladin, a bard or rogue, and an arcane spellcaster. One should be non-human, something instantly recognizable as either an elf or a dwarf, but no halflings (too likely to be seen as a poor copy of hobbits from Lord of the Rings). These characters are not the iconics, but rather completely new personas. While eating, they are called upon for some task. Something fairly simple and routine, not earthshaking. It's hard to build up to a world-saving plot in a single film and do so believably. Instead, let's stick with something simple. Use a standby maguffin where someone comes into the tavern in need of aid. After a short journey through the wilderness (just enough to fit in an encounter in some way related to the story), they reach the dungeon and enter. They fight their way through and achieve their goal. They exit, go back to town, celebration, the end. Simple, but if done with a good plot, it will work. Key Elements: Teamwork. None of this "one person goes in while the others are stopped by a wall of force" crap. They all go in together. Each character should have a shining moment. At least one encounter should be with a uniquely D&D monster (such as a beholder or mind flayer). Adherence to game mechanics. If the arcane spellcaster is a wizard, have a scene where he doesn't have the right spell prepared, for example. No in-jokes. Gaming geeks are the only ones who appreciate them and it makes the film seem juvenile if overdone. Avoid sterotypes (such as Elwood's character). At least one dramatic character death.As for actors, go with unknowns (or relative unknowns). Maybe one big name actor could make a cameo near the end, but otherwise, keep big names out of it. Likewise, recognizable D&D figures should be kept out except as a possible cameo. Maybe during the end celebration, a sharp-eyed gamer could spot a famour personage. DVD Extras: Cast/crew commentary Production sketches/stills Storyboards for key scenes Deleted scenes (with optional commentary) DVD Rom - Character sheets for major characters DVD Rom - The movie as a game adventure (even cooler would be an interactive map that, when an encounter locale is clicked on, displays a still of the set for that area) DVD Rom - A copy of the scriptAnyway, my two coppers.
Kragen_Steel 01-29-04, 01:41 PM	Originally posted by Spongly I think the D&D movie was great, for what it was. Basically, I think it's impossible to make a D&D movie and NOT have it come out as utterly cheesy and campy - anything you do with D&D will likely turn out very, very cheesy. So the movie took that idea and ran with it, and ended up with a very, very funny bit of cheese. Richard O'Brian as the ludicrous head of the thieves guild was particularly good. "Hawk the Slayer" with Jack Palance was a MUCH better movie and I dont think it cost more than a $1000 !!! Wanna see an ELF Master Archer on Acid? Then go buy this DVD on Amazon.com. If you havent seen this 80's CULT D&D classic... do so... I grab a six pack of beer and watch it at least once a month. Now THIS is a movie that helped inspire my D&D dreams as a young teenager... I pity those who only have the "official" D&D movie to go by... I believe that movie will only inspire a generation of pathetic players on average compared to some of the GREAT B movies from the 80's. Hell even Legend with Tom Cruise comes to mind even if it was a bit sappy but it was different. The link below brings you to the Hawk DVD http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/B00006G8H4/qid=1075401294//ref=sr_8_xs_ap_i3_xgl74/103-1749851-4193415?v=glance&s=dvd&n=507846 From the Back Cover Once upon a time, long ago, but perhaps not far away, there were two brothers. Hawk (John Terry) the younger brother was destined for greatness, possessing gifts of strength, honor, duty and courage. Voltan (Jack Palance), the elder, was a villain capable of great cruelty. Hideously deformed, Voltan roamed the land under a black mask so none would look on his ghastly face. When their father is killed by the hand of his firstborn, Voltan, Hawk swears vengeance. But Hawk soon has more than just his father's death to avenge. The perverse Voltan and his son Drago have kidnapped the Abbess of Caddonbury and are holding her for ransom. It will take both sword and sorcery to bring the evil Voltan to justice. Only the cunning Hawk, aided by the Giant, the Elf and the Dwarf can defeat the mystical forces of Voltan, the "Dark One."
devinmdp 01-29-04, 02:14 PM	I am involved with a company that was close to the D&D movie. Let me dispel a few myths and rumours. 1. The movie DID make money. Why? Because the cost of the film was so low that it almost couldn't fail, despite a dismal box office showing. 2. The movie was supposed to be a $100 million epic. When funding dissolved, the movie was pared down.....way down. Most of the budget went into the sfX sequence involving the dragon fight at the end of the movie. This is why the beholders do almost nothing and only appear on screen for a few seconds, and why there aren't any real CGI monsters in the meat of the movie. 3. There was a completely different script for the movie, involving a party invading a city of undead. This script was actually fairly decent, although still not strong enough IMO to make a movie that is supposed to represent all that is good with D&D. That script was scrapped and the original $100 million script was revived. 4. The movie was based on the director's own home campaign world. That's why there are no clerics. He got rid of them in his world. 5. The sequel is in the works and IS based in the same world and to be directed by the same director. IMO, the D&D movie that should be made is the Drizz't Trilogy. This has a strong central character and has themes that resonate with contemporary non-fan audiences...i.e. racial discrimination. In doing so, IMo the entire movie would hinge on the casting of Drizz't. You'd need a charismatic African-American actor who can really protray the grace and litheness of a drow elf without carrying any of the "hood" baggage that, for example, Wayans brought into the D&D movie. Devin
Hogre 01-29-04, 03:23 PM	I believe it takes 3 things to make a good move. Good Story Good Direction Good Actors The DnD movie had no bad actors, and a few good ones. Now some of you may think the acting was bad, but that was probably more to do with bad direction. I have seen the actors in other roles and they have done fine in other movies. The story for DnD was mediocre. There was nothing special here, but nothing dooming either. It could have been pulled off, by some minor tweaking. Directing. Directing is where this movie went down the drain. Substance was cut for action. And scenes were jumbled together to the point where it felt like you were jumping around aimlessly. There are of course other factors besides these 3. Set design, costumes and special effects to name a few. These usually don't make or break a movie, but they are sometimes more memorable.
devinmdp 01-29-04, 03:27 PM	Originally posted by Hogre I believe it takes 3 things to make a good move. Good Story Good Direction Good Actors I disagree. I think it is writing that makes or breaks a good movie. The script for the D&D movie was subpar IMO. One thing I believe Lord of the Rings has shown is that you need much more than neat special effects to truly win over vast audiences....you need relatable characters with some sense of depths and you need excellent writing. Devin
Ithilorien 01-29-04, 03:33 PM	While the script wasn't good, I would definitely agree that it was the directing which damned the D&D movie. Remember the modern concept of theatre and cinema is that a production is supposed to be the director's vision, he is supposed to bring everything together, and this means to a degree that they have to carry the majority of either the praise or detraction. In the D&D movie you see what is clearly bad directing with the jumbled scenes, poor takes, badly directed actors (Jeremy Irons should have been told to cut back, Thora Birch should have raised the stakes and made stronger physical choices, etc). The bad script certainly didn't help, but the directing was just awful beyond belief. Worse than Lucas. I disagree. I think it is writing that makes or breaks a good movie. The script for the D&D movie was subpar IMO. One thing I believe Lord of the Rings has shown is that you need much more than neat special effects to truly win over vast audiences....you need relatable characters with some sense of depths and you need excellent writing. Lord of the Rings, as a screenplay is by no means good writing. The dialogue is often stilted, the characters are mostly pasteboard (not that Tolkien himself was big on either or these points, really) with only Frodo, Sam, and Gollum really seeming to achieve any type of character arc. Though Jackson tried to make Faramir and Aragorn more dynamic than they are in the books it seemed less than convincing to me, maybe because of Faramir's minor role and Viggo Mortensen's so-so acting. And yet, despite writing which I really wouldn't call more than "okay" for the most part (some scenes do stand out as being very well written) Jackson made what are fairly brilliant movies. The acting is, on the whole, great, the visuals are impeccable, the music, though perhaps overbearing at times is well used. The pacing (except for RotK's ending) is sound and the cuts and transitions flow well. Thanks to Tolkien's lack of dialogue and characterization the film has to be told more through music, facial expressions, and action than us getting any deep glimpse of the character's psyche and Jackson manages to pull it all off beautifully. Very little of what we get of the character in LotR is from the writing, it's the acting and directing which pull it together. One of the key selling points of the RotK movies, as it is for the novels, is the level of detail. Jackson's crew approached the film not as a fantasy epic but as a historical epic, and I think it is this distinction which helped to hold it out as "good cinema" as opposed to cheesy fantasy. Our society still attaches far to much Disneyism to fantasy and there needs to be a break when trying to bring it to the big screen or we get fairy dragon companions and some of the worst overacting ever seen (Profion). This, again, is why I'd support the Chronicles as a film series (though Dragons of Autumn Twilight could be a stand alone single feature if studios don't want to commit to a full trilogy). Dragonlance does have a sense of culture and history more detailed than most settings. I remember flipping through my Tales of the Lance boxed set and reading about all the different ages and seeing the detailed descriptions of clothing, tools, weapons, and equipment used by different races. Dragonlance also is slightly off the generic fantasy path and so it might still look fresh on screen. And finally the Chronicles provide a more epic, grounded story than say the Dark Elf Trilogy or the books of Ed Greenwood. Though those may have their merits they aren't quite a "saga" and they don't have some of the stronger thematic ties I think Weis and Hickman's first three Dragonlance novels do.
Hogre 01-29-04, 04:12 PM	Sorry, but I just found this funny. Originally posted by devinmdp I disagree..... I think it is writing that makes or breaks a good movie. The script for the D&D movie was subpar IMO. One thing I believe Lord of the Rings has shown is that you need much more than neat special effects to truly win over vast audiences....Here it comesyou need relatable characters with some sense of depths Acting. and you need excellent writing. Devin And of course it takes a good director to be smart enough to bring these things together.
B4Real 01-29-04, 05:50 PM	Originally posted by Capn Charlie I don't care about the movie type or plot, I just want to see Sean Connery play Elminster. That is all. Why can't Samuel L. Jackson play him ? He is in every other movie. :D ~B4Real
B4Real 01-29-04, 05:55 PM	Originally posted by Sulaco Well, weak as the D&D movie was, it was most certainly better than Beastmaster, Krull, and Army of Darkness. The sad thing is that Army of Darkness was actually supposed to be kind of scary. :zzz: ~B4Real
Kragen_Steel 01-29-04, 06:45 PM	Originally posted by devinmdp I am involved with a company that was close to the D&D movie. Let me dispel a few myths and rumours. 1. The movie DID make money. Why? Because the cost of the film was so low that it almost couldn't fail, despite a dismal box office showing. Hopefully my new thread will put an end to this 9/11ish disaster of a movie. http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=173034 I've already sent off a complaint to Wizards and the NAACP. Hopefully other fans will pile on the complaints.
B4Real 01-29-04, 06:48 PM	Originally posted by Kragen_Steel Hopefully my new thread will put an end to this 9/11ish disaster of a movie. http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=173034 I've already sent off a complaint to Wizards and the NAACP. Hopefully other fans will pile on the complaints. LoL!
Ertai Planeswalker 01-29-04, 07:08 PM	Originally posted by B4Real Why can't Samuel L. Jackson play him ? He is in every other movie. :D ~B4Real Because Elminster isn't a brother...
Ranger REG 01-29-04, 09:24 PM	Originally posted by Drindin Get some big names in there like Elijah Wood, Orlando Bloom, Liv Tyler, maybe even Cate Blanchette (I think that's her name...) and you'd be on the way to making a decent film. Not really. Those actors and their characters have been the icons of Lord of the Rings films. I'd rather not recycle them. I want a D&D film to be distinctly different and that means an entirely new cast of actors.
Tevish Szat 01-29-04, 09:44 PM	Dragonlance Chronicles they could make something from. If they make another D&D movie like thi first, I will refuse to acknowledge its existance. Shesh, if they just make another D&D movie not immediatly recognizable as something coing from a good novel start like DL, you can bet i'll be making sure of the reviews before i see it. if there's a thumbs down, than i'll wait until its on network TV or something. I think that something could be pulled off, even not going off a preexisting base, but only if they forgot its a D&D movie and treated it like a FANTASY movie. no pitiful in jokes such.
MadBlue 01-30-04, 12:48 AM	I'd like to see a movie with the D&D iconic characters, perhaps with three or four of them being the main characters and others either making cameo appearances to assist in certain parts of the main characters' quest (Soveliss guides the party through the forest), or at least identifiable to players in the form of "Easter Eggs" (one of the characters bumps into Krusk in a doorway of a pub and Devis is sitting in the corner playing his lute). The characters should use abilities, spells and items they have in the game. For example: as the villian casts a fireball, Regdar, Mialee and Jozan brace themselves for the impact, while Lidda dives to the ground and rolls out of harm's way. Afterwards, Jozan heals the party with clerical magic (or one of the characters is seen drinking a potion and his/her wounds close up). As for villains, it would be neat to see the Yuan-Ti make an appearance. If the BBEG were a Lich or Mind Flayer, or maybe a Half-Dragon, that would be pretty cool, too. There's no need to put any fantasy elements into the movie that don't exist in D&D. As players, we're looking for familiar elements to say "cool, this is just like D&D". When someone casts a spell that causes people to sprout antennae from their ears, or the characters bump into a blue guy with a crest on his head, it doesn't make us go "cool I want to use that in my game", it makes us go "what the hell was that all about?". Of course, those not-familiar with the game are probably thinking the same thing, but then again they're probably thinking that when they see a Beholder too. If someone asks about the D&D RPG and says "is it like that movie (D&D II that is)?", we should be able to say (and want to be able to say) "yeah, pretty much". That being the case, what I'd also like to see is, as Hogre and devinmdp said, good special effects, good story, good acting and good directing. MadBlue
Tevish Szat 01-30-04, 01:00 AM	Originally posted by MadBlue If someone asks about the D&D RPG and says "is it like that movie (D&D II that is)?", we should be able to say (and want to be able to say) "yeah, pretty much". I agree wholeheartedly with this.
Enkeli 01-30-04, 03:53 AM	Originally posted by devinmdp You'd need a charismatic African-American actor who can really protray the grace and litheness of a drow elf without carrying any of the "hood" baggage that, for example, Wayans brought into the D&D movie. Why African-American? Drows aren't brown, they are pitch black, something that goes beyond any existing skin colour. What you need is a good make-up artist.
JRidden 01-30-04, 05:35 AM	Originally posted by Tevish Szat I agree wholeheartedly with this. +1 The guy up there had really written the idea of we, the D&D lovers In order to attract the "nonD&Ds" to watch the movie, great hollywooed stars are needed. "The Rock", Johnny Dipp and Val Kilmer etc are the good choices i think And i really wanna see Orlando Broom the handsome Elf can appear in the D&D movie...
Drindin 01-30-04, 05:38 AM	Originally posted by Ranger REG Not really. Those actors and their characters have been the icons of Lord of the Rings films. I'd rather not recycle them. I want a D&D film to be distinctly different and that means an entirely new cast of actors. *slaps his forehead again!* Dangit, you people! Cut me some slack! Here's why I picked those names in particular: They are the only actors that I can remember the names of that I'd even suggest being in the movie! Why? Because, though Tom Hanks is good, he can't hold a strong part with the skill required for a Fantasy movie, I don't care how strayed from the genre it is. Second, I don't call Leonardo Decaprio "Decapitated" for nothing. He'd make a good redshirt, mind you. I'd love to see him dragged behind a chariot... but that's just me. Any how, I rest my case... *again*. And another thing... having little known actors is all fine and good, but you have to remember, it all burns down to ONE MAIN THING: How much money will it reel in? Oh, sure the movie's gonna have a good feel to it, oh sure it'll have the right atmosphere... but despite the feel, one must remember that at present, even with LOTR, DND players are still a minority out there. And minorities like that don't tend to reel in the big bucks like appealing to everyone else does. So, you want the funding to hire a decent author and make good graphics sequences, you're gonna need big-name-actors playing major roles, or at least a huge-named producer behind the scenes. Then you can reel in the blues, greens, and pinks.
Enkeli 01-30-04, 05:57 AM	Johnny Depp would make a good rogue-ish character, he has that sort of bad boy charisma to him, and given his repuation for acting in off-beat movies, he might actually go for it (he was going to do Don Quixote, directed by Terry Gilliam, but it got canned).
JRidden 01-30-04, 06:02 AM	Originally posted by Drindin *slaps his forehead again!* They are the only actors that I can remember the names of that I'd even suggest being in the movie! Why? Because, though Tom Hanks is good, he can't hold a strong part with the skill required for a Fantasy movie, I don't care how strayed from the genre it is. Second, I don't call Leonardo Decaprio "Decapitated" for nothing. He'd make a good redshirt, mind you. I'd love to see him dragged behind a chariot... but that's just me. And another thing... having little known actors is all fine and good, but you have to remember, it all burns down to ONE MAIN THING: How much money will it reel in? Oh, sure the movie's gonna have a good feel to it, oh sure it'll have the right atmosphere... but despite the feel, one must remember that at present, even with LOTR, DND players are still a minority out there. And minorities like that don't tend to reel in the big bucks like appealing to everyone else does. So, you want the funding to hire a decent author and make good graphics sequences, you're gonna need big-name-actors playing major roles, or at least a huge-named producer behind the scenes. Then you can reel in the blues, greens, and pinks. Yup, you got the point. Let treat LOTRs a part of the D&D world. And i don't see that is a problem that Legolas (Orlando Bloom) appear again in the D&D movie He is the "Elf" in all the people's mind..... Not the "Spock" from the Entreprise and the "elf" from the player handbook
LaegolasGreenleaf 01-30-04, 09:52 AM	Originally posted by MadBlue I'd like to see a movie with the D&D iconic characters, perhaps with three or four of them being the main characters and others either making cameo appearances to assist in certain parts of the main characters' quest (Soveliss guides the party through the forest), or at least identifiable to players in the form of "Easter Eggs" (one of the characters bumps into Krusk in a doorway of a pub and Devis is sitting in the corner playing his lute)...... They did make a "movie" containing the iconic D&D characters called, Scourge of Worlds. The one problem that I found was that it didn't have enough of the representative characters. Here are the characters that would have made the movie much better and longer (why don't I just list them all off, just in case some people aren't familiar with them <yeah, right>): Krusk, half-orc barbarian Devis, half-elven bard Jozan, human cleric of Pelor Vadania, elven druid Tordek, dwarven fighter Ember, human monk Alhandra, human paladin Soveliss, elven ranger (personally, my favorite) Hennet, human sorceror Nebin, gnome illusionist *Notice* I named off the 3.0e core characters because I haven't quite gotten into the 3.5e (ie. Bard as the gnome's favored class). Oooo, I've got a good idea. Out of the characters above, including Mialee, Lidda, & Regdar, what actor / actress would best respresent each characters in a live action version of the Greyhawk setting? Keep it rolling..........
LaegolasGreenleaf 01-30-04, 09:58 AM	WOW Thanks for all of the responses. It's good to have a topic that the guys and gals here can have fun with. Don't stop!
LaegolasGreenleaf 01-30-04, 10:18 AM	Originally posted by Drindin *slaps his forehead again!* Dangit, you people! Cut me some slack! Here's why I picked those names in particular: They are the only actors that I can remember the names of that I'd even suggest being in the movie! Why? Because, though Tom Hanks is good, he can't hold a strong part with the skill required for a Fantasy movie, I don't care how strayed from the genre it is. Second, I don't call Leonardo Decaprio "Decapitated" for nothing. He'd make a good redshirt, mind you. I'd love to see him dragged behind a chariot... but that's just me. Tom Hanks did do a fantasy movie in a strange sort of way. I fon't know if some of you remember Mazes and Monsters. A very good reason why there was such a negative view of D&D in 80s. Incidently that's why I got my start into to it so late in life. Don't get me started on Leo. I'll just say any D&D movie would suck with him in it. As for Orlando Bloom, he would, for obvious reasons, fit into a D&D movie perfectly and not necessarily have to play an elf. I know the girls are all ga-ga over him.
Hogre 01-30-04, 10:30 AM	Originally posted by LaegolasGreenleaf Don't get me started on Leo. I'll just say any D&D movie would suck with him in it. He wasn't so bad in Gangs of NewYork. That movie wasn't too far off from being fantasy.
Ranger REG 01-30-04, 06:08 PM	Originally posted by JRidden Yup, you got the point. Let treat LOTRs a part of the D&D world. If that is the case, then why even make another D&D film? We already have LOTR films? For that, I and the non-roleplaying moviegoing audience are content. But if you want to make another D&D film (a better one than the original), then don't be lazy. Make it distinctly different, not an apparent "recycling center." And i don't see that is a problem that Legolas (Orlando Bloom) appear again in the D&D movie He is the "Elf" in all the people's mind..... Not the "Spock" from the Entreprise and the "elf" from the player handbook Technically, Mr. Spock is to TOS as Mr. Tuvok is to VOY as T'Pol is to ENT. Leonard Nimoy's portrayal of Mr. Spock have forever cemented him in Star Trek history as the classic iconic Vulcan (albeit a half-Vulcan). But other actors have portrayed Vulcans in Star Trek and did well for their own part. And in case you haven't noticed, there are other elves in LOTR whose actors did perform well on their parts and are being recognized, from Hugo Weaving's "Lord Elrond of Rivendell" to Craig Parker's "Haldir." (I know that Cate Blanchett's performance "Galadriel" is also good, but I'm talking about the manly elves who have fighting scenes on the films.) So why not be creative and different, and find other actors aside from the cast of LOTR (which I think "recycling" them is a lazy casting approach)?
Ithilorien 01-30-04, 06:45 PM	Originally posted by Ranger REG (I know that Cate Blanchett's performance "Galadriel" is also good, but I'm talking about the manly elves who have fighting scenes on the films.) That's one thing a D&D movie can do to be different: present women as part of the action, too. The Dragonlance Chronicles, for example, present three incredibly strong female roles: Goldmoon, Kitiara, and Laurana (not to mention Takhisis, come to think of it).
devinmdp 01-30-04, 06:47 PM	A Drizz't movie would have female drow ruling and dominating a society...and Cattibrie can fight with the best of them as well. Devin
Sulaco 01-30-04, 07:23 PM	Originally posted by LaegolasGreenleaf Don't get me started on Leo. I'll just say any D&D movie would suck with him in it. A little bit of editing will get that sentence in order: Don't get me started on Leo. I'll just say any movie would suck with him in it. There' that's better. PS - I love Mazes & Monsters. It is hilarious! And it was filmed(at least in part) here in Toronto.
Elly11 01-30-04, 10:43 PM	I don't care about the movie type or plot, I just want to see Sean Connery play Elminster. OMG Before I read that i was gonna post the EXACT same thing!! Sean Connery would be perfect for Elminster.
aldymnor 01-30-04, 11:04 PM	Originally posted by Kragen_Steel Dragonlance Trilogy is the most logical choice. It may not be purist D&D but it's rich enough to compete with LOTR. I dont think the masses would fall for a Drow Elf in the other series. I agree. Well, I think they would fall in love if it was done right but the lone wolf genre sorta went down with the 70s as far as fantasy / sci-fi. Case in point: Conan (granted that's 84), Beastmaster, etc. Dragonlance has the following issues over Forgotten Realms, as far as their ability to wow an American audience: -more believable companions (no fallen or future gods. Goldmoon is the closest thing to it and that's a long shot.) -more focused goal: the war of steel, the war of souls, these are both pretty focused events whereas in Forgotten Realms, there are many more small conflicts. Sure, you could focus on these but that'd be better for a TV series, in my opinion. Frankly I think they shouldn't be trying. Fantasy is amazingly difficult to lift off the ground in a theatrical cinema setting; Lord of the Rings was the most read literature in the 20th century. It had an "in" so to speak. I am, however, looking forward to the new King Arthur movie.
Ranger REG 01-31-04, 02:01 AM	Originally posted by aldymnor Frankly I think they shouldn't be trying. Fantasy is amazingly difficult to lift off the ground in a theatrical cinema setting; Lord of the Rings was the most read literature in the 20th century. It had an "in" so to speak. With all due respect, anyone who is not trying is considered to be doing a half-[bleeped] job. You do know what I mean, right? You do the task as minimal as possible so long you meet the quota, go home and get paid, where you get to do something more enjoyable and you'll give it your full attention and participation. I mean the job is nothing more than just a means to your income. It's like casting an OK actress who is beautiful and as long she says her line, that enough to print the film. At the very least, you gotta try. You got to make the setting as detailed as possible and very believable. The late Professor Tolkien was kind enough to left a lot of additonal background notes than just the stories themselves. And that is something Margaret Weis and Tracy Hickman must do. Stop using the conventional modern-day commercial novel writing approach and be unconventional. Make the Dragonlance world believable. What Peter Jackson did is make me, a member of the audience, to be immersed in the world the films is portraying. I don't need the books. In fact, it has been a long time since I read the books. For me, personally, it made me feel like it's the kind of world I like to escape to, pardon my romantic notion. THAT's the moviegoing experience I want when I go to the theater. If you can't give me that, then it makes no sense to bother at all.
LaegolasGreenleaf 01-31-04, 02:41 AM	Originally posted by Ranger REG ...For me, personally, it made me feel like it's the kind of world I like to escape to, pardon my romantic notion. THAT's the moviegoing experience I want when I go to the theater. If you can't give me that, then it makes no sense to bother at all. Amen, REG. The Lord of the Rings took us to amazing world of elves, dwarves, hobbits, magic, and yes, even a bit of mystery. A world even I would like to escape to. IMHO, The Lord of the Rings trilogy is the standard by which all other fantasy movies should be made. There is no greater story than this. Some may disagree with me on this but the strongest point of these stories is that the power of friendship can hold us together, even in the face of impossible odds. God, I love fantasy. May it live forever in our hearts, souls and minds.
Luminosity 01-31-04, 04:40 AM	He wasn't so bad in Gangs of NewYork. That movie wasn't too far off from being fantasy. DiCaprio can do anything he's directed to do. Have any of you seen "What's Eating Gilbert Grape?" His performance in "Romeo + Juliet" was better than any other Romeo I've seen play the part. The hostility toward him, in my opinion, stems from the DiCaprio burnout that many males experienced in the 90's. Pretty boy in Titanic...pretty boy in The Man in the Iron Mask, etc. I would very much like to see a female melee character in the D&D movie, partcularly if she's the bad guy or a close henchman thereof. Male Human Paladin: "I refuse to hit a la-"*THWACK*....*THUD* Female Melee Bad Guy: "Oh well. Your mistake."
MadBlue 01-31-04, 06:08 AM	Oooo, I've got a good idea. Out of the characters above, including Mialee, Lidda, & Regdar, what actor / actress would best respresent each characters in a live action version of the Greyhawk setting? Keep it rolling.......... Just some ideas: Regdar: Vin Diesel Lidda: Natalie Portman Mialee: Lucy Liu Jozan: Ben Afleck Ember: Halle Berry Krusk: Ron Perlman Devis: Kevin Bacon Alhandra: Jennifer Lopez Soveliss: Jude Law Hennet: Keanu Reeves Nebin: Steve Buscemi Tordek: Russell Crowe Of all the ones I listed, I could definitely see Vin Diesel being in the movie. Ron Perlman is reasonable. I really don't think we should expect a star-studded cast or academy nominations (outside of special effects), not that it wouldn't be nice, of course. MadBlue
aldymnor 01-31-04, 06:15 AM	Originally posted by Ranger REG At the very least, you gotta try. With millions of dollars on the line, a product line's name, the future of fiscal budgets and other things, I honestly disagree. I see trying as half-assed. I don't think they should try. Tolkein was a literary marvel by textbook definition. (I don't agree, but I'll reserve my personal thoughts on the professor for right now.) He built a world with intense detail, aimed to stay away from allegory (good luck with that, Mr. I-Hate-Combustion-Engines-and-Nazi-Germany), and gave a nation without native mythology some native mythology. As a veritable coup de grace, he tacked on a coming of age story, which can almost never go wrong with Americans for some reason. (I mention Americans because it is American dollars that make the major movie reels go round in the end.) Margaret Weis and Tracy Hickman (I love them both, don't get me wrong) played D&D and liked it so much, they tried to write and sell novels. There are certain niches people can find and use to meet their own creative goals. Some of these niches don't really involve multi-million dollar movies. Dragonlance could be believable as all get-out, but the problem is, it doesn't have the niche that LotR has had. Tanis would appeal to the children born to mixed families. Tasslehof would appeal to the little klepto in so many of us. ... And that's it. I love Raistlin more than any other fictional character, but it's not going to rake in the sales. Let's get back to the point, and sorry I ranted there. Firstly, I just plain disagree. Just because something can be done does not at all mean it should - not to me. The pilot of the Enola Gay might agree. Secondly, if there is to be a D&D movie, I'm still insisting DL is the best for the reasons I listed earlier. Anything done well would make it, but I think Dragonlance has the biggest margin of ability with which to make a great movie or three.
Rorroh Fiendhugger 01-31-04, 12:31 PM	I immediately thought of Johny Depp as well, for some reason I'd like him playing a Drow. Thinking of Braveheart, Mel Gibson could make a perfect human barbarian :) And let's not forget Russell Crowe either.
Capn Charlie 01-31-04, 12:48 PM	Originally posted by Elly11 OMG Before I read that i was gonna post the EXACT same thing!! Sean Connery would be perfect for Elminster. Indeed he would. I also want to see Christopher Walken play Halaster Blackcloak. Originally posted by LaegolasGreenleaf Amen, REG. IMHO, [b]The Lord of the Rings trilogy is the standard by which all other fantasy movies should be made. And it will be the measure against which they all fail. That is what will doom every other fantasy film made. They(general public) will say that it is no Lotr, that every aspect is a tolkein ripoff, and not care about it. All gamers will feel insulted that the movie won't get the Lotr budget. No one will try to outdo it. The Lotr movies were nice, an excellent swan song for fantasy movies on the big screen. I just hope that it's being good is a worthwhile trade for never getting another legitimate chance in theatres.
Nytmare 01-31-04, 12:55 PM	I would like to add that the surest way to make a project fail is to cast it first.
Ithilorien 01-31-04, 01:21 PM	The Lotr movies were nice, an excellent swan song for fantasy movies on the big screen. I just hope that it's being good is a worthwhile trade for never getting another legitimate chance in theatres. I don't think it's impossible for a film to ever compare with Lord of the Rings. Yes, the LotR movies were good, but not the greatest thing since sliced bread (no matter how many fantasy fans are going to disagree with me). The LotR films could actually serve to reinvigorate the fantasy genre, as now there has finally been not only a decent fantasy film, but also a highly successful one. What the LotR films have done is simply show that you can't crank out trash fantasy (Conan, Willow, the D&D movie) and expect it to sell. I will continue to assert that the LotR films, like the novels, have what are to me some glaring flaws, namely: * Lack of characterization: Tolkien's characters are for the most part wooden set pieces, and to a degree this is fine. He wasn't trying to write the greatest novel of all time, he was trying to make a history for his invented languages. The result is, however, that we get characters described as they would be in history books far more than is conventional in "good literature" where character development is a crucial point. In the films you can see how Jackson tried to ammend this flaw by making Aragorn and Faramir more dynamic and by actually reprojecting the elf/dwarf stereotypes that have evolved since LotR back onto Legolas and Gimli. * Poor pacing issues. Most people without an outstanding interest in the genre (and even I'd hazard to say those who do) find Tolkien to be some slow going, even the films, which have considerably more action, also have some drag to them. Things just don't move at the best pace. In addition to some slow moments in the films, the ending of RotK is ludicrously self indulgent, not neccessarilly in its content but simply the incredibly slow way in which each segment is filmed and the epic-length fades between each one tagging on what really is about ten minutes of dead space to be endured by an audience who has already been sitting for three hours. * Lack of dialogue. This is the key glimpse into a character one can have in film, and still a major one in literature, yet neither the novel or film versions of LotR really have terribly much focus on dialogue. Now, the Dragonlance novels certainly aren't triumphs of artistic mastery, either, but they do offer some things Tolkien doesn't, including more dialogue, better developed characters, and a faster pace. They also present a world about as different from Tolkien's as D&D can get (without going into Spelljammer, Ravenloft or Planescape, none of which seems like it would be terribly marketable and neither of which really reflects "core" D&D). It is things such as this which could help a well-budgeted, well-directed, seriously handled Dragonlance film also be a commercial success. On the other hand, Dragonlance also kind of errs on the other side of excess as compared to Tolkien in that perhaps its characterization and dialogue sway over into being too self-indulgent, melodramatic, and reminiscent of a soap opera. Yet soap operas and melodramas sell quite well in and of themselves, and a good screenplay, good actors, and good directing can gloss these over into a more coherent and palatable whole. I would very much like to see a female melee character in the D&D movie, partcularly if she's the bad guy or a close henchman thereof. Male Human Paladin: "I refuse to hit a la-"*THWACK*....*THUD* Female Melee Bad Guy: "Oh well. Your mistake." Sounds like Kitiara and Sturm at the High Clerist's Tower to me. Dragonlance could be believable as all get-out, but the problem is, it doesn't have the niche that LotR has had. Tanis would appeal to the children born to mixed families. Tasslehof would appeal to the little klepto in so many of us. ... And that's it. I love Raistlin more than any other fictional character, but it's not going to rake in the sales. Raistlin, to a degree, can represent the stance of Malcolm X-like minority groups which go from mistreatment to violence. He also is a highly relateable character to anyone who has been downtrodden, he simply extrapolates to the dark side where as most people in real life keep themselves reined in. You're also forgetting the Dragonlance stories focus on the concepts of faith and fate, both of which can be quite interesting particularly given that our nation is now somehow hinging (as it almost always has) between rationality, secular humanism, and the "Christian right." It also offers an epic battle between good and evil, which is one of the main themes reflected in LotR and has coming of age and companionship overtones to match, too. Moreover, the Laurana/Tanis and Riverwind/Goldmoon relationships offer a sort of Romeo and Juliet sort of aspect (both are to a degree "forbidden loves") and integrate women into the story far more than LotR ever did. I certainly don't see any glaring points that say "Dragonlance movies would be terrible" so long as they were produced with the same respect and maturity that the LotR ones were.
lotterybucks 01-31-04, 07:50 PM	Originally posted by Ithilorien I believe that decent film was called the Lord of the Rings. hear, hear!!!! A "name" actor can't really help but be identified as themselves more than there character, and this is bad for presenting a fantasy world. *cough*Orlando Bloom *cough* In my opinion, creating a movie about D&D is a very risky thing to do. Given the current craze due to LoTR, it is almost certain that another fantasy movie with elves, humans, orcs, dwarves, etc. will draw a rather large audience. However, a large crowd should be handled carefully. While it will bring even more attention to the supposedly hidden world of fantasy, the next film's success will also determine the popularity of RPGs for a long time. In order to attract the average movie-goer, big name actors will be needed. Although this will probably take away from the movie's quality, it will make D&D much more known. I mean, how many teenage girls oblivious to fantasy BEFORE Peter Jackson's masterpieces skipped going to the mall and watched the LoTR trilogy just to see Aragorn and (especially) Legolas? How many football jocks flocked the theaters just to see Arwen? There were many people who did this, but as a result, gave some much deserved respect to gamers and RPGers who've been immersed in that world for ages. In short, the geek world should rejoice if the sequel to the D&D movie comes out filled with a star studded cast, though they themselves should avoid the movie. It's just impossible to create a movie about such an open-ended game. Just my two CPs...
Ithilorien 01-31-04, 08:18 PM	Well, Mortensen and Bloom are far more popular now than they were pre-LotR (such can be said of almost everyone involved) and so as a sort of second- to third- to fourth-string actors (at least to American audiences) they didn't glare out of the screen the way the likes of Tom Hanks or Mel Gibson would. Another concern may be that though given the success of LotR a D&D movie would recieve a bigger budget than the D&D movie did, it would probably still be markedly less than was granted to LotR (at least until the first one proved itself, then more cash would likely be offered to sequels).
Raferous 01-31-04, 09:29 PM	Bwahaha!! Awesome idea... make a movie better than the last one!!!! :D My input... have a hexblade in there... they are the best eversomes!! Get rollin! I will act! (Im young, but i can act). -Raferous
JRidden 01-31-04, 11:45 PM	Yup, iconic characters are needed. With Viggo Mortensen's so-so acting and his "smelly" dirty look.....Orlando Bloom, the Clean, neat and handsome elf, no doubt, become the iconic and he's the representative of "Fantasy" world nowadays.(9 out of 10 people, including me, go and see the LOTRs film because of him) Face it, human being like beautiful things and not cheapy, dirty and dumb-look people like the one appear in the pervious D&D movie. Since he's still a :new-comer" of the holltwood stars, why not taking him again while his "demand of salary" is far less than the others? See Tom Cruise "Last Samurai" as a disaster example. If only he can make himself neat, and added some kind of "Monster" (like chinese hopping vampire,instead of invoiving in real-life japanese history). I'm sure the box office will have a bigger hit with this "Orential advanture-style" film. ^v^ Just my 2 Cps
Ranger REG 02-01-04, 01:44 AM	Originally posted by Ithilorien Well, Mortensen and Bloom are far more popular now than they were pre-LotR (such can be said of almost everyone involved) and so as a sort of second- to third- to fourth-string actors (at least to American audiences) they didn't glare out of the screen the way the likes of Tom Hanks or Mel Gibson would. Well, Viggo Mortensen was in Demi Moore's GI Jane film. For an actor who came into the LOTR production a few days before principal shooting (because the actor that was first cast as Aragorn quit), he performed well. Orlando Bloom was a nobody. He just graduated from an art school in England. This is his first professional acting gig, to be followed by Johnny Depp's Pirates of the Caribbeans with a so-so role. Last I heard, he's now doing a contemporary movie that does not involved swordfighting nor archery. If I were him, I'd keep finding new range in his acting skill for now. Go back to fantasy film if you need money or that you miss it (as if the 14-month production shooting is an experience you'd like to get into again). Another concern may be that though given the success of LotR a D&D movie would recieve a bigger budget than the D&D movie did, it would probably still be markedly less than was granted to LotR (at least until the first one proved itself, then more cash would likely be offered to sequels).[/B] Do what you can with the big budget to make that one film. Unless you can find a production company whose suits happens to be DL fans. After all, it was New Line Cinema that suggested they do 3 LOTR films, not 2 as was initially pitched by Peter Jackson and Co.
Kojiro James 02-01-04, 02:15 AM	Originally posted by Enkeli Why African-American? Drows aren't brown, they are pitch black, something that goes beyond any existing skin colour. What you need is a good make-up artist. Being a big fan of Farscape, I can now tell everyone that pitch-black Drow CAN be done. On Farscape, I've seen people painted up as every imaginable color under the sun. DROW ARE A POSSIBILITY!!
Drindin 02-01-04, 07:58 PM	Umm... people... there ARE pitch black african-americans, as well as plain africans out there. Just pointing that out...
Capn Charlie 02-01-04, 08:02 PM	Well the problem that the have is that drow skin tones are black-grey, as it lightens. African American skin tones are black-brown as it lightens. This makes the skin tone just not mesh. Besides most of the drow pics I have seen are dark grey, not actually black.
Drindin 02-01-04, 08:04 PM	Goes to show what I know! :P To be fully honest, I always thought they were blue!
Raferous 02-02-04, 12:11 AM	Originally posted by Kojiro James Being a big fan of Farscape, I can now tell everyone that pitch-black Drow CAN be done. On Farscape, I've seen people painted up as every imaginable color under the sun. DROW ARE A POSSIBILITY!! Good point! FARSCAPE RULES! ( And i am an uber nerd). :p
LaegolasGreenleaf 02-02-04, 12:27 AM	Drow did look kinda of blue-ish or gray-ish to show more detail of their features.
LaegolasGreenleaf 02-04-04, 01:03 AM	Did this D&D movie talk burn everybody out? I hope not. Let's hear any ideas outside of the campaign settings, original ideas. The challenge has been set down before you. Give it your best shot.
Tevish Szat 02-04-04, 02:27 AM	I might be insane, but i think Planescape could work. The leads, or at least one of them,would be a green prime, someone the audiance and relate to without knowing all the intracicies of the planes. planescape is different, throwing in touches of Scifi, as well beinga ble to be done anything from a small scale adventure contained in Sigil to a huge, plane-spanning epic.
Tevish Szat 02-04-04, 11:37 PM	woah... I killed the thread...
Ithilorien 02-04-04, 11:52 PM	Not necessarilly, I think most people have simply had their input. For example, my rundown is: Story - Dragonlance Chronicles Saga (or just Autumn Twilight to start) Characters - those found in the chronicles Casting - primarilly talented, yet "no-name" actors (indy and foriegn actors perfectly acceptable). Directors/Producers - again, talented yet uncelebrated folk (not Corey Solomon).
Plunderer_of_the_planes 02-05-04, 12:13 AM	I'm gonna go out on a big limb here and say...I'd rather not see another movie. We had our chance, Soloman blew it to hell. Besides tha game does not translate to movies well. No one will ever agree on how it should be. The FR fans will be mad if it's done in Greyhawk, GH fans will be mad if set in FR, and everyone will want blood if not set in a D&D world. Wich leads me to my next point. D&D used to not have deafault or set worlds 9/10 of the worlds played in were creations of D&D players. I think we should count ourselves lucky that the DL novels broke the NYtimes bestseller list and let the movie Idea's go....
B4Real 02-05-04, 08:06 AM	Originally posted by Ertai Planeswalker Because Elminster isn't a brother... NO! Really ? Are you serious ? :rolleyes: ~B4Real
WhtKnt 02-05-04, 09:39 AM	I offered my input, no one saw fit to comment. They were much more concerned with arguing over whether Orlando Bloom should be recruited. I have nothing more to offer. Unless, of course, someone wants to recruit me to write the script, which I would be happy to do.
Elly11 02-12-04, 10:04 AM	Originally posted by Capn Charlie Indeed he would. I also want to see Christopher Walken play Halaster Blackcloak. Not casting Sean Connery for Elminster is almost like not casting Patrick Stewart for Professor X,you just cant see any other actor playing the part. Sean Connery has that charismatic personality that would fit him for the role. Christopher Walken would give an amazing performance hes got that certain craziness about him that would fit Halaster perfectly. Another great performer who is probally taken a little bit more seriously and gives great performances is Alan Rickman. The setting I would like to see it set in is FR Drizzt, Elminster whatever just make it something we know with a great story and an even better script. It has to be relatable not so much for the eye candy but the film site and costumes should be up to par like they were in LoTR. If I dont feel like I'm really there I cant enjoy the movie so maybe this time around they'll make it more believable.
Lady_Firehawk 02-14-04, 07:28 PM	I coulda handled the D&D movie if they hadn't given the BBEG fricking BLUE LIPS. :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:
Elly11 02-14-04, 07:54 PM	:rofl: Look at it like this....at least it wasn't pink hair ;)
Korhal_IV 02-15-04, 01:05 AM	Dragonlance and Drizzt Do'Urden would be the worst imaginable starting points. An audience needs to be able in many cases to relate to the setting. Setting aside Dragonlance for the moment, writing a film whose primary theme is "black elf guy about to be lynched by white elf guys" is just ASKING for an NAACP lawsuit. Further, Drizzt is really more of a momentary pleasure, as characters go. He's fun to read about, but he leaves no major impression, at least to me. That's why we keep hearing about "Drizzt-clone" characters - it doesn't take much except being a) good at fighting and b) dual-wielding, plus a bit of c) being socially outcast in order to emulate Drizzt near-perfectly. What memorable dialogue has he had? What gut-wrenching moments? Even the latest trilogy just used great emotion in order to turn him into Rambo the Ranger. Mind you, I like the series a lot, but it's just not something that's viable, especially for a full-length film. Dragonlance is more problematic in that many of the elements it takes for granted - such as a polytheistic pantheon, which would already take a LOT of explanation - wouldn't be understandable to an audience whose closest contact with D&D has been Foxtrot comic strips. Also, dragons were heavily overdone in the first film - do we really want to bring in elements that are reminiscient of that film? Thirdly, Dragonlance has a huge cast, which is always tricky to use effectively. I'd rather see a film that focused on three or four characters. To drag out LotR again, we really only start to sympathize with Frodo and Sam when we see them struggling by themselves. Without the seven other characters running around, there's more time for pathos and communication. Fourthly, LotR is a big stumbling block for Dragonlance, even more so than it is for all fantasy films in general, because quite a few of the plot elements of LotR are present in Dragonlance. I'd like to see a fantasy film that presented a hero the audience can sympathize with at least somewhat, such as an unemployed mercenary. The foe should be something unusual even for fantasy - I like mind flayers. Brain-eating monsters that control their foes! What's not to like? Now, why is the mercenary unemployed? Well, no duh, there's no need for mercenaries. Why? Well, that's the question that has to be asked. The enemy is at the gates, yet the city council has blindly thrown away all their allies. Yep, here's where the mind flayers come in. When corpse after corpse starts showing up without a brain, and with horrific facial scars where tentacles tore into the head, the local mortician (elf enchantress? Priestess?) starts investigating, since the police are being redeployed away from these investigations. The two, mercenary and priestess, start investigating the trail of bodies, which leads to the palace of the councillors, a great marble mansion just FULL of great places to have a battle, and also where a cult of mind flayers is hiding. As the mind flayers' victims are freed (by killing the mind flayer?), some start joining up - add the dwarven butler, with great taste in weaponry as well as dinner wines, and a young, terrified nobleman, determined to do justice to the monsterswith his crossbow. Of course, what makes for great plot development is that *anyone* can be under the mind flayers' power, and at least one character should succumb more than once. You can easily see how creepy this would be, walking down a corridor in silence, praying that nothing in the adjoining rooms is reading your thoughts, sweating nervously as you wonder whether your companion's crossbow isn't purposefully lingering in your direction as he swings it back and forth...
Ithilorien 02-15-04, 11:29 AM	Without a polytheistic pantheon is it really D&D? Technically, LotR has quite an extensive pantheon itself, Tolkien just never overtly mentions it much (save for using the name "Elbereth").
DarkThoughts24 02-15-04, 10:33 PM	my circle of gamers and i would like to see a sequel to sword and the sorceror. more talon demmit!
Jefuri no Oni 02-16-04, 02:59 AM	As long as it's better than the first D&D movie I don't care. I think the best way to go is not to call it a D&D movie but rahter to rip off a D&D setting give it a different title and than just make a movie that's actually good. Ideally people who know nothing of D&D would like the movie but people who like D&D would enjoy it even more because they know where most of the plot in the movie came from.
novachild 02-16-04, 09:34 PM	Perhaps a movie featuring Raistlin, Caramon, Dalamar, and Chrysania would be nice... else why not the (abridged) life-story of Elminster... perhaps the 'Journals of Van Richten" as read by Strahd. and my final idea: The Prism Pentad... a five part movie lasting several hours longer than anyone has patience for, featuring a cast of half-naked, beautiful, ripped warriors that are all romantically involved with each other. Agis loves Sadira who kinda likes Rikus who wants both Sadira and Neeva, who marries a dwarf and has a kid... how daytime television! so much angst, sweat, and swordplay! I predict a boxoffice smash 5 times over. Vin Diesel as Rikus? Buff, not much personality? eh? :) peace
Mjollnir88 02-17-04, 12:43 AM	A Dragonlance based movie could be good, if done right. I'd like to see a Ravenloft movie, based in Falkovina, directed by Rob Zombie. !!!!Attention would-be D&D movie producers!!!!! Do not repeat the terrible travesty that the 1st movie was. The only good thing about it was watching Marlon Wayes die. Pretend it never happened and make a quality film. Watch Conan the Barbarian and the Lord of the Rings trilogy to learn how it is done.
WhtKnt 02-17-04, 09:53 AM	Originally posted by Mjollnir88 I'd like to see a Ravenloft movie, based in Falkovina, directed by Rob Zombie. !!!!Attention would-be D&D movie producers!!!!! Do not repeat the terrible travesty that the 1st movie was. The only good thing about it was watching Marlon Wayes die. Pretend it never happened and make a quality film. Watch Conan the Barbarian and the Lord of the Rings trilogy to learn how it is done. I wholeheartedly agree with this last sentiment. When I learned that Wayans was going to be in the film, I was afraid that the whole thing would degenerate into poorly-timed jokes and bad comedy... and I was right! However, I'm going to say this up front: If Rob Zombie is ever permitted to direct or produce a D&D film, set in Ravenloft or anywhere else, I will quit gaming on the spot! I saw House of 1000 Corpses and that was enough to convince me that you don't need talent to produce a movie, you just need money. I'd sooner sit through House of the Dead again (and that movie was bad!). A lot of people have been saying that Dragonlance would be a good film. I agree, to an extent. It has a strong story and enough action to keep it alive, but condensing it to two, or even three hours is going to be a pain. To do it justice, you really need to do it as a trilogy of films, and given the (generally) poor reactions to the first one, few studios are going to be willing to take a chance on another D&D film, much less three more. That said, a Ravenloft movie could do well, if it were handled correctly. Horror is making a resurgence right now, so that's a plus. You need to avoid making it cheesy, though. Christie Golden's novel Vampire of the Mists would be a good place to start. Dark Sun... well, I hate Dark Sun, but aside from that, it might succeed. It has the post-apocalyptic feel, but it needs to be very plot-driven or you're going to end up with Mad Max without the vehicles. Remember, you're not just catering to the gamers, here. To be a success, the film must draw in the average viewer as well.
novachild 02-17-04, 01:20 PM	btw, the dark sun was kind of a joke :p although it does have some potential... you're right... Mad Max with crodlus instead of vehicles, and a love story straight from daytime tv.... ick.
Lady_Firehawk 02-19-04, 03:16 PM	Too bad Kubrick's dead... :(
Plunderer_of_the_planes 02-19-04, 07:48 PM	Seems like I read somewhere that in the 80's Speilberg was going to do a D&D movie but TSR backed out....It would be cool if he was talked into it now....
LaegolasGreenleaf 02-19-04, 07:56 PM	Originally posted by Lady_Firehawk Too bad Kubrick's dead... :( I can just see it though.......... FULL METAL DRAGON Gotta find a way to get R. Lee in it. *Apologies* Sorry I couldn't resist....... :D
KeithF 02-20-04, 11:26 AM	I worked out some ideas for a new D&D movie a couple of years ago, using a slightly different concept, similar in some ways to 'The Princess Bride'. Picture this: four assorted gamers are shown in their daily lives, making their way to the DM's house. They open their rulebooks, crack open the junk food and start to play....and the film cuts to the fantasy world of the setting, with the same actors who play the gamers playing their characters. There would be occasional cuts back to the real world, e.g. when a character does something cool/funny, a moment's voiceover followed by a short scene in the DM's living room with the players laughing or cheering. Like in 'The Princess Bride' when the young boy complains about the story. The story would be something that might take place over the course of a single gaming session. For example: the party, having finished another adventure the previous session, arrives by ship in a big city, which they soon discover is being ruled by a king/lord who is trafficking with serious evil (demons, mind flayers, etc.). However, the people support him (they either know about his dealings and don't care, or said dealings can't be proven), and the party have to decide what to do, their differing alignments causing tension. Eventually, of course, they come to an agreement and defeat the bad guy. The characters would be a spectrum of different ages and types of player - the earnest new guy who always plays a paladin and tries to be heroic, the amateur-fantasy-artist girl who plays a beautiful elf magician, the older hardcore gamer who likes moral ambiguity and plays a neutral rogue, etc.
Plunderer_of_the_planes 02-20-04, 09:48 PM	Your idea was called "the gamers"
KeithF 02-21-04, 06:59 AM	It's been done? No big surprise, I suppose. Was it any good?
Plunderer_of_the_planes 02-21-04, 11:51 AM	Dunno yet, I live in a rural area so movies of that nature are rare. I have been trying to get a copy but no luck yet. Those I have talked to online who have seen it said it was a good movie. Link to "the Gamers" (http://gamers.deadgentlemen.com/media.html)
TheDarkestOfAngels 02-21-04, 10:48 PM	If there were a new D&D movie, I would like to see the following things. 1) A whole new setting. Not FR, Not GH, Not DL, not eberron, not anything. Putting a new movie in a pre-established setting will only serve to hurt it if they don't or even do include a fan-beloved character in any way, shape, or form. Such as Elminster, Drizz't, etc. etc. And don't get me wrong. I love GH and FR (never played or read about DL... eberron isn't even out yet, so I can't cast judgement.) Setting a new campaign world would allow the directer to only focus enough on the setting itself to introduce it move the story along. Personally, I'd like to see a setting somewhere along the lines of that one planet in Heavy Metal 2000 at the end of the movie. It was a desolate place and Tyler makes a perfect D&D supervillian, but you'd have to take out all of the sci-fi elements (I liked the movie, but some people don't. I can see why, but I'm not talking about anything more than the setting itself, not anything else.) Or even a setting similar to Scorpion King's Egyption setting or Dune, as opposed to a more European setting, like in D&D or LotR. Also, I think the setting itself should be low-magic. Kind of an odd thing to say, but placing a lot of magic in a movie can add unwanted D&D-ish or Harry Potter-ish cheese to it. Items and a lot of magic work much better in the game, but movies require a different approach. Magic should definately be present, but even if they do a GH or FR campaign, having a lot of magic involved except in certain scenes and generally much rarer than what is in normal D&D. Kinda difficult to explain my exact position on this, but this is the best I can do for now... 2) The heroes should be the classic set, kinda like Record Lodoss Wars (awesome set of RPG-ish movies.) where everyone has a part and everyone has something involved in the plot. Perhaps a melee Tyler-ish supervillian (Heavy Metal 2000 villian. he just screamed "I'm a D&D blackguard/supervillian," especially after he defeated this lizard-king thing and put on his bone armor). 3) I don't think even the D&D iconic monsters, such as the Drow, Illithids, and Beholders (... well... maybe one beholder) would need to be included. especially if a new setting is used. I think the plot would do if the BBEG weren't doing the atypical "I'm doing something big and bad do dominate all existance" or "I've been gathering an invincible army of darkness to..." or "I plan on aquiring the power of the gods" or "I plan on killing the gods." Something more "down-to-earth" sort of thing I think would be much better. even if it were a "down to earth" epic. Something like the Baulder's Gate II plot with a party vs. one horribly vile uberpower who's bent on revenge against against a group of peoples for whatever reasons. I guess what I'm trying to say is that I'd like a plot that's somewhere between truely epic and truely down-to-earth. Something that's on the upper reaches of plausibility and ledgendary. Including classic D&D monsters, in any situation, might draw attention away from the story and put their concern with those monsters rather than anything else that's going on. I never saw the monsterous D&D movie, but I heard that beholders made a brief appearance, but didn't do much and the dragons weren't done at all very well among a number of other things. If they did do a movie with existing D&D characters, I could easily imagine Connery playing Elminster. I don't know about any of the rest, but I've had the lingering desire to see the Kevin McCloud(Highlander) play Artemis Entriri. I think the immortal'd be perfect. I don't know about anyone else of note, however. Well... that's all I have for now.
Ranger REG 02-22-04, 08:34 PM	Originally posted by TheDarkestOfAngels 1) A whole new setting. Not FR, Not GH, Not DL, not eberron, not anything. Putting a new movie in a pre-established setting will only serve to hurt it if they don't or even do include a fan-beloved character in any way, shape, or form. Such as Elminster, Drizz't, etc. etc. And don't get me wrong. I love GH and FR (never played or read about DL... eberron isn't even out yet, so I can't cast judgement.) Setting a new campaign world would allow the directer to only focus enough on the setting itself to introduce it move the story along. But by doing so, you may generate fan interest that Wizards cannot ignore: a new game setting based on that movie's setting (assuming it is much more popular than the first D&D film). I'd rather they choose a setting, any setting and use iconic characters specific to the setting that is relevant to the story, not to include them for appearance purpose and appease certain fans. I'd like to think that before they are character fans, they're setting fans first. (Of course, I also like to believe that 99.99% of the D&D community are highly intelligent and very mature, but there is always somebody there to disprove that ... repeatedly. :P ) If they did do a movie with existing D&D characters, I could easily imagine Connery playing Elminster. Yet Another Request to Cast Connery. Look, while I like the guy when he was doing James Bond, and made a cameo appearance in Kevin Costner's Robin Hood: Prince of Thieves, I really ... again, REALLY ... don't think we need him. After what I have heard behind-the-scen production of LXG, the reason why it didn't do well at the box office is the constant argument between him and the director regarding the script. I don't know about any of the rest, but I've had the lingering desire to see the Kevin McCloud(Highlander) play Artemis Entriri. Kevin? Do you mean Connor (played by Christopher Lambert, too old and nearsighted) or Duncan MacLeod (played by Adrian Paul)?
TheDarkestOfAngels 02-22-04, 09:46 PM	Originally posted by Ranger REG Kevin? Do you mean Connor (played by Christopher Lambert, too old and nearsighted) or Duncan MacLeod (played by Adrian Paul)? I dunno. I've barely watched any Highlander, but he's the main character, I know that much. (Not that I wouldn't like to see more, but I think he could fit the character well, I think. He's got the swordplay, but I don't know about the acting well enough to make a judgement on that.) I wouldn't mind seeing who'd play Alustriel or the Simbul, to say the truth.
Raymond_Luxury_Yacht 02-23-04, 01:50 AM	Originally posted by Tevish Szat I might be insane, but i think Planescape could work. The leads, or at least one of them,would be a green prime, someone the audiance and relate to without knowing all the intracicies of the planes. planescape is different, throwing in touches of Scifi, as well beinga ble to be done anything from a small scale adventure contained in Sigil to a huge, plane-spanning epic. I wholeheartedly agree. Besides, it'd be a perfect oppurtunity to use special effects. The Blood War, Mechanus, Limbo...
Ranger REG 02-24-04, 05:01 AM	Originally posted by TheDarkestOfAngels I dunno. I've barely watched any Highlander, but he's the main character, I know that much. (Not that I wouldn't like to see more, but I think he could fit the character well, I think. He's got the swordplay, but I don't know about the acting well enough to make a judgement on that.) Then let me know when you made your decision: Adrian or Christopher?
Capn Charlie 02-24-04, 06:43 AM	How about a shameless action flick that could be set in nearly any world? Four adventurers meet in a tavern, get a little loaded, and decide to tackle a dungeon. They realize (a little too late!) that they are in far over their heads. It becomes them trying to find whatever mcguffin they need to escape. All the real acting will be the "campfire" scenes where they tell each other more about themselves and have a couple of flashbacks mixed with exposition. It would just be a showpiece for SFX and battle choreography. You could get to see iconic monsters, spells, and races/classes. Now, before the flaming begins, let me say why. Most of the "civilians" that I have talked to who watched and loved LotR really enjoyed the battle scenes. Neither fully understood, nor cared about, the epic story. Oh, and they loved the SFX. I know I, for one, also truly enjoyed the battle scenes in the movies more than just about anything else in them. The "foreword" alone, with the great war, is one scene I had to watch dozens of times zoomed way in before I could get on with the DVD. Action flicks sell, they are enjoyable, and they are hard to nitpick. Really, what bad can you say about action movies? THe story sucks: yep. But the special effects are usually top notch. Look at the Star Wars prequels. Of all the things in them , what did people go on the most about? THe lightsaber duels, and a kickass yoda. The target demographic for DND just eats this kind of movie up. Most gamers are male, even, another check in the movie's favor. And remember, at it's core DnD is about using funny shaped dice to help an imaginary person to kill other imaginary things. But then, all this is based on the fact that most of the people I know read books for epic stories and watch movies to have fun for an hour or two.
Ranger REG 02-24-04, 07:42 PM	Originally posted by Capn Charlie How about a shameless action flick that could be set in nearly any world? You mean like ... Dungeons & Dragons: The Movie? Yeah, it's been done. :P :P :P :P
Plunderer_of_the_planes 02-24-04, 11:21 PM	:confused: There was action in that piece of unholy tripe?
Endymion 02-25-04, 12:08 AM	Uh...if Sean Connery passed on The Lord of the Rings movies, what on earth makes you think he'd touch a Dungeons & Dragons based movie? Never happen. And, quite frankly, after the debacle of the first D&D movie, I'd be amazed if they got ANY major actors to do the film. That said, I personally don't feel casting is a major issue. They could have a cast of complete unknowns - which would actually be a good thing, since there would be no egos to cater to and the budget could go to better sets, effects, and overall production instead of some putz's huge salary - and it could still be an awesome movie IF - and only if - they get competent writers in there to give the actors something to work with. The biggest problem - and there are plenty to choose from - with the D&D movie was the writing. The characters, plot, dialogue...everything was just shamelessly thin. I kept thinking of that line from The Simpsons: "If I puked in a fountain pen and mailed it to the monkey house, I'd get better scripts!" That's why you had the actors just hamming it up. They gave these huge, over-the-top performances which were just utterly ridiculous because they had nothing to work with in terms of script. It was just painful and embarrassing... I'm honestly amazed they didn't have actors just walking off set because they simply couldn't read those lines... They need real writers. As for world/campaign setting... Why not just go with something generic? Something completely new? Stop trying to appease all the fanboys by throwing out specific cities and characters. And don't make as many D&D references as you can in some grotesque attempt to give the movies that Official Dungeons & Dragons Falvor! They seriously need to just make a good fantasy movie that incorporates D&D creatures and general aspects. Have sorcerors casting spells...but don't have them saying, "Oh no! I'll have to cast Bigby's Crushing Hand to save the party!" Don't explain the magic system to us or name the spells...or it becomes as bad as kung-fu movies or Dragon Ball Z, where the characters scream the name of the move they're performing. It's horrible and awkward and totally unnecessary. If there's anything the average movie-goer needs to know, show (as opposed to telling) it to them or give a brief, concise explanation - a simple explanation, not a geekified D&D one. If Tordek's weapon can't hurt the Gorgon, we'll notice that he's not hurting it. If that's not enough, he can say something along the lines of, "Damn it! This weapon is useless." We don't need someone to explain to him - and the audience - "It's a Gorgon. They're immune to non-magical weapons. You'll need a +3 Cold Iron blade to kill it!" *shudder* (Oh, and I don't claim that gorgons can only be hurt by magical, cold iron weapons. I honestly don't know off the top of my head and I'm not about to look it up just for this post. I was just trying to illustrate a point.) We don't want or need that stuff in a movie. (Okay, maybe those people who watched The Lord of the Rings movies in theaters and shouted, "Oh yeah! Aragon just crit on that orc's ass!" would want that sort of stuff. But those are the same people who make D&D players look like socially inept, dateless, pizza-faced basement dwellers.) Those little things don't, in any way, make the movie more D&D. They just make all of us gamers cringe and die a little inside, feeling dirty for even admitting we play D&D. As has been said before, they really need to just make a good fantasy movie. Make use of the D&D material - creatures, spell effects, imagery, etc. - to give the movie a distinct flavor, but don't struggle to make it a hardcore D&D property. Oh, and don't try to make a 90 minute movie. Fantasy movies are meant to be epic. It should be no less than 2 hours, leaning closer to 2 and a 1/2 to 3 hours. Hmm...and I'll be back with more criticisms and demands as they come to me. :D Heh.
Ranger REG 02-25-04, 02:56 AM	Originally posted by Plunderer_of_the_planes :confused: There was action in that piece of unholy tripe? Shameless action. Not necessarily a good thing though... :P :P
TheDarkestOfAngels 02-25-04, 03:01 AM	Originally posted by Ranger REG Then let me know when you made your decision: Adrian or Christopher? whoever was on the television series, I never watched the movies. not yet, anyway.
CodliostrosG0d 02-28-04, 03:59 AM	The only good thing about the first movie was that it made alot of the idiots I know more at ease about the game. As for number two, I kinda wanna see a Drizzt based movie. As long as they do it right, that is.
Ranger REG 02-28-04, 11:58 PM	Originally posted by TheDarkestOfAngels whoever was on the television series,... Dark hair, big eyebrows, sloping forehead ... that's Adrian Paul ("Duncan MacLeod"). I never watched the movies. not yet, anyway. You should. The original Highlander film is the best.
TheDarkestOfAngels 02-29-04, 12:54 AM	Originally posted by Ranger REG You should. The original Highlander film is the best. sweet. I'll keep that in mind next time I'm at the store. :)