| Post/Author/DateTime | Post |
|---|---|
| shiyongseng09-23-05, 02:09 AM | I'm sitting here in the middle of China, just like I was about 5-6 years ago when the first D&D movie came out in the theaters. Now there is another that has been filmed (at least it went straight to TV). The 1st movie was a bunch of S@#T. The only good thing was when the 1st came out I was here in China and there is a ton of pirating going on every day. A movie comes out in the States and it's on DVD here in less than a week. Sometimes the quality is poor, but sometimes it's taken straight from the movie camera that puts the picture on the scren for us- wonderful. Now, these producers and the people responsible for making these D&D movies are idiots. The people that hold the rights should think long and hard before they even make a move to make one of these. Drizzt is a big character in the FR world books, and so are others like Elminster. For once they should film a movie based on these books to make a movie worth spending your time on. An anime would be nice, but it would be more interesting to see who could actually fill in the character Drizzt or other characters that have made D&D and FR popular. Maybe even a movie with Dragon Lance characters like Raistlin and such would be nice, but then again the people that have made the two movies that are out now would just screw it up making great characters look small. |
| Ranger REG09-23-05, 02:31 AM | I'm sitting here in the middle of China, just like I was about 5-6 years ago when the first D&D movie came out in the theaters. Now there is another that has been filmed (at least it went straight to TV). The 1st movie was a bunch of S@#T. The only good thing was when the 1st came out I was here in China and there is a ton of pirating going on every day. A movie comes out in the States and it's on DVD here in less than a week. Sometimes the quality is poor, but sometimes it's taken straight from the movie camera that puts the picture on the scren for us- wonderful. Interesting that you're willing to talk about a movie that you've seen in a pirated format ... here. :smirk: AFAIC, they only got the film right in name only ("Dungeons & Dragons"). If they want to do "Forgotten Realms" and "Drizzt," they have to negotiate with WotC. |
| Squick09-23-05, 08:56 AM | Boy did the D&D movie suck! And no doubt the follow-up is a crock of sh!t too. So, should they ever make a Forgotten Realms or Dragonlance movie, it would also be crappy. Just the way things are I guess. Let those properties stay put and not be spoilt by the taint of Hollywood. BTW, whatever happened to that FR TV project? And hi REG :D |
| WizO_Lyoness09-23-05, 11:03 AM | There's nothing wrong with suggesting what you would rather see in D&D movies, nothing at all. Hey who knows who might see it ;). Please keep it clean, though. Thanks. |
| Hutchimus Prime09-23-05, 11:34 AM | should they ever make a Forgotten Realms or Dragonlance movie, it would also be crappy. Just the way things are I guess. Let those properties stay put and not be spoilt by the taint of Hollywood. I don't think its fair to say that the movies would be crappy as a matter of course. If you get a quality team attached to the property, and its made by people you love the material, then you'll get a good movie. Think about Comic Book movies. When I was a kid all we had was the Captain America movie, the Fantastic Four movie that never even really got released, Batman & Robin, etc. Comic Book moviews were a joke. Then X-Men and Spider-Man came along and were made by people who loved the material and made respectful adaptations, and you got good movies. Now comics, not just super hero movies are regularly mined for movie adaptations. |
| Bloodtide_the_Red09-23-05, 12:09 PM | Of course, they just don't make stupid D&D movies. Of the 200 some movies that come out a year, most are very bad, with only a couple gems. The problem with any shared world type movie will be the rules. There is a conflict between the game rules and the movie rules. And as it's a movie, the movie rules take over the game ones. Example-the wizards shoot fireballs at the gold dragons. Now the game rules are quite clear about that being a bad idea, but movie rules say it looks 'cool', so they do it. The idea is that unless you follow the movie rules, you will have a bad movie. It's not true, of course, but that is the way of thinking of movie makers. They try to make movies that 'everyone' will like, the idea being that the more people that see the movie, the more money it will make(and naturaly, that's true). Add on top of that the 'public option' problem, where you need to try to make 'everyone' happy. Take Drizzt, for example. A drow that hacks his way through dozens of humanoids would be way to violent, so a movie version would just 'knock them down'. The same way clerics offen religious people, so if you use them at all, you need to tone them way down. Magic is a whole problem too, you don't want it 'too powerful to ruin the story'. How much magic to the good guys in the D&D movie have, just about none. Even look at the bad guys magic, any 15thish level wizard could have killed the princess(a 0level nobody) in one round. Of course, he summons up some undead thing that takes forever to um, well, not realy harm her. Buring hands could have worked much better. It would be better to see a made for TV/Cable movie, they have much more freedom. You will still have some of the above problems, of course, but they will be a bit better. BT |
| Andyr09-23-05, 04:56 PM | For once they should film a movie based on these books to make a movie worth spending your time on. An anime would be nice, but it would be more interesting to see who could actually fill in the character Drizzt or other characters that have made D&D and FR popular. I think if there was a D&D anime-style film then not only would it distort the perception of large amounts of people as to what D&D is, but a large chunk of D&D fans would choose not to watch it because of the medium. Anime would be a bad idea... It would be nice to have a god D&D film, maybe based on one of the novels, but I am not sure that the transition to Hollywood could give a product that still had the 'feel' of FR or D&D in general. Perhaps I'm overly pessimistic. ;) I did think that the Beholders in the first film looked pretty cool, though. And Richard O' Brien has always been an actor I've liked. |
| Ranger REG09-23-05, 06:20 PM | Boy did the D&D movie suck! And no doubt the follow-up is a crock of sh!t too. So, should they ever make a Forgotten Realms or Dragonlance movie, it would also be crappy. Just the way things are I guess. Let those properties stay put and not be spoilt by the taint of Hollywood. Unfortunately, that's where the money's at. How else do you think Peter Jackson got the dough to make the LOTR films? Last time I checked, New Line is based in CA (correct me if I'm wrong). BTW, whatever happened to that FR TV project? Fireworks Entertainment shut down. The option right went back on the market for sale. |
| ElGrecoETAC09-23-05, 10:59 PM | Sean Connery as Elminster Jessica Alba as the Symbul Edward Norton as Manshoon Rutger Hauer as Fzoul Chembryl Eric Bana as Mourngrym Amcathra Michelle Rodriguez as Scyllua Darkhope Ryan Phillipe as obnoxious Zhentarim supporting villain Antonio Banderas as Artemis Entreri (cameo) Ewan McGregor as Jarlaxle (cameo) You heard it here first! :D |
| GothicDan09-23-05, 11:05 PM | Sean Connery as Elminster Okay. Jessica Alba as the Symbul NO. She looks entirely juvenile and she's a horrible actress! Though, of course, what I know of her is based on the Fantastic Four movie. Bringing that up, I demand that Johnny Storm/Chris Evans be cast in a role somewhere. Excuse me, now I have to go get a mop to wipe up the drool. Edward Norton as Manshoon Possibly. Rutger Hauer as Fzoul Chembryl Could work. Eric Bana as Mourngrym Amcathra Is he old enough? Otherwise, yes. Michelle Rodriguez as Scyllua Darkhope No clue. Ryan Phillipe as obnoxious Zhentarim supporting villain Ryan Phillipe = Teh Hot. ;) I would make him Kimil Nimesin, myself. Antonio Banderas as Artemis Entreri (cameo) Provided he can completely drop the accent, yes. Ewan McGregor as Jarlaxle (cameo) I would imagine he would have to tone up a little bit first, but yes. (In a particular mood at the moment.) |
| ElGrecoETAC09-23-05, 11:36 PM | (Elminster) Okay. Come on... it's more than OK. ;) NO. She looks entirely juvenile and she's a horrible actress! I think that's why she popped in my head (the juvenile portion). I think she could pull off impetuous well enough to carry the role. How often does the Symbul go off on tangents or deliver discourse, after all? Though, of course, what I know of her is based on the Fantastic Four movie. Bringing that up, I demand that Johnny Storm/Chris Evans be cast in a role somewhere. Chris Evans as plucky Dales-fighter-type hero (Manshoon) Possibly. This character would rely on an actor with great vocal skills. Ed Norton has a terrific acting range, and has demonstrated his ability to be equally convincing as both a menacing, fearsome individual, or as an urbane, suave socialite. He could pull this off. (Fzoul) Could work. There's something about Hauer that conveys plausible megalomania/self-assuredness. He has that wild look in his eye, but shows charisma as well. I always felt he would have made a terrific Magneto (based in part on his performance in Blade Runner). (Mourngrym) Is he old enough? Otherwise, yes. I believe Mourngrym is in his mid-late '30s, possibly early '40s. Bana could pass for either. I really liked him as Hector, in an otherwise underachieving "Troy". (Scyllua) No clue. She has a plausible physicality (it wouldn't look fake for her to be whipping around armored men), and has shown she can do "quiet intensity". (Zhent guy) Ryan Phillipe = Teh Hot. ;) I would make him Kimil Nimesin, myself. Wrong continent--pay attention Dan! ;) Besides, I'm not sure that Phillipe has the chops to convincingly combine apparent youth with centuries' worth of maturity. (Artemis) Provided he can completely drop the accent, yes. Artemis hails from the borderlands shared by Calimshan and Tethyr (much like a souther Spain around the Reconquista period, if you will). Much as I hate applying real world ideas to the Realms, the accent might actually be fitting here. :confused: (Jarlaxle) I would imagine he would have to tone up a little bit first, but yes. Granted. It just struck me that McGregor's Obi-Wan-esque humor was very much like what I pictured Jarlaxle throwing around. |
| Slime Lord09-24-05, 10:11 AM | Well, I'm interested in seeing the SciFi Movie Dungeons and Dragons II on the 8th of of Oct. Sure, it's a cliche title "a dark wizard trying to take over the world and a group of adventurers must stop him!" but why not? It's our beloved gaming world in some form of a movie. Sure, it's not Drizzt, WoTSQ, ElfSong Books, etc. But it's a DnD Movie. |
| Cli' San Aquanova09-24-05, 10:23 AM | No, no no no, no Antonio Banderas as Entrerri. Entrerri hails from Calimport, and is a Calishite. That's Arabic in Earth, not Spanish. Plus, Banderas is the most cliche'd (however effective) rogue in the big screen. So much that they even parodied him in Shrek II. So no. I like Tony, but he doesn't fit here. And I don't think Jessica Alba would fit as Simbul... :shifty: But Sean Connery is the only one for Elminster. But, seeing as he declined the role of Gandalf, I doubt he'd ever do a FR movie. The art of Storm Silverhand in FRCS is Jennifer Lopez to a "z", as much as I dislike it. So she'd be a good idea as far as consistency goes. Sean Bean, Eric Bana, Ray Park (aka Darth Maul, and Toad), and Alan Rickman are all win-win picks. Plus, Vin Diesel would drool to do this, and to be honest, I think he would make a damned good Red Wizard, were it not for his slight lisp... ...but I stand by my words that only Peter Jackson could make a D&D/FR movie work, and I'll continue to until I'm proven wrong. -C'SA :u:Bring Back Merfolk!!!:u: |
| WVgamer09-24-05, 10:29 AM | Erik Mona (Editor-in-Cheif of the Dungeon and Dragon magazines) said that Ed Greenwood endorsed it, so that has to count for something. |
| Andyr09-24-05, 11:51 AM | Plus, Vin Diesel would drool to do this, and to be honest, I think he would make a damned good Red Wizard, were it not for his slight lisp... Interestingly enough, on various Baldur's Gate boards the discussion of a film of the game has come up a few times - and Vin Diesel is invariably chosen for the role of the bad guy there, Sarevok. |
| ElGrecoETAC09-24-05, 02:33 PM | No, no no no, no Antonio Banderas as Entrerri. Entrerri hails from Calimport, and is a Calishite. That's Arabic in Earth, not Spanish. Artemis Entreri was born in Memnon, near the border with Tethyr, a region that is home to both Calishite and Tethyrian populations. His mother was a prostitute and his father a mercenary, neither of whom is specifically cited as belonging to either ethnicity. I personally believe it's more likely that Artemis has mixed ethnic heritage (look at his name, and compare it with other Calishite names, for example), and thus feel that Banderas would suit him just fine, appearance wise. Plus, Banderas is the most cliche'd (however effective) rogue in the big screen. So much that they even parodied him in Shrek II. So no. I like Tony, but he doesn't fit here. Also, in case you didn't notice, my take on the topic was supposed to be rather light-hearted. Artemis and Jarlaxle are meant as cameos--as a comedic device, if you will. Banderas and McGregor, both of whom pull of humor well and don't take themselves too seriously, would be imminently suited for such a stunt. :) But Sean Connery is the only one for Elminster. But, seeing as he declined the role of Gandalf, I doubt he'd ever do a FR movie. I never even heard of this. :confused: |
| BrianCritchley09-24-05, 06:01 PM | as for a movie based on a book. 2 words for you starship troopers |
| GothicDan09-24-05, 07:37 PM | No, no no no, no Antonio Banderas as Entrerri. Entrerri hails from Calimport, and is a Calishite. That's Arabic in Earth, not Spanish. A great number of modern Spanish/Hispanic people have traces of Moorish (Arabic) blood in their veins. So what we see today is most likely a mixture of Arabic and the "native" Spanish (who may be part African and part Celtic) people. So there's no reason that Banderas couldn't pull off the part, visually, and he has some acting talent, as well. |
| Crust09-24-05, 08:04 PM | I think a Chronicles movie could be great. Some of the characters could become as popular as Legolas. Tasselhoff, Flint, Raistlin, Verminaard... Then, a few years later, Legends, with the whole Fistandantilus/Raistlin mindswitch idea going on (which would blow people's minds), and the mighty Lord Soth. Could be awesome. As far as FR, I'm not sure what I'd want to see. I suppose the Icewind Dale trilogy seems the most likely possibility. Actually, I'm waiting to see the time when Drizzt (and possibly all of FR) really become somewhat of a mainstream sort of fantasy fiction that everyone can recognize. He's been in video games. I'm waiting to see cartoons, action figures (I would love that!), and a movie or three. Maybe something where the actors sign on for multiple installments where the novels are basically made into movies, one every year or so. I can only wish. |
| dragonheart09-24-05, 09:08 PM | A great number of modern Spanish/Hispanic people have traces of Moorish (Arabic) blood in their veins. So what we see today is most likely a mixture of Arabic and the "native" Spanish (who may be part African and part Celtic) people. well I believe the "moors" were a mix of arabic and north african but arabic works pretty well. :) "native" spanish were actually a mix of Basque (who don't seem to be related to much of anyone else and may be descended from the first nonneanderthals in spain) and the Vandals - yep the group of germanic barabarians who gave us the name for their sacking of Rome. after that they moved on to Spain and estabilished a Romanic kingdom that lasted (more or less) until the moors arrived and pushed them up to the northern parts of Spain. given all of thaqt I see no reason Banderas couldn't play Artemis ( or almost anyone from the realms given that most are from southern areas and only recently (evolutionwise) moved north so they should all be a bit "swarthy" rather than "fade into the snow white" :D |
| shiyongseng09-24-05, 11:55 PM | The reason I say an anime movie would be interesting is because a better atmosphere could be made for the movie, and also spells and monsters could look a lot better. I agree with Crust on the making of the Chronicles on the big screen, the characters could be very memorable. The Lord of the Rings series made movie was done nicely, I really enjoyed it- even though I never finished reading the books. I read the Hobbit, then I started on The Fellowship of the Ring and got bored. I put it down and never gave it a second look- I still don't plan to read it. I think if good movies were made from that series then the making of an even better series would blow the top off the box office. Another example of fantasy books made movie would be The Lion the Witch and the Wardrobe. I read the first book of that series and had to force myself to finish it- but it now it's a movie coming out in December. I'm going to watch it on pirated DVD when it comes out and see how it is compared to the book. Books like these made movie, yet no D&D book made movie... I think that since the comic book industry is making such a killing turning all these comics into movies, perhaps WoTC should try the same. The comics make the money from the movies because there is such a large customer base for it. Almost everyone when they were growing up has read at least one comic. With D&D it may not be the same, not everyone has read one of these books, but the customer base is there. D&D has been around for years, and if a good movie was actualy produced from these books (preferably a good book- not a random one of course) it too could make a killing at the box office. The band wagon should be jumped upon now before it passes them by. I believe it would be worth a shot to see what happens. WoTC seems to be after money like a ranger after an orc (look at the prices of rule books), so a real try should be made towards the production of a good D&D movie. I don't think a movie with Drizzt would be too bloody and people wouldn't like it. If bloody movies were made and no one liked them- why was Braveheart so well liked? In my eyes it was the bloody battles that made it feel more real. I don't think being too bloody would be a big factor in why people would/wouldn't go to see it- unless of course your religion came into play. When I was growing up I knew a family that wouldn't let their kids watch Rogger Rabbit because they were such holy-rollers. I myself love to watch zombie movies so blood and gore for me would make the movie all the more watchable. And yes I'd like to say again, the pirating here in China is a wonderful thing. Almost any game for any system and almost every movie that comes out in the US hits here within a week. :D |
| Raptor201909-24-05, 11:59 PM | Visgoths, not vandals. Vandals moved on to north africa. Remember, it was a visgothic prince in the middle of a civil war that invited the moors into spain(they then decided they liked the place and conquered everything but Asturias, the rest as they say, is history). |
| ElGrecoETAC09-25-05, 01:29 AM | God, Chronicles and Legends would do amazing amounts of business. There has to be reason why these movies haven't gotten some level of gree light after the billions LOTR brought in... licensing conflicts perhaps? |
| Ranger REG09-25-05, 02:53 AM | Erik Mona (Editor-in-Cheif of the Dungeon and Dragon magazines) said that Ed Greedwood endorsed it, so that has to count for something. "Greedwood"??? :uh-huh: |
| Billy Lear09-25-05, 03:37 AM | Just one question for Shiyongseng... Does Bruce Payne (Damodar) have blue lips in this one? I really can't tell from the promo poster on the Sci-Fi Channel Website (http://www.scifi.com/dnd/). Here are a couple of other questions for anyone who wants to answer: 1. Why were Damodar's lips blue in the first movie? 2. What was that thing that Profion put into Damodar's (a.k.a. insta-*****'s) head? My :twocents: on the first move = I didn't like it that much. I hope the second one is at least a little better. |
| Sovereign King09-25-05, 05:36 AM | As I am at work doing night shift security work and having nothing pressing to do at the moment I've searched the web and found a review for the Dungeons and Dragons II movie. From what I've read it sounds somewhat interesting. I like how automatically that a bunch of people automatically stated it would be awful with out actually given it the benefit of the doubt. I admit the first one was really bad but that doesn't mean that this one will be awful as well. I'm going to post the review for all of your enjoyment or lack there off so here it is. Back in the year 2000, individuals who went and saw a certain movie (Star Wars: Episode 1) were affronted with a trailer for a new movie. It seemed to follow the premise of the animated adaptation to a tee. Yes, it was a Dungeons & Dragons movie. It had a tagline that sucked, and it seemed so promising. Unfortunately, Dungeons & Dragons suffered budget constraints, and too much modification by the studio heads (rather than the writer/director), and turned into a shadows of its former self. Courtney Solomon became the scapegoat, and it was only okay (I loved it, but, most hate it...). 5 years later, take one of the villains from the first movie, add together a new cast and a new timeframe, and add in a PROPER budget for a Dungeons & Dragons movie. What does this formula produce? One hell of a movie... The movie follows Berek the Fighter, a man who has all but given up his adventuring for the role of the aristocrat, rising above his old station of power as the Captain of the Guards. He longs for the days back when he was adventuring, and he would lay on the battlefield, exhausted after a perilous battle. He decides to challenge a former student to a duel of swords, to test whether his abilities have slipped any, and wins, but only to find, he's been allowed to win by his former student. He has slipped much farther than he imagined. His student makes some rather harsh advice for his former mentor and then walks away to his duties. He comes home to find his beloved Melora pouring over a scroll of divine magic (a type of magic only hinted upon in Dungeons & Dragons; and a type of magic not been cast on Izmer in hundreds of years), with little success. She decides she will try to perfect the divine magic to try and gain a place on the Wizard's council. However, she casts a divining spell and gets a surprise that's much more than she bargained for. Now, Berek must appoint his own adventuring group to go and find Damhodar, and put an end to him. He will be helped by Lux the Barbarian, Ormaline the Wizard, Dorian the Priest of Obad-Hai, and Nim the Rogue. Powerful allies he's adventured with in the past. Over the course of the movie, they find themselves coming face to face with enemies both malign and magnificent, in an effort to stop Damhodar's evil designs. This movie is definitely excellent, and I would definitely recommend anyone see this movie. And on a note... Thank Obad-Hai there was no Elven Archers... |
| GothicDan09-25-05, 10:20 AM | If they make D&D officially into an anime, I'll kill myself. That being said, it's already been done, somewhat, in The Record of Loddoss War, which is about the only anime I own. Because it was "based" on D&D. And I do think that the Chronicles story line might well translate the best into a D&D movie, due to the inherently low magical nature of the world of Krynn. Tossing around uber-powerful characters from the start might have the flash-bang that makes audiences go "ahhh" without any real thought, but it won't result in a very dramatic plot. |
| ElGrecoETAC09-25-05, 10:26 AM | Eh, I don't know. I'll watch it (and wish it the best), but I have to wonder why people would invest millions of dollars in the hopes that a generic storyline will succeed better than a proven literary franchise... Chronicles and Legends reached millions of people who weren't gamers. Lord of the Rings proved that a rich sci-fi/fantasy storyline could reach a varied audience. D&D, however, unfortunately still carries a stigma with it. When you market D&D specifically, you're reaching only a very specific clientelle--and driving off a lot of people who have misconceptions regarding the game, genre, etc. I'm not trying to denigrate D&D, of course. I'm simply trying to point out that aiming after a small, specific market rarely makes for commercial success. "You Got Served" might have been a great movie, for all I know. I've never seen it, however, because I'm not the least bit interested in the concept of groups of teenagers using dance-offs to settle their differences. :twitch: |
| WVgamer09-25-05, 10:38 AM | I thought LotR proved that marketed properly, any teenage girl could think an elf was hot *cough*Legolas&Drizzt*cough* Seriously though, while LotR proved it could be done, I doubt it will again in a long time. |
| GothicDan09-25-05, 11:11 AM | Legolas = Not Hot. *doesn't understand* |
| WVgamer09-25-05, 11:23 AM | I have about 50 friends of the opposite gender who disagree, Dan, but to each their own. |
| ElGrecoETAC09-25-05, 11:39 AM | Seriously though, while LotR proved it could be done, I doubt it will again in a long time. Why not? Peter Jackson combined a story plenty of people knew about with proven, marketeable stars. Ian McCellen, Viggo Mortensen, Liv Tyler, Orlando Bloom, etc., were actors people from a variety of walks of life would go see even if they didn't know what the story was about. The fact that there was Sci-Fi eye-candy galore added to the potential market. Basing it on a long-time best seller sealed the deal. I don't get why Wizards is going about things the way they are. Hollywood studios are all about the bottom line and money to be made. All we've been seeing in the last year is about how sales are down, and how so many execs and producers are looking for the next big thing. Enter Wizards. You can either get comparative peanuts invested in your straight-to-TV or straight-to-DVD project that aims for a target audience that consists primarily of gamers (and you can't count on all of them showing up)... Or you can make a viable push for a no-kidding blockbuster investment on a project that you already own (Dragonlance or FR books). Dungeons and Dragons I, based on a cliched "generic party" storyline tanked. Badly. In the meanwhile, TWO billion-dollar movie franchises launched on the backs of popular book series (one old, one new). What does Wizards do? You guessed it--Dungeons and Dragons 2, which I'm *SURE* will go such a long way toward validating their movie-making choices. :rolleyes: |
| Slime Lord09-25-05, 11:56 AM | Why not? Peter Jackson combined a story plenty of people knew about with proven, marketeable stars. Ian McCellen, Viggo Mortensen, Liv Tyler, Orlando Bloom, etc., were actors people from a variety of walks of life would go see even if they didn't know what the story was about. The fact that there was Sci-Fi eye-candy galore added to the potential market. Basing it on a long-time best seller sealed the deal. I don't get why Wizards is going about things the way they are. Hollywood studios are all about the bottom line and money to be made. All we've been seeing in the last year is about how sales are down, and how so many execs and producers are looking for the next big thing. Enter Wizards. You can either get comparative peanuts invested in your straight-to-TV or straight-to-DVD project that aims for a target audience that consists primarily of gamers (and you can't count on all of them showing up)... Or you can make a viable push for a no-kidding blockbuster investment on a project that you already own (Dragonlance or FR books). Dungeons and Dragons I, based on a cliched "generic party" storyline tanked. Badly. In the meanwhile, TWO billion-dollar movie franchises launched on the backs of popular book series (one old, one new). What does Wizards do? You guessed it--Dungeons and Dragons 2, which I'm *SURE* will go such a long way toward validating their movie-making choices. :rolleyes: I was wondering though - Do we know the "Dragon God" in question with this movie? |
| ElGrecoETAC09-25-05, 12:25 PM | Slime Lord, Beats me! Sovereign, Why would you think that a made-for-TV movie would have a budget larger than one made for the silver screen? Judging by the screenshots I've seen so far, I'm prepared for another cinematic equivalent of a kick to the spheres. :weep: |
| Cli' San Aquanova09-25-05, 02:03 PM | Artemis Entreri was born in Memnon, near the border with Tethyr, a region that is home to both Calishite and Tethyrian populations. His mother was a prostitute and his father a mercenary, neither of whom is specifically cited as belonging to either ethnicity. I personally believe it's more likely that Artemis has mixed ethnic heritage (look at his name, and compare it with other Calishite names, for example), and thus feel that Banderas would suit him just fine, appearance wise. Hmmm. Well, I heard that Entrerri was originally planned to be very much more Calishite than the Entrerri we all know, in both behavior and appearance. Not like the Latinesque rogue Banderas would no doubt produce. ;) I don't know how true it is, but still. It was worth a try. ;) Also, in case you didn't notice, my take on the topic was supposed to be rather light-hearted. Artemis and Jarlaxle are meant as cameos--as a comedic device, if you will. Banderas and McGregor, both of whom pull of humor well and don't take themselves too seriously, would be imminently suited for such a stunt. :) Blegh. ;) :D :P I never even heard of this. :confused: In case you didn't know, PJ and the casting crew originally tried to get Sean Connery to play Gandalf in LotR, but he declined the role. -C'SA :u:Bring Back Merfolk!!!:u: |
| GothicDan09-25-05, 09:09 PM | I have about 50 friends of the opposite gender who disagree, Dan, but to each their own. I'm gay. As SlimeLord will tell you, we are far more qualified to judge handsomeness than any female. ;) Also, I'm glad that Sean Connery didn't do Gandalf. And I'd be upset if he did Elminster. Only the 3E Elminster seems very Sean Connery in appearance. |
| TheAscendant09-25-05, 10:03 PM | :rolleyes: "Beauty is in the eye of the beholder..." |
| Xavier_of_Cormyr09-25-05, 11:41 PM | the dialogue in the 1st movie was god-awful. i could look past the cheesey special effects, but c'mon, the entire movie sucked! :banghead: someone must realize that putting out a REAL D&D movie will 1) rake in the dough just like all 3 LotR films 2) draw in new players to the D&D game- thus more RPG sales 3) marketing! Elminster slippers, Szass Tam night-lights, Driz'zt ice pops, Shadovar sunscreen, Red Wizard finger paints... you get the idea. And the hard part of making this movie is done! There are already many best sellers that could be adapted to a screenplay, and "pitching" the film would take about 11 seconds, since movie exec's would think of LotR and see $$$$. |
| ElGrecoETAC09-26-05, 03:14 AM | Hmmm. Well, I heard that Entrerri was originally planned to be very much more Calishite than the Entrerri we all know, in both behavior and appearance. Not like the Latinesque rogue Banderas would no doubt produce. ;) I don't know how true it is, but still. It was worth a try. ;) Where did you hear that from? |
| shiyongseng09-26-05, 03:37 AM | The second movie is definitely better than the first, and no, no blue lipstick in this one. But still, the dissapointing thing is that the movie made was not made after any of the books, and we all know there are plenty of them for a good base. The pirating in China is great so I have seen it before it's hit the Sci-Fi channel. No memorable characers, acting..., special effects somewhat eye pleasing at time for not being a big theater job. I rather felt like I was watching a beefed-up Zena; never a fan. The opening of the movie was rather cheese looking. (spoilers) The cleric character was laughable and didn't last long :weep: . The thief - not as annoying as what's-his-face in the other. There was a bit where the mage did a detect magic spell in a room and everyone was wearing something magical, but you never really got a chance to know what they had- so the main character's sword was rather odd when it burst a mortar wall open like a hammer. Then of course later he cut through steel like butter when they got caught in a cage. There was a lich helping Damodar? Sorry if the name isn't correct, it's because again nothing really memorable. Anyway, the lich of course seemed to have the best magic in the whole movie while Damodar seemed to have nothing special, yet he was the guy trying to stomp a mud hole in these guys. In one sceen near the end he was riding away on a horse with the main "goodguy" in persuit and not using any magic at all??? Of course he didn't get far. The elven mage had more power in her staff than he did in the whole movie :eek: . Ya... Wow... Great movie here... It's going to be on TV so don't miss it, or you may have to waste your money on a rental. I think the only good part about it was that it was better than the first. |
| jim931109-26-05, 09:18 AM | i like the fact that the new movie is on tv. I went and paid money to see the first movie because i wanted to support it with my money in hopes that another would be made, but after seeing what a joke it was, i wish i hadn't. I don't want to use my money vote to support such a terrible movie ever again. At least on tv, i can watch without being out the 8 bucks. I always here that the novel line reaches people who don't game, so it would seem that they would want to try and translate that to movies. I really would hope that they wouldn't just sell the licensing rights and walk away. They need to be sure that any D&D movie [Realms, Greyhawk, Dragonlance or Eberron (there's your anime candidate)], be quality and not just an attempt to cash in on the D&D fanbase. |
| joshdw409-27-05, 09:01 AM | In my humble opinion, I think the problem with the D&D movie was that someone thought... "I'm going to make a D&D movie" and did. Simple enough right? Pfft. Then why did LoTR do so much better? The director. A self-professed LoTR fanatic who has probably read the books more times than a newspaper decided he was going to make a movie about his obsession. Three things went right: a) he had the director know-how b) he wasn't going to let his "baby" be misrepresented and spent WAY too much time and money getting things perfect (ok, the right amount of money) c) last but not least, Tolkein is an amazing and descriptive writer Yeah, I think a FR book could do wonders if put in the right hands. Finding the right director will make or break the film though. It would be next to impossible since they have to practically live FR and be a good director. If you think about it from a marketing point. A "dark" character with elf ears like Drizzt will probably have an appeal to a big audience after LoTR. Plus you have internal and external struggles and character development. |
| Slime Lord09-27-05, 10:14 AM | In my humble opinion, I think the problem with the D&D movie was that someone thought... "I'm going to make a D&D movie" and did. Simple enough right? Pfft. Then why did LoTR do so much better? The director. A self-professed LoTR fanatic who has probably read the books more times than a newspaper decided he was going to make a movie about his obsession. Three things went right: a) he had the director know-how b) he wasn't going to let his "baby" be misrepresented and spent WAY too much time and money getting things perfect (ok, the right amount of money) c) last but not least, Tolkein is an amazing and descriptive writer Yeah, I think a FR book could do wonders if put in the right hands. Finding the right director will make or break the film though. It would be next to impossible since they have to practically live FR and be a good director. If you think about it from a marketing point. A "dark" character with elf ears like Drizzt will probably have an appeal to a big audience after LoTR. Plus you have internal and external struggles and character development. I'd like to add - I think a film like Daught of the Drow would do good. Mainly because you have a bad ass, young female elf, trying to find her self and good. Ripping away what she had known her entire life, growing up in a tangled web. Many girls from any walk of life could relate to her on many levels. If Elaine would allow it (not that I think she had rights of Lirel...*sigh*), that would be my go-getter. A bad ass female, who not only knows magic, but can kick ass too ;). Edit: And my thought on who could play Liriel Baenre would be Brandy, but she is getting older and I don't see her doing moves like that. |
| Squick09-27-05, 10:17 AM | I don't think its fair to say that the movies would be crappy as a matter of course. If you get a quality team attached to the property, and its made by people you love the material, then you'll get a good movie. Think about Comic Book movies. When I was a kid all we had was the Captain America movie, the Fantastic Four movie that never even really got released, Batman & Robin, etc. Comic Book moviews were a joke. Then X-Men and Spider-Man came along and were made by people who loved the material and made respectful adaptations, and you got good movies. Now comics, not just super hero movies are regularly mined for movie adaptations. Let's not kid, any future D&D-based movie *will* be crappy. If you think otherwise, you're deceiving yourself. So many factors will make it this way: budget, poor script, second-rate directors, talentless actors and the unfortunate legacy been established by the two movies produced already. Comic book-based movies are another story altogether. The medium itself is already a visual one, thus its interpretation is far more conducive to film. Look at "From Hell" and "Sin City" -- all strong visually because of their comic origin. Story-wise, many comics IMO, are stronger than most fantasy novels available, especially RPG-based novels. Let's face it -- D&D novels aren't the greatest literature around. They are marketing tools that support a product and help capture the consumer. I don't think that there is a D&D novel or series of novels, whether set in FR, DL, or any other world, worth adapting for film! LotR was successful, simply because it was based on one of the best-selling books of the last century. No D&D novel can compete with its sales. Hence, no producer would provide the kind of budget seen for the LotR trilogy. Fantasy may be the flavour of the month at the moment, but it won't last (just look at the recent WWII mania). Hopefully any further D&D movies won't be made, because they missed the fad. Unfortunately, that's where the money's at. How else do you think Peter Jackson got the dough to make the LOTR films? Last time I checked, New Line is based in CA (correct me if I'm wrong). No, you're not wrong -- all the BIG money for film is in Hollywood. My point was, however, that all the money in the world doesn't equate a good film. Does it? Fireworks Entertainment shut down. The option right went back on the market for sale. Thank God nobody has picked it up then! Imagine FR as Xena or Hercules? :eek: And lastly, why does every thread about a D&D movie end up being a casting discussion? :confused: |
| Ranger REG09-27-05, 03:00 PM | In case you didn't know, PJ and the casting crew originally tried to get Sean Connery to play Gandalf in LotR, but he declined the role. Yeah, and the Scot is still banging his bald head on the wall for saying no, as he once mentioned it in the LXG DVD. :P |
| Ranger REG09-27-05, 03:08 PM | No, you're not wrong -- all the BIG money for film is in Hollywood. My point was, however, that all the money in the world doesn't equate a good film. Does it? No, it does not. But from judging what Peter Jackson did with LOTR, you're gonna need some major investment. After all, there are employees to pay, like Daniel Falconer (aka Reverend Strone on the Holonet forum), and hi-tech hardware, like them iPods. Thank God nobody has picked it up then! Imagine FR as Xena or Hercules? :eek: Perhaps, but both series have lasted at least 6 seasons each, in an already fading syndication market. In fact, there are less original syndicated series today than in the 90's, most of them are reruns. (Thank goodness for syndication, or else I'd be paying $35 a month to watch SG-1 and SG:A on cable). And lastly, why does every thread about a D&D movie end up being a casting discussion? :confused: Shrugs. I try to stay on-topic. |
| ElGrecoETAC09-27-05, 07:46 PM | That one's on me. I was trying to be unnecessarily light-hearted. |
| ElGrecoETAC09-27-05, 07:50 PM | LotR was successful, simply because it was based on one of the best-selling books of the last century. No D&D novel can compete with its sales. Hence, no producer would provide the kind of budget seen for the LotR trilogy. Peter Jackson had to fight for years to gain the money he needed to accurately create his labor of love. He eventually convinced the right people that the bottom line was there, and his project got the Green Light. The right person, with the appropriate connections and passion for the genre could do the same for a proven series of Dragonlance or FR novels (which have sold millions in their own rights). The Harry Potter series of movies is an example of how proven best sellers can get the Green Light. |
| Squick09-28-05, 04:59 AM | Peter Jackson had to fight for years to gain the money he needed to accurately create his labor of love. He eventually convinced the right people that the bottom line was there, and his project got the Green Light. The right person, with the appropriate connections and passion for the genre could do the same for a proven series of Dragonlance or FR novels (which have sold millions in their own rights). The Harry Potter series of movies is an example of how proven best sellers can get the Green Light. Persistence and a powerful belief in the film does not always result in a decent movie. If I'm not mistaken, the incompetent (Courtney Solomon) who made the first D&D movie also believed in his project and also took years (ten, I recall) to round up the financial support for his abortion. Look at the result -- a really pathetic and lame take on a cultural icon we all love and only hope the best for. So, that's why I say: rather no movie than a crappy movie. Stay the *hell* away from the property if you're going to ruin it. :mad: And, like I've already said: I don't believe there is a RPG-based novel out there worthy of being *immortalised* in film. FR novels are mediocre at best. On DL I can't really comment (except for the first two trilogies and the Tales anthology). To me, they were better candidates for a movie than FR, but still not really that great. Since it's such a facsimile of LotR, people will immediately draw comparisons and see all its weaknesses (and plagiarism). |
| Ranger REG09-28-05, 05:12 AM | Peter Jackson had to fight for years to gain the money he needed to accurately create his labor of love. He eventually convinced the right people that the bottom line was there, and his project got the Green Light. If you ask me, he got lucky. He went into the meeting with the New Line exec thinking he can pitch for proposing two films for LOTR. New Line gave him the go-ahead to make three. He must have been as giddy as Gimli receiving three golden locks of Galadriel's hair. The right person, with the appropriate connections and passion for the genre could do the same for a proven series of Dragonlance or FR novels (which have sold millions in their own rights). The Harry Potter series of movies is an example of how proven best sellers can get the Green Light. Yeah, but I'm still not liking the current holder of the D&D film right: Courtney Solomon. :nonono: On the greener side, he doesn't have the Forgotten Realms film right. Thank goodness, TSR sold the right before they marketed Forgotten Realms. |
| Yom Beekus09-28-05, 03:31 PM | I'll watch the second movie before I pass judgement upon it. I like to give movies a chance to wow me. If it does, great. If it doesn't...oh well... It's better to have tried and failed then to never have tried at all. |
| GothicDan09-28-05, 06:52 PM | I agree with this: the majority of D&D novels aren't really that good. That doesn't mean that they're not enjoyable to read, but they are not in any way making a literary impact on society, they are not implementing new literary techniques or harkening back to older, time-honored ones. The only D&D books I think that would truly be worth it to turn into novels would be the Chronicles DL trilogy or some of those by Ed Greenwood, the latter of which seems to have put as much thought and care into his world as Tolkien did, or almost, at least. One can also get an idea of just how 'good' D&D authors are by seeing those of whom have been published outside of TSR/WotC - including Greenwood and Weis and Hickman. |
| ElGrecoETAC09-28-05, 07:10 PM | Persistence and a powerful belief in the film does not always result in a decent movie. If I'm not mistaken, the incompetent (Courtney Solomon) who made the first D&D movie also believed in his project and also took years (ten, I recall) to round up the financial support for his abortion. Look at the result -- a really pathetic and lame take on a cultural icon we all love and only hope the best for. Courtney Solomon based a movie on a subject with a (comparatively) small audience that is often derided by people who have no experience with it. You can't compare this with a successful line of novels like "Chronicles" and "Legends", which reached beyond gamers to ordinary book readers. Incidentally, we'll have to agree to disagree on the merits of the above mentioned line of novels. We all know how opinions work, right? ;) |
| ElGrecoETAC09-28-05, 07:13 PM | I agree with this: the majority of D&D novels aren't really that good. That doesn't mean that they're not enjoyable to read, but they are not in any way making a literary impact on society, they are not implementing new literary techniques or harkening back to older, time-honored ones. Would you say that the majority of the American movie-goers who contributed to the $350 million+ domestic gross of each of the LOTR movies went to see them on the basis of the literary impact they had on our society? |
| Squick09-29-05, 03:36 AM | It's better to have tried and failed then to never have tried at all. IMO, this doesn't work for things like movies. Once the movie is out there...and it's bad (like the D&D move undoubtedly was)...the damage is done and it's irrevocable! Most of the time you only have one shot at doing it right, and if you blunder and waste that opportunity (like the D&D movie undoubtedly did), not only have you disappointed all the loyal fans, but you've stolen that chance from someone else who could've potentially done it right. It's better better to have realised that you're not going to do it right, than to have screwed up and spoilt that one chance for someone who could have done it right. Courtney Solomon based a movie on a subject with a (comparatively) small audience that is often derided by people who have no experience with it. You can't compare this with a successful line of novels like "Chronicles" and "Legends", which reached beyond gamers to ordinary book readers. Incidentally, we'll have to agree to disagree on the merits of the above mentioned line of novels. We all know how opinions work, right? I'll agree that the DL novels have certainly reached a broader audience than just RPGers, but essentially, most of those "non-gamer" readers are blissfully unaware of the whole D&D thing in first place. They read fantasy novels. They aren't readers of D&D-based novels specifically and just happen to not play the game. Also, how wide an audience are we speaking of? Are we talking Harry Potter or Middle Earth figures? No. That's why those movies got big budgets, were well supported by movie-goers and why the first D&D movie sucked. Yeah, my opinion of the novels is just that -- my opinion. Don't get me wrong, I read them, enjoy them and even re-read them occasionally. I just realise that because I like something so much, it doesn't mean that the world at large will too (or that a movie should be made). That's why the world's opinion of the first D&D movie was justifiably negative (to use slight euphemism). |
| Inspired_Mage09-29-05, 04:19 AM | Hey All, IMO they can still make a good D&D movie based on an FR novel, but they must try and not attach the name "Dungeons & Dragons" to it as it appears to attach a cerain stigma to it which just does not appeal to non-gamers. Also, as much as I love FR, I do agree that the DR Chronicles would make a better movie than say a Drizzt movie (and I am a big Drizzt fan). Also also, Its a pity the series is so long as I think that it would make a great movie, is the Death Gate Cycle by Wies & Hickman, awesome story! |
| Ranger REG09-29-05, 05:29 AM | IMO they can still make a good D&D movie based on an FR novel, but they must try and not attach the name "Dungeons & Dragons" to it as it appears to attach a cerain stigma to it which just does not appeal to non-gamers. Now, if only someone -- not Courtney Solomon nor some wannabe that thinks like Courtney; even though they don't know it or deny it -- would negotiate with WotC for the film right to Forgotten Realms. Also, as much as I love FR, I do agree that the DR Chronicles would make a better movie than say a Drizzt movie (and I am a big Drizzt fan). Meh. It depends on what audience you're aiming at. If you want a film to be as epic as LOTR and Narnia (due out in December 2005), then go with Dragonlance, and ignore critics who may call it a ripoff. If you want audience who like Hellboy, Serenity, and/or anti-hero film, go with Drizzt. Also also, Its a pity the series is so long as I think that it would make a great movie, is the Death Gate Cycle by Wies & Hickman, awesome story! Meh. They could always do one of the novels, like someone did Patrick O'Brian's Master and Commander: The Far Side of the World film. |
| ElGrecoETAC09-29-05, 06:23 AM | IMO, this doesn't work for things like movies. Once the movie is out there...and it's bad (like the D&D move undoubtedly was)...the damage is done and it's irrevocable! The thing to do at this point would be to ensure that no ad ever runs that says "From the people who brought you Dungeons and Dragons: The Movie"... I'll agree that the DL novels have certainly reached a broader audience than just RPGers, but essentially, most of those "non-gamer" readers are blissfully unaware of the whole D&D thing in first place. They read fantasy novels. They aren't readers of D&D-based novels specifically and just happen to not play the game. I don't see how this would in any way be a detriment to the movie. If anything, I would imagine word of mouth spreads much more easily when people talk about something as readily identifiable as an enjoyable book. Also, how wide an audience are we speaking of? Are we talking Harry Potter or Middle Earth figures? No. That's why those movies got big budgets, were well supported by movie-goers and why the first D&D movie sucked. Probably not as many as Harry Potter, that's for sure. I think the Dragonlance line of novels sold somewhere around the 20 million range--probably more if you include their new War of the Souls line. |
| Ranger REG09-29-05, 05:12 PM | Probably not as many as Harry Potter, that's for sure. I think the Dragonlance line of novels sold somewhere around the 20 million range--probably more if you include their new War of the Souls line. Personally, I avoid any DL novels of the Fifth Age and later. |
| ElGrecoETAC09-29-05, 05:19 PM | I hear you. Hence the suggestion for Chronicles and Legends--epic, but ultimately about people. |
| GothicDan09-29-05, 08:53 PM | Would you say that the majority of the American movie-goers who contributed to the $350 million+ domestic gross of each of the LOTR movies went to see them on the basis of the literary impact they had on our society? No, it was because (in large part, if not solely) everyone had heard the name. Everyone knew what they were about, a little bit, even if they hadn't read the books at all, or disliked the idea of them. They were made famous in the first place because of their literary impact. Also, you know some of my favorite fantasy series that I'd love to see on film? Jacqueline Carey's Kushiel Legacy trilogy and George R.R. Martin's Song of Ice and Fire. However, the former are a bit too nitty-gritty-NC17, and the latter are probably ultimately too political to appeal to the vast majority of modern American movie-goers. Sigh. |
| Squick09-30-05, 03:16 AM | Also, you know some of my favorite fantasy series that I'd love to see on film? Jacqueline Carey's Kushiel Legacy trilogy and George R.R. Martin's Song of Ice and Fire. Yeah, there are so many other fantasy novels or series of novels that should get the movie treatment way before any RPG-based book. Let's face it: DL is a facsimile of LotR, Elminster is a Gandalf clone, any actor portraying Drizzt would look as goofy as Orlando Bloom as Legolas and the D&D movie sucked! Someone mentioned the antihero archetype would be interesting...so why not Moorcock's Elric (which I believe, might be made)? A much more original saga than most banal D&D novels. There are a multitude of good fantasy novels just waiting to be made into movies, why harp on DL or FR? |
| WizO_Lyoness10-01-05, 08:22 PM | ...and remember, no novel discussion. ;) |
| Ranger REG10-02-05, 01:25 AM | ...and remember, no novel discussion. ;) Riiight, like you can make a successful movie based directly on Dungeons & Dragon game. ;) |
| warlockco10-02-05, 05:06 AM | Wow I just checked what films/shows that Bruce Payne has been in since he the did 1st D&D movie, seems he has been a virtual nobody since. Guess that is how they tagged him for D&D II. |
| ElGrecoETAC10-02-05, 09:31 AM | Someone mentioned the antihero archetype would be interesting...so why not Moorcock's Elric? I would love to see an Elric movie that did justice to the character. Unfortunately, I doubt it would make it in American theatres. There's just too much material that probably wouldn't pass our boards. |
| GothicDan10-02-05, 12:38 PM | I still can't find any of the older Elric books. Sad. |
| warlockco10-02-05, 09:30 PM | Riiight, like you can make a successful movie based directly on Dungeons & Dragon game. ;) Saw some commercials for the D&D 2 movie, looks promising. |
| Squick10-03-05, 04:40 AM | I would love to see an Elric movie that did justice to the character. Unfortunately, I doubt it would make it in American theatres. There's just too much material that probably wouldn't pass our boards. The Elric movie seems to have potential. Michael Moorcock himself is involved in the project and has been rather vocal about his desires and vision of the film. Info can be found at Moorcock's offical site: http://www.multiverse.org Sorry about posting somewhat off-topic :embarrass |
| Ranger REG10-03-05, 04:42 AM | Saw some commercials for the D&D 2 movie, looks promising. Still not enough for me to finally order cable. |
| Bocklin10-06-05, 12:54 PM | Saw some commercials for the D&D 2 movie, looks promising. Anything that one can see on the web? Bocklin |
| warlockco10-06-05, 02:01 PM | Anything that one can see on the web? Bocklin Scifi channel had a very big lack of information on it on their website :weep: Was hoping to get some images or find out more on the heroes. |
| shiyongseng10-08-05, 02:23 AM | There is going to be an Elric movie?! I never would have heard of Elric were it not for hanging around a little Wikan store when I was young. There is going to be a movie about Elric, yet no D&D movie after one of the many books that's been published... I've read all the Elric books but 3, and don't really see it becoming a movie since the story line was so jumpy from timeline to timeline. It would jump years from book to book. It's a pity that a book that has less followers than D&D is being made movie. Well, it is the 8th here in China and everyone should have had a chance to see what a blunderous movie D&D2 was. Who can point out the more sore points in such a trash movie that I didn't point out in my before typed reply? Ooops, my mistake. I thought it aired on Scifi on the 7th in the States- the 8th was the word premier. Now I see it's not till the 13th for Scifi. I read that some director by the name of Uwe Boll directed the movie- well props to him for doing such a poor job, and props to the grand idiots that wrote such a bad script. |
| Canadian_Samurai10-12-05, 11:07 AM | I'm sitting here in the middle of China, just like I was about 5-6 years ago when the first D&D movie came out in the theaters. Now there is another that has been filmed (at least it went straight to TV). The 1st movie was a bunch of S@#T. The only good thing was when the 1st came out I was here in China and there is a ton of pirating going on every day. A movie comes out in the States and it's on DVD here in less than a week. Sometimes the quality is poor, but sometimes it's taken straight from the movie camera that puts the picture on the scren for us- wonderful. Now, these producers and the people responsible for making these D&D movies are idiots. The people that hold the rights should think long and hard before they even make a move to make one of these. Drizzt is a big character in the FR world books, and so are others like Elminster. For once they should film a movie based on these books to make a movie worth spending your time on. An anime would be nice, but it would be more interesting to see who could actually fill in the character Drizzt or other characters that have made D&D and FR popular. Maybe even a movie with Dragon Lance characters like Raistlin and such would be nice, but then again the people that have made the two movies that are out now would just screw it up making great characters look small. 100% agree. A D&D movie based on the novels with a LOTR movie quality would make an awesome movie! |