With the first D&D movie being terrible, and the second and third being direct-to-video/SyFy Channel (but better than the first), I would question whether D&D is considered a viable movie property any more.
Maybe some direct-to-video animation, but that has a bad reputation as well. I haven't seen it, but it's my understanding that the 2008 Dragonlance animated movie, with a big name voice cast, was really bad.
Trying to make a movie out of a game system is backasswards. A game system does not have characters or a plot, and in the end, does not really provide a setting either. Basically the studio slaps the label on to get a little more buzz and then trots out whatever hack story someone had germinating. The closest thing to an good movie based on a (admittedly fictitious) game was Cloak and Dagger.
The successful D&D movies are The Lord of the Rings and The Hobbit while the successful T.V. show is Game of Thrones. The movies create interest in the concepts that D&D allows you to explore.
I think there's room for a story based in Greyhawk as a movie, but they need to treat it like marvel does there movies. Don't make the first one about Mordenkainen and the Circle of Eight. Make it about that one fighter guy and his girlfriend the wizard's apprentice and build from there! Oh wait, isn't that what they did with the first D&D movie? Insert a good story then, not overly melodramatic. And no Wayans!
They could lean a bit form Game of Thrones, minus the gratuitous rated R stuff. PG, or even PG-13 would be okay, as that is actually the lower cut-off age for the target group with the greatest interest level in D&D. Gritty enough to satisfy older folks, but probably not so gritty as to keep many parents from allowing their 10+ year-olds from watching it. I work with many 5th graders, most of whose parent watch The Walking Dead with them. That is a fairly gritty show, so I think this would fly well enough.
And leave the whole Dungeons and Dragons name out of the title. Put the logo where it belongs among the usual logos we see for companies at the beginning of the a movie (HASBRO Entertainment, WotC, movie companies, etc.). Then give it a title that isn't lame, for a movie script written by people at least familiar with whatever world the movie is set in, and who actually can write their way out of a paper bag. _________________ - Moderator/Admin (in some areas)/Member -
And there's the issue--good writers, actually good folks behind a movie like that in general. Regardless of what they actually title it, a D&D movie might be a tough draw for writers, cast, etc.
BUT, here's an idea or two if any Hollywood script-writer types are lurking...how about something detailing the life and times of Robilar? Would be an interesting character study, and enough material for a movie.
Or (OT) if they didn't want to do a fantasy flick, they could do a bio on the creators of the game. There's a lot of drama going from the 70s to the mid 80s (lawsuits, etc).
Hasbro is trying to buy DreamWorks Animations, not the movie studios.
DreamWorks Animation has made ALOT films like: the Shrek movies, Madagascar, How to train your dragon and so on. They have the writers and the ability to make a great movie about Greyhawk , but Hasbro owns a lot of titles rights ( G.I.Joe,My Little Pony, Pokemon). I think that any Greyhawk movie would be a "How to train your dragon" like movie for kids without the Dungeons & Dragons Logo.
Ah. Well, never mind what I posted then. So far as animation is concerned, HASBRO has many other properties it would work on animation for before doing anything for D&D. _________________ - Moderator/Admin (in some areas)/Member -
"Meanwhile, Hasbro awaits the outcome of a trial over who owns the movie rights to its highly valued Dungeons & Dragons game. If that case goes the toy company’s way, it looks to make a D&D picture with Universal."
With the first D&D movie being terrible, and the second and third being direct-to-video/SyFy Channel (but better than the first), I would question whether D&D is considered a viable movie property any more.
However, remember that the first Star Trek movie was widely panned, and Paramount greenlit the second (under the auspices of Paramount TV, not Paramount Movies) with the idea that it would be the final Star Trek movie -- they'd cash out what little was left from the Trekkies and call it a day. That's why Spock died in the film -- Leonard Nimoy, understanding that, wanted the Spock story arc to go out with a bang.
Paramount certainly didn't think Star Trek was a viable movie property. They were proven wrong, with a trilogy of excellent-to-pretty good movies (then a film that was never made, and then the mostly excellent Star Trek VI) pumping life into the franchise.
With competent writers, a good story and producers who want to make a good film, not just a "cash cow" film, I think a D&D movie could do quite well, even given the checkered past history with the game on film.
They'll probably make a movie in which a group of teenagers gets transported into "the D&D world", because that is always awesome.
"In a world of magic and dragons, the hopes of a kingdom rely on...
...a gamer, a cosplayer, a street kid, a jock, a sosh, and a bro!
This November, be prepared to waste $15 and two hours of your life watching...
[big explosion.]
Dungeons & Dragons: The Waster of Life"
_________________ - Moderator/Admin (in some areas)/Member -
Last edited by Cebrion on Fri Nov 14, 2014 9:26 pm; edited 4 times in total
Not really epic enough. Dragonlance (the first three books that is) would make a best series of movies from among the various IP. It has too many classic elements, plus younger age group appropriate appeal, to be ignored. _________________ - Moderator/Admin (in some areas)/Member -
I was reading Dragonlance through high school and, though I really enjoyed the character interaction in the story, I always thought the enormous number of dragons was too much for my own suspension of disbelief. Unfortunately, the first D&D movie did the same thing and that was one of the things I hated about it.
ONE dragon is impressive and cool (e.g. Smaug in The Hobbit). Thousands of them become boring. What's believable is a result like that in Reign of Fire, where only a few dozen dragons brought the entire globe to ash. There is no believable story when the heroes are up against an army of thousands of dragons.
I liked the DragonLance movie and was hoping the second and third books would be done with the same voice actors. But so much time has passed that I'm not holding my breath.
They'll probably make a movie in which a group of teenagers gets transported into "the D&D world", because that is always awesome.
"In a world of magic and dragons, the hopes of a kingdom rely on...
...a gamer, a cosplayer, a street kid, a jock, a sosh, and a bro!
This November, be prepared to waste $15 and two hours of your life watching...
[big explosion.]
Dungeons & Dragons: The Waster of Life"
As Foxworthy of Geoff once said:
When you find that the fate of your kingdom, which for the past fourteen centuries has withstood uprisings, incursions, and even that thing with dragons back when your grandfather was just a young lad, now rests in the hands of some self-absorbed high school kids, you might be....
...screwed!
;)
I was reading Dragonlance through high school and, though I really enjoyed the character interaction in the story, I always thought the enormous number of dragons was too much for my own suspension of disbelief. Unfortunately, the first D&D movie did the same thing and that was one of the things I hated about it.
Especially considering on Krynn, pretty much the entire population thought dragons were a myth, since nobody had ever seen one. Then all the sudden, you can barely see the shy there's so many of them milling about up there.
Also, on Krynn, half elves were supposed to be quite rare too. Tanis was the product of a rape, and I seem to recall reading something to the effect that all half elves on Krynn were (though I could be mistaken on this). And yet, these supposedly rare beyond rare half elves seemed to pop up all the time. I think almost every DL module had a new one to introduce,
SirXaris wrote:
ONE dragon is impressive and cool (e.g. Smaug in The Hobbit). Thousands of them become boring. What's believable is a result like that in Reign of Fire, where only a few dozen dragons brought the entire globe to ash. There is no believable story when the heroes are up against an army of thousands of dragons.
SirXaris
On the TV Tropes site, there is a page about something they call the "conservation of ninjitsu". Basically, it states that one ninja could give Superman a run for his money, but a hundred of them and each one goes down after being subjected to a harsh look. Maybe the same applies to dragons, with one dragon being nearly indestructible, so long as it's the only dragon known to be within a 500 mile radius. But then, when there's a thousand dragons, kids throwing rocks are taking them out of the sky.
Just a theory.
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
Canonfire! is a production of the Thursday Group in assocation with GREYtalk and Canonfire! Enterprises
Insert a good story then, not overly melodramatic. And no Wayans! 
