Pwease !!!
It's direct-to-DVD???
That's my question, too. The official movie site doesn't seem to mention that as being the case, unless I missed it. I was hoping for a theatrical release.
Apparently, it's a mix of CGI and animation and the trailer they showed at GenCon got pretty mixed responses as well. Some are saying that the CG doesn't mix well with the regular animation.
If it's that bad and goes straight to DVD, I fear we won't get proper sequels, which is too bad. This is a series that deserves a proper film treatment of some sort.
That's my question, too. The official movie site doesn't seem to mention that as being the case, unless I missed it. I was hoping for a theatrical release.
Yes, it's straight-to-DVD. There may be limited theatrical releases, but nothing has been announced as of this time.
Apparently, it's a mix of CGI and animation and the trailer they showed at GenCon got pretty mixed responses as well. Some are saying that the CG doesn't mix well with the regular animation.
All the responses I've heard have been pretty positive. The CG animation will be for the draconians, dragons, and battle scenes. The rest is traditional animation, and looks slick.
If it's that bad and goes straight to DVD, I fear we won't get proper sequels, which is too bad. This is a series that deserves a proper film treatment of some sort.
Actually, going straight-to-DVD will give us a much better shot at sequels. John Frank Rosenblum said that a theatrical release will require a bigger budget (distribution and so on), which means a sequel is less likely. The straight-to-DVD release won't cost as much, which will give us a better shot at sequels.
If it's that bad and goes straight to DVD, I fear we won't get proper sequels, which is too bad. This is a series that deserves a proper film treatment of some sort.
Even if it turns out to be a flop, remember that as far as a Lord of the Rings movie goes, before there was Peter Jackson there was Ralph Bakshi. There's always hope, as Tas says at the end of Autumn Twilight.
Even if it turns out to be a flop, remember that as far as a Lord of the Rings movie goes, before there was Peter Jackson there was Ralph Bakshi. There's always hope, as Tas says at the end of Autumn Twilight.
And where there's a whip...
*WHIP-CRACK!*
...there's a way. :D
And where there's a whip...
*WHIP-CRACK!*
...there's a way. :D
I just had a sudden image of Verminaard selecting some slaves in Pax Tharkas to make a movie about him.
I saw the trailer at Dragon Con, and I have to say that I was not impressed at all. Kinda made me sad really.
Really? What did you not like about it?
Also on the Where there's a whip line. Great little song. Abominable movie. The Hobbit was great. I liked Ralph Bakshi's take on the Lord of The Rings and would have loved to see the second part. The Return of the King (animated one) had some great songs (Frodo Of The Nine Fingers And The Ring Of Doom anyone?) but the characterizations were way off and so was the names they gave to some of the places.
Straight to DVD? I talked to Margaret Weis at Gen Con and she said that it definitly was going to be a theatrical released movie.
I suspect you might have misunderstood. There's talk of a limited theatrical release, but it's definitely going to be straight-to-DVD.
I suspect you might have misunderstood. There's talk of a limited theatrical release, but it's definitely going to be straight-to-DVD.
And by "limited theatrical release," it means "won't be showing in Hawaii movie theater."
Spain has around 48 million people, and I don't expect threatical release, neither...
I think that's what happens when you live somewhere with fewer people than the city of Phoenix, Arizona. ;)
And yet I don't see what's wrong with living in Hawaii.
I'll just pick up the DVD instead.
Here is her take on the new Dragonlance movie.
Margaret Weis Blog
YouTube Qualinesti Hymn
Even if it turns out to be a flop, remember that as far as a Lord of the Rings movie goes, before there was Peter Jackson there was Ralph Bakshi. There's always hope, as Tas says at the end of Autumn Twilight.
now if we can only get a Peter Jackson version of the Hobbit....without it looking anything like King Kong.
and Leornard Nimoy could sing the theme song...
Rankin/Bass films were some good things. i never had the misfortune of seeing the LotR movies. i recall it only being 2 movies....
what would be nice is if they did take more D&D books and make them into movies rather than original scripts.
hell they do it for other books, so why is DoAT the first D&D film madde from a book?
i think they would have gotten better movies from taking books and making those live action films from them.
and if Jackson can pull off a 5 foot tall hobbit then how hard could Tas be?
and Leornard Nimoy could sing the theme song...
That would be such a horrible thing, which the sick part of me would love to see.
That would be such a horrible thing, which the sick part of me would love to see.
you have never seen the video or heard the song by Spock?
search youtube, or a music sight for "the ballad of bilbo baggins" by Nimoy.
but dont let him sing any song in DragonLance!
you have never seen the video or heard the song by Spock?
search youtube, or a music sight for "the ballad of bilbo baggins" by Nimoy.
but dont let him sing any song in DragonLance!
I have seen it. That's why I think it's so funny. ;)
Based on the only two videos I've seen of it (the trailer and the Qualinesti song), if it were not a series that I am already in love with and have devoted mass amounts of money and time too, I doubt I would have any desire to see it. Ever. It feels like (and this is not meant as an insult to anyone) they are banking on our love of DL to push the sales. The problem with this is it doesn't help bring many new people into the fold.
The main problem I have with what I've seen is that the two art styles do not seem to flow together very well. Maybe they do better and the trailer was poorly put together, but my experience is that the trailer is usually the best of the best, and if that is so, then the art of the movie is poor indeed. Traditional and CGI animation can work together, I've seen some very well done projects, but it feels jarring in the trailer as it keeps jumping back and forth. I think it would have looked better one way or another.
The other thing is the so called 80's style of traditional animation (think all the 80's cartoons like Thundercats, Heman, etc.) is very jarring to look at for me, as it is so linked to that one style of entertainment, for me at least. Maybe less so for others, but that's what it feels like to me.
*Shrug*
As I said, I know I'll buy one.
While I know without a doubt that I will be picking up a copy of the DVD soon after it is released, I have this to say.
Based on the only two videos I've seen of it (the trailer and the Qualinesti song), if it were not a series that I am already in love with and have devoted mass amounts of money and time too, I doubt I would have any desire to see it. Ever. It feels like (and this is not meant as an insult to anyone) they are banking on our love of DL to push the sales. The problem with this is it doesn't help bring many new people into the fold.
The main problem I have with what I've seen is that the two art styles do not seem to flow together very well. Maybe they do better and the trailer was poorly put together, but my experience is that the trailer is usually the best of the best, and if that is so, then the art of the movie is poor indeed. Traditional and CGI animation can work together, I've seen some very well done projects, but it feels jarring in the trailer as it keeps jumping back and forth. I think it would have looked better one way or another.
The other thing is the so called 80's style of traditional animation (think all the 80's cartoons like Thundercats, Heman, etc.) is very jarring to look at for me, as it is so linked to that one style of entertainment, for me at least. Maybe less so for others, but that's what it feels like to me.
*Shrug*
As I said, I know I'll buy one.
I agree with your points (except for the "banking on our love of DL" one). There probably aren't many people that post in the DragonLance threads who won't be purchasing this, despite the large amount of negative reviews I've read for the look of it.
Personally, I don't mind the animation style. The way the characters look is fine. What does bug me is the fact that even Saturday morning animes look like they spend more money on frames per second. The CG presented in it has nearly no texture at all. In this day and age, the combination of CG and traditional animation is not all that rare - not even in video games. If this trailer is supposed to best of what they have to offer thus far (as Newanda pointed out), then they have a lot of spiffing up to do (and not much time to do it).
Now, I do have good things to say. The interview with the screenplay writer gave me faith in this story's transition from paper to screen. The bits of the soundtrack I heard absolutely floored me and I hope to see a CD on the racks. Simply awesome! There is love in this project. They want it to become a trilogy. And, they're certainly spending enough money on production companies and a stellar cast. If the animation ends up looking like my grandfather's snot rag...I'm willing to look past it.
At least I've seen both Dungeons & Dragons movies in their entirety, so I can take whatever they throw at me.
I agree with your points (except for the "banking on our love of DL" one). There probably aren't many people that post in the DragonLance threads who won't be purchasing this, despite the large amount of negative reviews I've read for the look of it.
Sorry, I meant "our" as in DL fans in general, not necessarily those few who post here.
Any movie is automatically better than what we expected, because three years ago any reasonable person's expectations would have been zero Dragonlance movies.
That said, I agree that in my opinion, one form of animation would look better. I also think that even the best-made movie would still disappoint us, somehow.
Dragonhelm spoke the truth above, though. If they keep the budget down on this one, and it does well, then we'll get sequels and more attention brought to our much-loved setting. Not to mention a chance for live-action movies. If they had spent a ton of money on it and the movie flopped, we'd end up with a movie and little/no chance for the other two. Keeping the budget in-hand on the first means we should be able to add all three books to our Dvd collections.
They're "in it to win it", so to speak.
P.S.- Since when did it become neccessary to have Peter Jackson direct all our movies? Yes; the man is excellent, and I loved the LotR movies like hell... But there's one or two other directors out there who could do justice to a good story.
Personally I think WotC should have loosend the purse strings and gone all out with an actual live cast and crew and then loosend em a bit more and givin Perter Jackson a call.
Wait a minute. WotC, not some production company like Paramount, is footing the bills?
It's like WWE making Red Sonja films. :P
I bring up Peter Jackson becuase to date he has made the best fantasy films I have ever seen, if you know someone better by all means give him a call. I also think it would have been cheaper in the long run to do the movies, all three at the same time.
In case you haven't viewed the extras in your LOTR DVD, PJ mentioned how he learned the hard way why nobody in the filmmaking industry would make three films all at once.
Dragonlance is owned by WotC thus WotC should be putting as much backing into the film as possible reguardles of the production company.
And LOTR film right is owned by Saul Zentz and his Tolkien Enterprises company, but he didn't foot the bill. Miramax and New Line paid him though.
And you can forget about Tolkien Estate headed by their lead trustee Christopher Tolkien (JRR's son), who hasn't said any word of endorsement for PJ's film adaptation.
This could have been a fantastic live action series instead of an ok cartoon. I love Dragonlance and I know that the three books of the Cronicles could be really great movies if enough effort and money was put forth.
I totally agree with you on that. I bet that if they had the resources to pour into it, "The Dragonlance Trilogy" would be as beloved as the LotR movies, even with the general public.
Unfortunately, its like this scumbag (we'll call him "Rummy") put it: "As you know, you go to war with the Army you have... not the Army you might want or wish to have at a later time." The animated movie is the army we have. We might get a movie with adequate body armor next time, but thats really only likely if this one gets the support it needs.
...
Ok, so the army metaphor was made of fail... Guess you can't win em all. :D
I bet that if they had the resources to pour into it, "The Dragonlance Trilogy" would be as beloved as the LotR movies, even with the general public.
Where are they going to get the resources? The studios are too greedy to part some of their money to the writers. The risky investment of LOTR is a once-in-my-lifetime phenomenon. The other studios are too chicken to pull that move, and some would be justified, by pointing out the on-going financial dispute between PJ and New Line's head honcho Mr. Shaye as evidence.
Where are they going to get the resources?
They aren't going to get the resources. That's my whole point.
Eh. I guess there's a chance that if this movie does well, it will raise enough interest that they'll be able to get the necessary monies. That's about the only way I can see a live-action movie having a chance of being made. But I could be wrong, of course.
Eh. I guess there's a chance that if this movie does well, it will raise enough interest that they'll be able to get the necessary monies. That's about the only way I can see a live-action movie having a chance of being made. But I could be wrong, of course.
Well, then ... think about it this way.
Before there was a live-action LOTR, there was a Rankin-Bass animated LOTR -- actually two films, one was LOTR and the other was The Return of the King. True story.
So, naturally DL is following the same footsteps as its "granddaddy" of fantasy literature into cinematic medium.
Give it time.
Give it time.
Yes, that's exactly my position on the issue of DL movies; the waiting game, and the hoping, and the appreciating of what we've got (for now). That's why I posted this on page one...
Dragonhelm spoke the truth above, though. If they keep the budget down on this one, and it does well, then we'll get sequels and more attention brought to our much-loved setting. Not to mention a chance for live-action movies. If they had spent a ton of money on it and the movie flopped, we'd end up with a movie and little/no chance for the other two. Keeping the budget in-hand on the first means we should be able to add all three books to our Dvd collections.
I think you're getting me confused with some other poster... I think we're on the same page.
But... The animation style of the Dragonlance movie looks horrendous, it is very bumpy, two-dimensional, and sketchy, the animation just doesn't flow well together. The CGI also I have problems with, if your going to do CGI then it should blend in and look like the animation not a entirely different movie. Also, many animated films can do what is shown as CGI with ordinary animation.
Release date: January 15th, 2008
I think you're getting me confused with some other poster... I think we're on the same page.
Then why are you ranting about resources?
It's not like they're in the position to hand-pick the best production company, production team, cast and crew? It's not like Hollywood ... or the guy from Wellington that did a small film project about short hobbits and orcs ... are beating down their doors.
Just Courtney Solomon.
Forgember said that more money should have been spent on the film and it should have been live action. I agree more with Dragonhelm's earlier point, that a controlled budget is best. The low budget is a plus, really. We'll get to see 3 low-budget animated movies instead of 1 low-budget live action movie that they crammed 3 books into.
And we all know this is how that hypothetical live action would be: "Eh, we don't have time to introduce Riverwind or any of these minor characters. And this guy, Flint? He dies halfway through, no one will miss him. We'll just cut them out." Can anyone honestly say they'd want to watch that? Not me.
1 movie per book sounds much better.Besides, since the movie is already made, this is a moot point.
I'm very happy we're going to get a DL movie. SO happy that I don't care a whole lot about poor CGI. Any movie is more than I expected. It'll be like a second Christmas on January 15! I maintain hope for the movie's success, and that this success might spawn us some 4E D&D material and maybe more movies in the future.
It's a moot point, despite my own wishful desire is to see a live-action treatment. I know it's not the kind of animation appealing for adults -- like Beowulf or Heavy Metal -- but then LOTR did went through the same thing in becoming motion picture.
I just hope that sometime in the future, someone who is as competent a director as PJ but with a love for DL, would give it a live-action treatment ... before I succumb to a possible high-blood pressure related blindness.
Ok, now that cover actually looks pretty nice. Maybe this is a good sign that the artwork of the previews does not equal the artwork as a whole.
I totally agree with you on that. I bet that if they had the resources to pour into it, "The Dragonlance Trilogy" would be as beloved as the LotR movies, even with the general public.
Seriously? You are comparing LotR to DL? One of the 20th Century's most enduring literary phenomena to some book read by gamers?
I am not comparing the quality of the books here, just the popularity and mass appeal. LotR had generations of fans and critical acclaim before the movie came out, which translates into a huge fan base (the "general public" of which you spoke). Many non-fantasy lovers have been reading LotR for decades. DL is popular with DnD players...period. Non-fantasy readers don't go near it, and fantasy-readers who don't play DnD don't like it (in my experience).
A theatrical release would flop on an epic scale. Plus the fact that from the trailers I have seen at GenCon and on the web it is REALLY BAD. Just terrible. Seriously. Is anyone involved with this project aware of the advances animation has seen since He-Man and Thundar the Barbarian?
I'm not comparing the quality of the two series either. I'm merely aware of the importance money means to a film, and the power money can exert over the minds of the public. If DL had the budget LotR had, it wouldn't matter if only a small minority had read it.
Eragon is an OK example of this. A fantasy book, new on the scene with a small following gets an impressive budget ($100 million) and becomes a live action movie. This is an excerpt from the Wiki-page:
...earning $8.7 million on opening day and $23.2 million across opening weekend, ranked 2nd behind The Pursuit of Happyness. Eragon's second weekend US box office dropped by almost 70%,.... Eragon’s $75 million total US gross was the 31st highest for 2006.
The movie was absolutely terrible, explaining how the second week's income dropped 70%. It had a decent opening day (2nd behind Pursuit of Happyness is not bad), largely due to the advertising blitz. The advertising even got to me... I think it was the dragon flying about that made me see it. The Eragon movie was bad, very bad, and yet it was only $25 million shy of being a success. Nowhere near LotR profits, of course.
Was Eragon's audience familiar with the book? Largely not. Fantasy fans? Some of them, to be sure. But what got them into the theatre was money, spent on advertising.
Here's some more data on recent, much higher grossing movie trilogies:
The Lord of the Rings film trilogy: $2.916 billion
Pirates of the Caribbean trilogy (as of December 4, 2007): $2.79 billion
Harry Potter film series (first 3 movies): $2.643 billion
Spider-Man trilogy: $2.496 billion
Star Wars: Episodes I, II, and III: $2.415 billion
Its a good time to be a nerd. ;) Lots of well known franchises, but can you see the odd one in the mix? Hint: its the THEME PARK RIDE. Yes, a frickin amusement park ride is the 2nd highest grossing trilogy of all time. Oh, but it had such a huge following...
Proof enough that money can buy you excellent screenwriters, actors, music, etc, etc. All of which get people into the theatres, and make a movie beloved.I agree that Lord of the Ring's massive fan base helped it immensely. But a massive pre-existing following isn't neccessary for getting a movie made, or for it to do well. I'll also admit that I'm biased towards Dragonlance, and that might be why I think it would succeed where Eragon failed.
A theatrical release would flop on an epic scale. Plus the fact that from the trailers I have seen at GenCon and on the web it is REALLY BAD. Just terrible. Seriously. Is anyone involved with this project aware of the advances animation has seen since He-Man and Thundar the Barbarian?
You're clearly missing the point. They would use the hypothetical money to make a live-action movie with big name stars and stunning effects. Note that this is all a hypothetical, and that I'm the one who's happy to get even the "He-Man" animation.
And by "limited theatrical release," it means "won't be showing in Hawaii movie theater."
Ya know ... Indi theaters could still theoretically show it ... "best case scenario" ... it's not like rocky horror hasn't been playing every saturday at midnight in cities accross the country for decades.
Screenshots from the official movie site. Hrrrrmm... kinda "wowsy" lookin. WOOT!! WotC is footing the bill!? They are sooo cool.
No really. Thats rockin. I know the story is gonna be great ... :shea prays for good directing:
I'm a big fan of this world.
"better than thundercats is all I ask"Seriously? You are comparing LotR to DL? One of the 20th Century's most enduring literary phenomena to some book read by gamers?
Meh. DL goes beyond gamers.
I am not comparing the quality of the books here, just the popularity and mass appeal. LotR had generations of fans and critical acclaim before the movie came out, which translates into a huge fan base (the "general public" of which you spoke). Many non-fantasy lovers have been reading LotR for decades. DL is popular with DnD players...period. Non-fantasy readers don't go near it, and fantasy-readers who don't play DnD don't like it (in my experience).
My female friend read it and liked it, and she doesn't play D&D nor read any fantasy fiction before.
Not many non-fantasy readers read fantasy literature ... for obvious reason (they're not into fantasy fiction). They know of Tolkien, they just don't go into it (like I know of Danielle Steele, but I don't read romance novels).
A theatrical release would flop on an epic scale.
Funny, that's what Tolkien Purists said about Peter Jackson's adaptation of LOTR.
I have been going there on and off for years before the movie was even announced and its had that same layout. I think its great that they chose the site as the official site for the dvd... but seriously its time to update the decade old "The Internet is New" design.
After how long its been up It just looks like a sloppy I did this in 5 minutes with Geocities pagebuilder website now. They have a great community there but its time for an layout update!
The fact that we are getting a DL period makes me happy.
Whoa! Hey! I don't have no period. :evillaugh
I would love to have seen a better animation style
You mean it's not better than Rankin-Bass rotoscope animation?!?!!!
I bring up Peter Jackson becuase to date he has made the best fantasy films I have ever seen, if you know someone better by all means give him a call. I also think it would have been cheaper in the long run to do the movies, all three at the same time. Dragonlance is owned by WotC thus WotC should be putting as much backing into the film as possible reguardles of the production company. This could have been a fantastic live action series instead of an ok cartoon. I love Dragonlance and I know that the three books of the Cronicles could be really great movies if enough effort and money was put forth.
I think you are vastly overestimateing the amount of money Hasbro makes. Let alone makes off of WoTC. Let alone what WoTC makes off of DnD. Let alone percentage of that comes from Dragonlance.
And PJ isn't a very good director. Just like Lucas he has a very good eye for effects but when it comes to people just talking it sort of falls apart.
LoTR had a HUGE budget and thats why they were good movies. They could afford real actors (no offense to Lucy Lawl-ess), a top notch digital/practical effects team, the very best costumes/make up/props (which make or break a fantasy movie) and all the rest of the very necessary things to make a good fantasy movie.
I whole heartedly agree with you though that DL could make an epic and amazing film. However, I also understand the costs involved with that and don't expect to see it done in my lifetime.
I wont be watching the DvD, I don't think I could take the disappointment. But I will be buying it for my niece and nephew who are too young to know better. Hopefully they'll be captivated by the images and themes, just like Ralph Bakshi's LoTR did for me.
And PJ isn't a very good director. Just like Lucas he has a very good eye for effects but when it comes to people just talking it sort of falls apart.
Do you want to elaborate that?
LoTR had a HUGE budget and thats why they were good movies.
Big budget doesn't mean good movie. It's HOW you use the budget and HOW creative you are to know how to entertain your audience, including those who have read the book you're adapting.
I really thought it was a good clip. I can't Wait to see the movie!
Click Here To Check It Out!
Click Here To Check It Out!
any body got any ideas
cheers
Rich
Well Guys here is a brand new clip for the Dragons Of Autumn Twilight Coming out on 01/15/08.
I really thought it was a good clip. I can't Wait to see the movie!
Click Here To Check It Out!
That looked just as horrible as the Youtube trailers. Thanks for wasting my time with that link.
EK
Do you want to elaborate that?
Big budget doesn't mean good movie. It's HOW you use the budget and HOW creative you are to know how to entertain your audience, including those who have read the book you're adapting.
Thats for sure just look at waterworld
I know this is only my opinion but out of 10 I would have to give it about 1.
People in this thread have referenced the original Lord of the Rings animated movie which is so far superior to the first attempt at a Dragonlance movie that I can hardly believe this was allowed to happen. Actually the Hobbit animated feature was by far better, better adapted, better animated and better voice acted.