DDOracle Traffic Report Updated October 22, 2014, 8:09 pm

[AdamSmith]

http://ddoracle.com/Traffic.html

I was waiting for the update ;)

Sarlona's on top (it's the current default server after all)
Cannith has become average
Orien has sunk back to it's pre-default server status
And Wayfinder at the bottom as usual

[Singular]

http://ddoracle.com/Traffic.html

I was waiting for the update ;)

Sarlona's on top (it's the current default server after all)
Cannith has become average
Orien has sunk back to it's pre-default server status
And Wayfinder at the bottom as usual

And Thelanis remains the best server. Ever. Ever-ever!

[morkahn82]

khyber is top (if you do not consider temporary single-server variations on all time graph)

[AdamSmith]

The default server might change again with the new update on Monday. We'll see.

[Ohboyo]

lotro puts ddo to shame numbers wise :/

[moo_cow]

lotro puts ddo to shame numbers wise :/


Seriously? That game looks like ****.

[Tscheuss]

lotro puts ddo to shame numbers wise :/

LotRO has a wider fan base than DDO, and the movies didn't hurt any. Sadly, most D&D movies are low-budget, tacky films that don't really grab an audience.

[DakFrost]

I wouldn't say any server is doing very well. The all time chart, basically three years worth of data, is pretty depressing.

[Chauncey1]

LotRO has a wider fan base than DDO, and the movies didn't hurt any. Sadly, most D&D movies are low-budget, tacky films that don't really grab an audience.

Even if you watch them purely to ridicule them MST3K style.

Heck, there was a movie with Jason Statham in it that was based off some obscure MMORPG that was really quite bad, but it was better by several orders of magnitude than ANY D&D movie.

[FranOhmsford]

Even if you watch them purely to ridicule them MST3K style.

Heck, there was a movie with Jason Statham in it that was based off some obscure MMORPG that was really quite bad, but it was better by several orders of magnitude than ANY D&D movie.

In the Name of the King was most definitely NOT better than any of the D&D Movies!

The D&D Movies get an unfair rep based on the name - They're not masterpieces by any means but they're also nowhere near as bad as they're made out to be!

Honestly - Ignoring Peter Jackson there hasn't been a single top class all out fantasy movie since Willow in the late 80s!

There's been a couple close call historical fantasies like King Arthur and Season of the Witch and some Sci-Fantasies like Avatar but actual true Fantasy is ignored by Hollywood in favour of Modern Day Fantasy Light like Harry Potter and Twilight!

Oh and of the three Narnia movies Prince Caspian was pretty d@rn good but LtW&tW and VotDT weren't!


You only have to look at the dismal mash-up of styles that was the Cartoon version of Dragons of Autumn Twilight to see what I mean when I say that Hollywood doesn't give True Fantasy a chance!

[Chauncey1]

In the Name of the King was most definitely NOT better than any of the D&D Movies!

The D&D Movies get an unfair rep based on the name - They're not masterpieces by any means but they're also nowhere near as bad as they're made out to be!

Honestly - Ignoring Peter Jackson there hasn't been a single top class all out fantasy movie since Willow in the late 80s!

There's been a couple close call historical fantasies like King Arthur and Season of the Witch and some Sci-Fantasies like Avatar but actual true Fantasy is ignored by Hollywood in favour of Modern Day Fantasy Light like Harry Potter and Twilight!

Oh and of the three Narnia movies Prince Caspian was pretty d@rn good but LtW&tW and VotDT weren't!


You only have to look at the dismal mash-up of styles that was the Cartoon version of Dragons of Autumn Twilight to see what I mean when I say that Hollywood doesn't give True Fantasy a chance!

Even the D&D movie with Jeremy Irons was horrible.

"Honestly - Ignoring Peter Jackson there hasn't been a single top class all out fantasy movie since Willow in the late 80s!"

I though the Harry Potter movies were quite good actually. And the Chronicles of Narnia movies I've seen, I liked, pretty close to the books I think, though I've not read them since I was in my early teens. The Underworld series was pretty good too. And the French film, Le Pacte de Loups was awesome. But yeah, Hollywood is fixated on comic book movies right now...which, I don't really have a problem with to be honest.
There are more movies made since the 80's in the fantasy genre that were good, but I can't think of any right now, lol. It's late and past my bedtime. That's my story and I'm stickin' to it.

[Chauncey1]

Bleh, double post, sorry.

[Tscheuss]

In the Name of the King was most definitely NOT better than any of the D&D Movies!

The D&D Movies get an unfair rep based on the name - They're not masterpieces by any means but they're also nowhere near as bad as they're made out to be!

Honestly - Ignoring Peter Jackson there hasn't been a single top class all out fantasy movie since Willow in the late 80s!

There's been a couple close call historical fantasies like King Arthur and Season of the Witch and some Sci-Fantasies like Avatar but actual true Fantasy is ignored by Hollywood in favour of Modern Day Fantasy Light like Harry Potter and Twilight!

Oh and of the three Narnia movies Prince Caspian was pretty d@rn good but LtW&tW and VotDT weren't!


You only have to look at the dismal mash-up of styles that was the Cartoon version of Dragons of Autumn Twilight to see what I mean when I say that Hollywood doesn't give True Fantasy a chance!

With all due respect, sir, I like D&D. I would hope that most of us playing DDO like D&D. In this context, how can it be that D&D movies get a bad rep because of the name? When D&D fans say that D&D movies are not good, that judgement has nothing to do with the name.

[FranOhmsford]

With all due respect, sir, I like D&D. I would hope that most of us playing DDO like D&D. In this context, how can it be that D&D movies get a bad rep because of the name? When D&D fans say that D&D movies are not good, that judgement has nothing to do with the name.

How to say this without giving offense?

You missed the point!

People who like D&D {well most of em} dislike the first D&D movie for one reason alone - IT'S NOT D&D!

The 2nd and 3rd D&D Movies have more D&D to them but weren't given the A-Movie treatment by Hollywood unlike the 1st.

D&D still has negative connotations for many {unfortunately} so the D&D Movie was already at a disadvantage when trying to appeal to the majority.
They compounded this by making it as conformist as they possibly could which alienated the actual fans of D&D too!


Now I over-all liked the 1st D&D Movie {apart from the absolutely horrid "They all go to Heaven" ending!} - Unlike most I didn't even have a problem with Marlon Wayans {I actually thought he was the best character in the film!}.
However:
I do have a few issues with said Movie:

1) Jeremy Irons hams it up just like in Die Hard with a Vengeance {Which frankly he ruined!} - He isn't Alan Rickman, He isn't even Tim Curry - Hollywood should stop asking him to play the bad guy!
On the other hand he was really good as Lord Vetinari and I liked him in Danny the Champion of the World too.

2) Blue Lips - Why?

3) Tom Baker and Richard O'Brien wasted!

4) PC African American Elf!

5) That ridiculous ending!

BUT:

- The Dragons were well done {not as good as Reign of Fire but I've never seen any Dragons that are - Not even Smaug!}.


Actually I'm not really sure why I have a soft spot for this Movie as there's far more to dislike than to like but I did enjoy it, I bought it AND I've watched it multiple times since!
It's simply nowhere near as bad as people make it out to be - Certainly not worse than In the Name of the King {which was atrocious despite Jason Statham!}.

[FranOhmsford]

I though the Harry Potter movies were quite good actually.

Eurgh No!

Plus Harry Potter isn't TRUE Fantasy in the D&D or Lord of the Rings sense.
-It's set on Earth
-It's in Modern Day
-It's Fantasy Light that Moms read!


And the Chronicles of Narnia movies I've seen, I liked, pretty close to the books I think, though I've not read them since I was in my early teens.

No - Not close to the books!
Which frankly was a good thing for Prince Caspian {a Slow read but probably the 2nd best Fantasy Movie of the past Decade behind Pan's Labyrinth*}
But was a bad thing for LtW&tW and VotDT which were ripped apart by Hollywood!


But again - I don't consider Narnia to be TRUE Fantasy in the D&D/LoTR style.
-It's set partly on Earth
-It's in Modern Day to the era it was written
-Even with Narnia itself being a Fantasy world the religious overtones are pretty blatant.
-These are children's books more than straight up Fantasy.


The Underworld series was pretty good too.

Eurgh


And the French film, Le Pacte de Loups was awesome.

Never seen it but isn't that a Werewolf movie?


But yeah, Hollywood is fixated on comic book movies right now...which, I don't really have a problem with to be honest.

Neither do I but I would like to see more TRUE Fantasy from the likes of Gemmell, Eddings, Brooks, Pratchett, Kerr and many many others given the Movie treatment they deserve!

Just in D&D there's the awesome Troy Denning Prism Pentad set in the world of Dark Sun!


There are more movies made since the 80's in the fantasy genre that were good, but I can't think of any right now, lol. It's late and past my bedtime. That's my story and I'm stickin' to it.

The Fantasy Genre - Like the Sci-Fi and Horror Genres - Is huge!
It covers literally every other Genre!

I'm talking about the specific TRUE Fantasy Genre that D&D belongs to!


*Fellowship of the Ring was 2001!

[goodspeed]

Eurgh No!

Plus Harry Potter isn't TRUE Fantasy in the D&D or Lord of the Rings sense.
-It's set on Earth
-It's in Modern Day
-It's Fantasy Light that Moms read!



No - Not close to the books!
Which frankly was a good thing for Prince Caspian {a Slow read but probably the 2nd best Fantasy Movie of the past Decade behind Pan's Labyrinth*}
But was a bad thing for LtW&tW and VotDT which were ripped apart by Hollywood!


But again - I don't consider Narnia to be TRUE Fantasy in the D&D/LoTR style.
-It's set partly on Earth
-It's in Modern Day to the era it was written
-Even with Narnia itself being a Fantasy world the religious overtones are pretty blatant.
-These are children's books more than straight up Fantasy.



Eurgh



Never seen it but isn't that a Werewolf movie?



Neither do I but I would like to see more TRUE Fantasy from the likes of Gemmell, Eddings, Brooks, Pratchett, Kerr and many many others given the Movie treatment they deserve!

Just in D&D there's the awesome Troy Denning Prism Pentad set in the world of Dark Sun!



The Fantasy Genre - Like the Sci-Fi and Horror Genres - Is huge!
It covers literally every other Genre!

I'm talking about the specific TRUE Fantasy Genre that D&D belongs to!


*Fellowship of the Ring was 2001!

Some time back id heard they wanted to do a movie based on the magic kingdom and the elfstones. But like all Hollywood rejects they wanted to change and add things to it. For land over I think they wanted to add 2 kids in there?

It's a shame, the older novels would make one hell of a trilogy if they did em right. Just thinking of that hulking dark shape of a reaper stalking all those men ripping them apart one after another as they flee deeper into the earthen tunnels. But what is, is.

[Singular]

Fran, the D&D movies were miserable. A friend of mine is a producer and writer for movies - I asked him "how did these movies get made, and made so badly?"

He replied "because of name recognition. Attach D&D to anything and you will get a minimum number of buyers and turn a profit. That allows you to make cheap films, not bother putting the money and time into making them good."

[FranOhmsford]

Some time back id heard they wanted to do a movie based on the magic kingdom and the elfstones. But like all Hollywood rejects they wanted to change and add things to it. For land over I think they wanted to add 2 kids in there?

It's a shame, the older novels would make one hell of a trilogy if they did em right. Just thinking of that hulking dark shape of a reaper stalking all those men ripping them apart one after another as they flee deeper into the earthen tunnels. But what is, is.

Sword is 730 pages long
Elfstones is 650.
Wishsong is over 500.
They'd make a trilogy each!


As for Magic Kingdom - Of course Hollywood wanted to add a couple of kids - They do that to EVERYTHING!
The question is though - Would it make sense to add them? And I could see it myself even though I'd much prefer they stick rigidly to the BOOK!

Until he wrote Running with the Demon {absolutely horrid!} I thought of Black Unicorn as easily his weakest novel {really slow going!}. So adding in some extra characters could actually help a Landover series of movies {just keep Magic Kingdom as close to the book as possible though please!}.


TBH though it's probably for the best that Elfstones got shelved as that more than any other fantasy novel I've ever read DESERVES the Lord of the Rings treatment!

Some Movies that I feel would be easier for Hollywood to make properly:

David Gemmell

Legend {May need a rename to distinguish it from that bleedin' awful piece of Tom Cruise tripe!}.
Waylander
Waylander II
Knights of Dark Renown

David Eddings
The Losers {not fantasy actually but a brilliant read}

His Fantasy Novels are mainly Epic series/trilogies so need the LotR treatment
Maybe not the Belgariad but The Mallorean, The Elenium and The Tamuli would all make amazing Movie Trilogies!

Terry Pratchett
Jingo
Night Watch
Monstrous Regiment
Equal Rites
Witches Abroad
Lords and Ladies
Masquerade

Just to start!
And ignoring the books that have already been adapted for TV.

Raymond E. Feist
Faerie Tale

R.A. Salvatore
Echoes of the Fourth Magic

[FranOhmsford]

Fran, the D&D movies were miserable. A friend of mine is a producer and writer for movies - I asked him "how did these movies get made, and made so badly?"

Name dropping?


He replied "because of name recognition. Attach D&D to anything and you will get a minimum number of buyers and turn a profit. That allows you to make cheap films, not bother putting the money and time into making them good."

The first D&D Movie was not made on the cheap!

No it didn't have the budget of The Avengers or Fellowship of the Ring but it wasn't cheap in Movie terms!

The later Movies yes - Went straight to DVD but for B-Movies they were actually both better than literally any other B-Movie Fantasy of the past 30 years you could name!




The big problem with that "name recognition" however I have already pointed out:

The fans who will actually go to watch said movie no matter how little effort you put into making it will hate it for not being good enough!
AND
D&D has a bad rep with many people anyway so it's name recognition is literally ONLY going to bring in the fans!

Anyone else who sees it will find it weak anyway because you put so little effort into it!



IMDB currently has it at a 3.6 rating - Which I find to be ridiculous - It's simply not THAT bad!

On a scale where Willow is a 10 and Legend is a 1 I'd give Dungeons & Dragons a 6 {maybe a 7}.

[Xaxx]

ok guys... do you wanna know how you should look at the first dnd movie????

its the adventure a bunch of guys have sitting around the table doing a one or two off with a dm who isnt the normal and its a goof off campaign..... you get a bit of serious play... you get alot of horseplay... you get alot of one liners (dwarf beards must be mentioned by the dwarf... and it is).... and it has a corney send off promising further adventures that everyone knows we're never gonna do unless we all get drunk one night.....

THAT is what the first dnd movie is.... view it through that context and it becomes a much better movie. :)

(and the cues that im right.... Jeremy Irons going WAAAY over the top cheesey, and all the one liner throw aways.... thats such dead on goof off campaign stigmas its not even funny.... if you played pen and paper tell me jeremy irons character isnt the bad guy whose dressed all in black with a smiley face pin and a one of those *my name is* stickers and written in it is *The Bad Guy* )

[FranOhmsford]

ok guys... do you wanna know how you should look at the first dnd movie????

its the adventure a bunch of guys have sitting around the table doing a one or two off with a dm who isnt the normal and its a goof off campaign..... you get a bit of serious play... you get alot of horseplay... you get alot of one liners (dwarf beards must be mentioned by the dwarf... and it is).... and it has a corney send off promising further adventures that everyone knows we're never gonna do unless we all get drunk one night.....

THAT is what the first dnd movie is.... view it through that context and it becomes a much better movie. :)

(and the cues that im right.... Jeremy Irons going WAAAY over the top cheesey, and all the one liner throw aways.... thats such dead on goof off campaign stigmas its not even funny.... if you played pen and paper tell me jeremy irons character isnt the bad guy whose dressed all in black with a smiley face pin and a one of those *my name is* stickers and written in it is *The Bad Guy* )

The second D&D Movie was a much superior D&D campaign though!

It did have its own problems:
-Cleric trying to turn a Dracolich {or White Dragon} - NEITHER are TURNABLE!
-Wizard teleporting into a wall - Just because!
-Xena wannabe Barbarian!

But at least it felt more like D&D!

The 3rd Movie's probably the best as a straight up Fantasy Movie but I'm still trying to get my head around the Paladin HAVING to do Evil BEFORE his God {TORM!} will acknowledge him!
No bleedin' wonder none of the other Paladins in the order had had any powers for so long!
They didn't realise their God was a B-tard!

[Angelic-council]

LotRO has a wider fan base than DDO, and the movies didn't hurt any. Sadly, most D&D movies are low-budget, tacky films that don't really grab an audience.

Very true.

[LeslieWest_GuitarGod]

No matter how you spin it, watching the D&D movies were probably almost as satisfying as stepping in brontosaurus **** on a sunny Jurassic morning...

There is no fantasy that can come anywhere close to all the lore that surrounds D&D. The scripts are basically made.. fodder for Hollywoods best. If or when gets the Big $$$ someday, with the right talent behind the curtain, D&D will finally get its due in the mass market.

As for how well its actually done to date and why, make no mistake, Hollywood didnt make a single D&D fan. We are all here because of the wonderful work of Gary Gxgax, Dave Arneson, and millions of D&D roleplayers the world over past and present. There are CEOs, our military, Hollywood stars and starlets, priests, politicians, athletes, today's homeless and today's elite that carry memories with them of a day long ago playing a game at a table, with their friends.

D&D will march on... thanks to us all.

[Uska]

In the Name of the King was most definitely NOT better than any of the D&D Movies!

The D&D Movies get an unfair rep based on the name - They're not masterpieces by any means but they're also nowhere near as bad as they're made out to be!

Honestly - Ignoring Peter Jackson there hasn't been a single top class all out fantasy movie since Willow in the late 80s!

There's been a couple close call historical fantasies like King Arthur and Season of the Witch and some Sci-Fantasies like Avatar but actual true Fantasy is ignored by Hollywood in favour of Modern Day Fantasy Light like Harry Potter and Twilight!

Oh and of the three Narnia movies Prince Caspian was pretty d@rn good but LtW&tW and VotDT weren't!


You only have to look at the dismal mash-up of styles that was the Cartoon version of Dragons of Autumn Twilight to see what I mean when I say that Hollywood doesn't give True Fantasy a chance!

How can you forget Star Dust?

[Uska]

With all due respect, sir, I like D&D. I would hope that most of us playing DDO like D&D. In this context, how can it be that D&D movies get a bad rep because of the name? When D&D fans say that D&D movies are not good, that judgement has nothing to do with the name.

Ok as a forty year player of D&D those movies were terrible

[catouse9]

LotRO has a wider fan base than DDO, and the movies didn't hurt any. Sadly, most D&D movies are low-budget, tacky films that don't really grab an audience.

I always thought they should make a movie of the chronicles of thomas covenant but those books seem to be forgotten by everyone? Loved them back when I was in high school.

[Chauncey1]

Eurgh No!

Plus Harry Potter isn't TRUE Fantasy in the D&D or Lord of the Rings sense.
-It's set on Earth
-It's in Modern Day
-It's Fantasy Light that Moms read!



No - Not close to the books!
Which frankly was a good thing for Prince Caspian {a Slow read but probably the 2nd best Fantasy Movie of the past Decade behind Pan's Labyrinth*}
But was a bad thing for LtW&tW and VotDT which were ripped apart by Hollywood!


But again - I don't consider Narnia to be TRUE Fantasy in the D&D/LoTR style.
-It's set partly on Earth
-It's in Modern Day to the era it was written
-Even with Narnia itself being a Fantasy world the religious overtones are pretty blatant.
-These are children's books more than straight up Fantasy.



Eurgh



Never seen it but isn't that a Werewolf movie?



Neither do I but I would like to see more TRUE Fantasy from the likes of Gemmell, Eddings, Brooks, Pratchett, Kerr and many many others given the Movie treatment they deserve!

Just in D&D there's the awesome Troy Denning Prism Pentad set in the world of Dark Sun!



The Fantasy Genre - Like the Sci-Fi and Horror Genres - Is huge!
It covers literally every other Genre!

I'm talking about the specific TRUE Fantasy Genre that D&D belongs to!


*Fellowship of the Ring was 2001!

For some reason..."No True Scotsman" comes to mind.

[Monkey-Boy]

Best D&D movie: Gamers: Dorkness Rising.

[Weemadarthur]

I always thought they should make a movie of the chronicles of thomas covenant but those books seem to be forgotten by everyone? Loved them back when I was in high school.

Great novels but I think they would fare better with a TV series (sorta like they did with GoT) rather than films. Its a shame these couldnt have been done whilst Liam Neeson was in his prime as I think he would have made a supurb Thomas but is prolly a little too old now.

For the movies I would like to see made though I would have to go with David Farlands runelord saga (although only the 1st 4 books) or as allready said Eddings' Elenium would be awsome. I would also love to see the Wheel of Time get the GoT treatment and get a big budget TV series.

[FranOhmsford]

How can you forget Star Dust?

Stardust is good but I'd put it in the same Genre as Narnia as a Wish-Fulfilment Fantasy.

I also don't think it quite reaches the heights of Pan's Labyrinth or Prince Caspian as a Wish-Fulfilment Fantasy
It is much better than say Never-Ending Story and its sequels though!


Oh and An Unexpected Journey was better too {though Desolation of Smaug just annoyed me!].

[FranOhmsford]

Great novels but I think they would fare better with a TV series (sorta like they did with GoT) rather than films. Its a shame these couldnt have been done whilst Liam Neeson was in his prime as I think he would have made a supurb Thomas but is prolly a little too old now.

How about Christian Bale?


For the movies I would like to see made though I would have to go with David Farlands runelord saga (although only the 1st 4 books)

The 1st Book in that series "The Sum of All Men" was smeggin' AWESOME!

Unfortunately the rest of the series went rapidly downhill!



or as allready said Eddings' Elenium would be awsome.

Sparhawk, Kalten, Bevier, Tinian, Ulath, Vanion, Sephrenia - So many superb characters - Eddings forte has always been his {and his wife's} characterizations!

Those Movies would be in the Casting!

[Hoglum]

He replied "because of name recognition. Attach D&D to anything and you will get a minimum number of buyers and turn a profit. That allows you to make cheap films, not bother putting the money and time into making them good."


Back in the day the Hollywood know it all wizards also poo-pooed comic book movies - right up until they were done right and taken more seriously. Now comic book movies are some of the biggest cash crops they have.

Make some good fantasy D&D flicks and I'll bet the attitude would change. Give us more of what we've seen and they'll always be seen as a joke.

Face it, when you watch D&D 1 and the thieves are tripping over their own feet and crashing around recklessly while trying to rob a wizard tower something is terribly wrong. The same bad attitude towards the genre will continue as long as the movies reflect idiocy.

[catouse9]

Great novels but I think they would fare better with a TV series (sorta like they did with GoT) rather than films. Its a shame these couldnt have been done whilst Liam Neeson was in his prime as I think he would have made a supurb Thomas but is prolly a little too old now.

For the movies I would like to see made though I would have to go with David Farlands runelord saga (although only the 1st 4 books) or as allready said Eddings' Elenium would be awsome. I would also love to see the Wheel of Time get the GoT treatment and get a big budget TV series.

You are right a TV series would probably be better but whoever played Thomas the Unbeliever would have to be someone that the audience kind of liked already or had some sort of Charisma to make him more understandable for the mass audiences out there because he does some very questionable non-heroic things that heroes in movies just do not do... definitley not one for the kids out there... Speaking of which when I saw LOTR there were 3 little girls beside me that were having a slumber party and their dad's drug them to the opening weekend and they were terified most the movie... bet he got calls from the other parent's kids.

[FranOhmsford]

Back in the day the Hollywood know it all wizards also poo-pooed comic book movies - right up until they were done right and taken more seriously. Now comic book movies are some of the biggest cash crops they have.

Well said.


Make some good fantasy D&D flicks and I'll bet the attitude would change. Give us more of what we've seen and they'll always be seen as a joke.

I just don't get why with all the D&D Novels out there to choose from AND Hollywood's love of adaptations and re-makes elsewhere the three Movies have been freshly written {seemingly by committee!}.

Here's some possibilities Hollywood!

- I Strahd {Keep Kate Beckinsale away from this!}
- Mordenheim {Keep Kate Beckinsale away from this!}
- The Prism Pentad {Verdant Passage is book 1}
- Dragons of Autumn Twilight {Do it properly this time!}
- Darkwalker on Moonshae
- Beyond the Moons
- The Crystal Shard {Yes I know it's Drizz't!}
- Exile/Homeland/Sojourn {Would make an awesome Cartoon TV Series!}
- Saga of Old City {Gord the Rogue}



Face it, when you watch D&D 1 and the thieves are tripping over their own feet and crashing around recklessly while trying to rob a wizard tower something is terribly wrong. The same bad attitude towards the genre will continue as long as the movies reflect idiocy.

One of the biggest problems with the 1st D&D Movie that I missed in my previous posts!

The Heroes are stupidly low level for the Campaign!

[FranOhmsford]

You are right a TV series would probably be better but whoever played Thomas the Unbeliever would have to be someone that the audience kind of liked already or had some sort of Charisma to make him more understandable for the mass audiences out there because he does some very questionable non-heroic things that heroes in movies just do not do... definitley not one for the kids out there... Speaking of which when I saw LOTR there were 3 little girls beside me that were having a slumber party and their dad's drug them to the opening weekend and they were terified most the movie... bet he got calls from the other parent's kids.

Their Dad did WHAT?

I know LoTR is seen more as a Boy's thing but did he really have to drug the poor girls to get them to go!

[Chauncey1]

Best D&D movie: Gamers: Dorkness Rising.

Agreed!

[catouse9]

Their Dad did WHAT?

I know LoTR is seen more as a Boy's thing but did he really have to drug the poor girls to get them to go!

yeah they were all 5 and 6 years old... they were really good and watched the whole movie and everything without making any noise except for screaming every now and again... One of the little gilrs actually grabbed my arm a couple of times in her pure terror and the apologized for doing so... i think once was during the time when bibo's face changed and he tried to get the ring back from frodo which gave me a start at the time as well... he he.

[catouse9]

thing is only one of those girl's was his kid... the others were just staying the night with them-I guess he needed to see the movie on the 1st night really badly to drag 3 little girls along... They were super scared most of the movie and probably a little confused with the ending not being exactly a happy one where the bad guys get their due...
I felt confused after the 3rd movie with the hobbits frolicking in the bed together.

[Nestroy]

(...)- Exile/Homeland/Sojourn (...)

Would make an epic film series (3 parts) like LotR with the right story board writers and the right director. Albeit certainly for audiences 16+ or adult. Especially the scenes on the comming-to-age celebrations in the Lolth temple. But, given great artistic vision, this movies could be great. Real movies, mind you, not 2nd rate cartoons.

[FranOhmsford]

Would make an epic film series (3 parts) like LotR with the right story board writers and the right director. Albeit certainly for audiences 16+ or adult. Especially the scenes on the comming-to-age celebrations in the Lolth temple. But, given great artistic vision, this movies could be great. Real movies, mind you, not 2nd rate cartoons.

No chance of these ever being made as Real movies - The PC crowd would go nuts at all the blacking up!

And no - African American does not = Drow!

They could probably get away with the Icewind Dale series but not Drizz't's backstory - This HAS to be animated!

[Nestroy]

No chance of these ever being made as Real movies - The PC crowd would go nuts at all the blacking up!

And no - African American does not = Drow!

They could probably get away with the Icewind Dale series but not Drizz't's backstory - This HAS to be animated!

They got away with the Orcs and the Men of Westerness in LotR. It just depends on how the Drow are depicted. Remember, the Hero is black-skinned on the surface world only and has to go against severe prejudices. Now tell me about PC. And in the darkvision of the drow the color actually would be some kind of grey-purple or greyscale. I think the drow skin color could well be quite white or grey in darkvision in a film, depending on how accurate the artistic director want´s the movie to be. Hey, Drizzt could well find out he is black-skinned the day he first sees himself in a mirror in sunlight and not before.

By the way, I never heard any outcry here in DDO at how the Drow are depicted.

[Chai]

They got away with the Orcs and the Men of Westerness in LotR. It just depends on how the Drow are depicted. Remember, the Hero is black-skinned on the surface world only and has to go against severe prejudices. Now tell me about PC. And in the darkvision of the drow the color actually would be some kind of grey-purple or greyscale. I think the drow skin color could well be quite white or grey in darkvision in a film, depending on how accurate the artistic director want´s the movie to be. Hey, Drizzt could well find out he is black-skinned the day he first sees himself in a mirror in sunlight and not before.

By the way, I never heard any outcry here in DDO at how the Drow are depicted.

The drow use continual light and faerie fire spells in their cities. They would be familiar with their appearance, including color, regardless if they go to the surface or not. Their ultravision is a spectrum they can see into, but its not limited to that.

[FranOhmsford]

They got away with the Orcs and the Men of Westerness in LotR. It just depends on how the Drow are depicted. Remember, the Hero is black-skinned on the surface world only and has to go against severe prejudices. Now tell me about PC. And in the darkvision of the drow the color actually would be some kind of grey-purple or greyscale. I think the drow skin color could well be quite white or grey in darkvision in a film, depending on how accurate the artistic director want´s the movie to be. Hey, Drizzt could well find out he is black-skinned the day he first sees himself in a mirror in sunlight and not before.

By the way, I never heard any outcry here in DDO at how the Drow are depicted.

Wow - Way to make excuses!

The men of Westerness are barely even seen in LotR {Basically background mobs during the battle!}.

Orcs in the movies seemingly come in all colours - and quite obviously go in for body paint anyway!

Drow aren't just a dark grey or Purple - This is D&D we're talking about here NOT WoW! - They are Black - JET Black!


And DDO doesn't use REAL ACTORS who would have to Black up {even the African American ones!} to play a Drow - DDO is Animated Computer Graphics!


Also - Nowhere in the early Drizz't novels does it ever mention that his skin colour changes upon reaching the surface world - Either Salvatore got scared of the PC Crowd later on or you're simply making things up!

[Tscheuss]

Back in the day the Hollywood know it all wizards also poo-pooed comic book movies - right up until they were done right and taken more seriously. Now comic book movies are some of the biggest cash crops they have.

Make some good fantasy D&D flicks and I'll bet the attitude would change. Give us more of what we've seen and they'll always be seen as a joke.

Face it, when you watch D&D 1 and the thieves are tripping over their own feet and crashing around recklessly while trying to rob a wizard tower something is terribly wrong. The same bad attitude towards the genre will continue as long as the movies reflect idiocy.

Special effects are so much better than they used to be. Comic book movies made back then would not have been nearly as good as they are now. Technology has made a better storyteller. :)

[FranOhmsford]

Special effects are so much better than they used to be. Comic book movies made back then would not have been nearly as good as they are now. Technology has made a better storyteller. :)

Tell that to the people who made the trash remake of Clash of the Titans!
Or the even worse {I can't believe that was even possible!} sequel - Wrath of the Titans!

Tell that to the millions of Star Wars Fans who want to see the ORIGINALS!

Oh and though I wasn't a fan myself many people still consider Micheal Keaton's Batman to be the best Comic Book Movie!

Practical Effects beat CGI EVERY TIME!

[Tscheuss]

Tell that to the people who made the trash remake of Clash of the Titans!
Or the even worse {I can't believe that was even possible!} sequel - Wrath of the Titans!

Tell that to the millions of Star Wars Fans who want to see the ORIGINALS!

Oh and though I wasn't a fan myself many people still consider Micheal Keaton's Batman to be the best Comic Book Movie!

Practical Effects beat CGI EVERY TIME!

Effects are only as good as the people who use them. GIGO still rules. If/when someone combines good people and healthy budget with modern effects to tell a D&D tale, we will finally have a decent D&D movie.

[Rykka]

Even the D&D movie with Jeremy Irons was horrible.

"Honestly - Ignoring Peter Jackson there hasn't been a single top class all out fantasy movie since Willow in the late 80s!"

I though the Harry Potter movies were quite good actually. And the Chronicles of Narnia movies I've seen, I liked, pretty close to the books I think, though I've not read them since I was in my early teens. The Underworld series was pretty good too. And the French film, Le Pacte de Loups was awesome. But yeah, Hollywood is fixated on comic book movies right now...which, I don't really have a problem with to be honest.
There are more movies made since the 80's in the fantasy genre that were good, but I can't think of any right now, lol. It's late and past my bedtime. That's my story and I'm stickin' to it.

I thought the old governator Conan was a pretty good, if abbreviated, adaptation. Death Stalker II was pretty hilarious. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i6aOLbK7m1c

[FranOhmsford]

I thought the old governator Conan was a pretty good, if abbreviated, adaptation. Death Stalker II was pretty hilarious. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i6aOLbK7m1c

Those are both more than 20 years old!

If you liked Deathstalker II you should try Hawk the Slayer!

[Chauncey1]

Tell that to the people who made the trash remake of Clash of the Titans!
Or the even worse {I can't believe that was even possible!} sequel - Wrath of the Titans!

Tell that to the millions of Star Wars Fans who want to see the ORIGINALS!

Oh and though I wasn't a fan myself many people still consider Micheal Keaton's Batman to be the best Comic Book Movie!

Practical Effects beat CGI EVERY TIME!

Shiny tools are useless without the proper skills.

[FranOhmsford]

Shiny tools are useless without the proper skills.

CGI can provide wonderful backdrops and scenery but even today cannot come close to the realism of practical effects from decades ago like:
- The Xenomorphs in Aliens
- The Rancor, Jabba the Hutt et al in the ORIGINALS!
- Ray Harryhausen's wonderful Skeleton Warriors in Jason and the Argonauts have NEVER been surpassed! {The Original Clash of the Titans was a better film with some incredible effects itself but J&tA was made 18 years earlier!}


I've heard nothing but good things about Babylon 5 but I've never been able to watch it because of the God-Awful CGI that was lauded to the rafters when it came out!

And I've seen the worst of the worst in practical effects - I own Warriors of the Deep on DVD!

[Chauncey1]

CGI can provide wonderful backdrops and scenery but even today cannot come close to the realism of practical effects from decades ago like:
- The Xenomorphs in Aliens
- The Rancor, Jabba the Hutt et al in the ORIGINALS!
- Ray Harryhausen's wonderful Skeleton Warriors in Jason and the Argonauts have NEVER been surpassed! {The Original Clash of the Titans was a better film with some incredible effects itself but J&tA was made 18 years earlier!}


I've heard nothing but good things about Babylon 5 but I've never been able to watch it because of the God-Awful CGI that was lauded to the rafters when it came out!

And I've seen the worst of the worst in practical effects - I own Warriors of the Deep on DVD!


I agree for the most part, but I think Avatar changed all that. Say what you will about the acting and dialogue, but it's very hard to argue against the near flawless CGI in that film.

[bsquishwizzy]

Even if you watch them purely to ridicule them MST3K style.

Heck, there was a movie with Jason Statham in it that was based off some obscure MMORPG that was really quite bad, but it was better by several orders of magnitude than ANY D&D movie.

No, actually, it wasn't. It really sucked. Badly.

The D&D movies are at least watchable. They may not have the best acting or script-writing, but the stories are fairly sound

The intro to the latest D&D movie actually wasn't bad. Unfortunately, that was the best part. Still, I can sit down and watch it, and not be assaulted by the same, contrived storylines that I would most other fantasy movies.

[bsquishwizzy]

Probably one of the best fantasy old-school effects movies out there: Dragonslayer. The dragon was stop animation with blur included for realistic movement. There are a couple of times you notice it, but for the most part it is fluid.

[Chauncey1]

No, actually, it wasn't. It really sucked. Badly.

The D&D movies are at least watchable. They may not have the best acting or script-writing, but the stories are fairly sound

The intro to the latest D&D movie actually wasn't bad. Unfortunately, that was the best part. Still, I can sit down and watch it, and not be assaulted by the same, contrived storylines that I would most other fantasy movies.

How about we agree that they all sucked?
Some more than others, but which ones is in the eye of the beholder.

[Chauncey1]

Probably one of the best fantasy old-school effects movies out there: Dragonslayer. The dragon was stop animation with blur included for realistic movement. There are a couple of times you notice it, but for the most part it is fluid.

Yeah that was pretty good animation.

[Seamonkeysix]

There certainly is a fan base for fantasy, D&D-type, movies. Game of Thrones is the most watched television series of all time. The problem with D&D movies, imo, is there hasn't been a respectable team of writers, directors and producers that have taken the theme seriously. You'd have to appeal to the D&D crowd, but also make a movie that appeals to the general public. GoT did a great job of building solid story line, characters and special effects based around a fantasy series. D&D has plenty of story line to draw from, it's just never been done with the right team...and sadly, I don't know that it ever will.

[bsquishwizzy]

How about we agree that they all sucked?
Some more than others, but which ones is in the eye of the beholder.

True. But any time you get Uwe Boll behind the camera, and the suckage reaches epic proportions.

Seriously, did anyone *really* think that the Transporter was out in the fields raising crops? C'mon...

[bsquishwizzy]

There certainly is a fan base for fantasy, D&D-type, movies. Game of Thrones is the most watched television series of all time. The problem with D&D movies, imo, is there hasn't been a respectable team of writers, directors and producers that have taken the theme seriously. You'd have to appeal to the D&D crowd, but also make a movie that appeals to the general public. GoT did a great job of building solid story line, characters and special effects based around a fantasy series. D&D has plenty of story line to draw from, it's just never been done with the right team...and sadly, I don't know that it ever will.

Yes. The problem is that most people think you have to have this sort of Shakespearian thing going on when it is a Swords and Sorcerery type movie.

They leave out suspense, the aura of dread, and even horror elements. And that's what kills it.

[Seamonkeysix]

Yes. The problem is that most people think you have to have this sort of Shakespearian thing going on when it is a Swords and Sorcerery type movie.

They leave out suspense, the aura of dread, and even horror elements. And that's what kills it.

Agreed...or they go the route of trying to attract younger children and incorporate characters and themes that detract from the effectiveness of the movie. In 1984, I suppose this would make sense, because the fans of D&D were pretty much kids and young adults. In 2014, fans of D&D span the gamut of ages. There are plenty of 20-50 year old people that would be more than happy to see an intense D&D movie.

Not to go back to the well, but look at Game of Thrones. Not for kids. Great series. Super popular.

[Chauncey1]

True. But any time you get Uwe Boll behind the camera, and the suckage reaches epic proportions.

Seriously, did anyone *really* think that the Transporter was out in the fields raising crops? C'mon...

Never could figure out why Statham did that film.

[FranOhmsford]

Never could figure out why Statham did that film.

Money!

[Therrilliar]

No chance of these ever being made as Real movies - The PC crowd would go nuts at all the blacking up!

And no - African American does not = Drow!

They could probably get away with the Icewind Dale series but not Drizz't's backstory - This HAS to be animated!

As a producer myself, I have thought often about how one would go about making a Drizzt movie. It would be a thorny issue, but the saving grace would be that the Drizzt stories are about overcoming stereotypes and racial prejudice. It would have to be handled very delicately, but could be done. I would point out that the most recent Thor movie had dark elves in it and no one went PC crazy over it.

BTW, I was also peripherally involved with the D&D movie in two ways. First, my company was approached by Courtney Solomon to help produce the first film. Knowing I played D&D they gave me the script and I told them to pass. And that script was even better than the one they ended up using! Second, I worked for the company that made the D&D movies for a few months.

It was hilarious going to the private screening and sitting behind the director and hearing the entire crowd cheer when Wayans' character died.

The story of the first D&D movie is long and sordid and much of it can be found online. I know some of the more obscure details that I won't divulge. But suffice to say that the franchise was not in good hands when it was turned over to Solomon. He has since been under contract to produce a D&D movie every 5 years or lose the franchise, so that explains the cheapo direct to VOD versions coming out of Bulgaria since the first debacle.

However, I believe Solomon has recently been in talks with Warner Bros. to sell back the franchise. So there is some small hope that a real D&D movie of quality might be made.

As far as speculation as to why bad movies get made, that would be an entire magazine article. Having been in the movie and TV business for almost 30 years now, I can simply tell you that the reasons are not as simple as you might think. Sometimes it is difficult to stop a freight train once it gets going...

I, frankly, don't think a big-budget "D&D" movie will ever get made. The brand has been completely soiled and driven into the ground by Mr. Solomon. However, a movie that uses one of the popular settings and book series (aka Forgotten Realms) could be made if it avoids the "D&D" moniker.

It would be my hope one day to get the rights and funding to make such a film and portray the D&D experience the proper way on the screen. The problem in the past has been the no one who actively plays the game has been involved with the films. The best we've had is a guy who played in high school in the 80's (who didn't?). We need a producer who loves the game, plays it regularly, and is still in tune with what makes it so appealing.

[FranOhmsford]

As a producer myself, I have thought often about how one would go about making a Drizzt movie. It would be a thorny issue, but the saving grace would be that the Drizzt stories are about overcoming stereotypes and racial prejudice. It would have to be handled very delicately, but could be done. I would point out that the most recent Thor movie had dark elves in it and no one went PC crazy over it.

The Dark Elves of Norse Mythology and the Thor Movies have absolutely nothing to do with the Drow!
The ones in the Movie are closer to the Dark Eldar of Warhammer 40k and indeed call themselves Eldar at times too!

Algrim {I think that's his name - I actually rewatched Dark World yesterday and it was better on the 2nd viewing than the first...though I still feel they messed up Loki's fake death producing a bad twist ending!} is actually a pretty good character and no it doesn't matter so much that he's English of Nigerian descent as we already have Idris Elba playing Heimdall and an Oriental background Asgard warrior!


It was hilarious going to the private screening and sitting behind the director and hearing the entire crowd cheer when Wayans' character died.

I really don't get the hatred of Snails {He's probably the best actual character in the whole movie!}. I know that's not saying much but Marlon Wayans is most definitely not to blame for everyone hating said movie {He's just an easy target!}.


The story of the first D&D movie is long and sordid and much of it can be found online. I know some of the more obscure details that I won't divulge. But suffice to say that the franchise was not in good hands when it was turned over to Solomon. He has since been under contract to produce a D&D movie every 5 years or lose the franchise, so that explains the cheapo direct to VOD versions coming out of Bulgaria since the first debacle.

He's been a bit tardy on that 5 years then - The original came out in 2000, the second in 2005 and the 3rd in 2012!



I, frankly, don't think a big-budget "D&D" movie will ever get made. The brand has been completely soiled and driven into the ground by Mr. Solomon. However, a movie that uses one of the popular settings and book series (aka Forgotten Realms) could be made if it avoids the "D&D" moniker.

Like Whoever has the rights to D&D will EVER allow a Movie of those books to be made WITHOUT said moniker!

Never gonna happen!


It would be my hope one day to get the rights and funding to make such a film and portray the D&D experience the proper way on the screen. The problem in the past has been the no one who actively plays the game has been involved with the films. The best we've had is a guy who played in high school in the 80's (who didn't?). We need a producer who loves the game, plays it regularly, and is still in tune with what makes it so appealing.

As a fan of 2nd Ed. I'd hate to see a D&D Movie made by someone who'd only ever played 4th/5th Ed.!

And honestly with all the Home-Brewed rules systems I'm not sure how it can be said that someone has a knowledge of D&D just because they play a roleplaying game with that title!

Also - The main appeal of D&D PnP has always been better shown in movies like The Gamers!
Movies that are about the Characters rather than the Players should try to avoid this seeming requirement to "show the rolls".

A Drizz't, Elminster, Gord, Mordenkainen, Dragonlance, Dark Sun, Spelljammer, Eberron, Ravenloft or even Planescape Movie should concentrate on being a GOOD MOVIE first of all!


Strangely enough the Ravenloft novels "I Strahd" and "Mordenheim" because of their similarities to Dracula and Frankenstein AND because of the proliferation of BAD Gothic movies like I Frankenstein, The Underworld Series and Van Helsing would probably be the easiest to get Hollywood to make.
And would also be the easiest to get the holders of the D&D licence to agree to not having said D&D moniker on - Ravenloft would be enough!

[IronClan]

Oh and though I wasn't a fan myself many people still consider Micheal Keaton's Batman to be the best Comic Book Movie!

I wont go so far as best comic book movie, nothing from DC can live up to that billing, but best batman? sure, mostly because Keaton is just that good, one of the all time underrated actors IMO.

IMO Game of Thrones will do a HUGE boost to the genre for movies and series.

Would love to see The Chronicles Of Thomas Covenant as a HBO series it would need a bigger CGI budget than GoT as the lands and creatures are far more fantastical. As for casting... Liam Neeson? Bale? pfffft,... the last thing that role calls for is an Alpha male action star, the protagonist is a, depressed, middle aged broken man with Hanson's disease (leprosy) thust into a fantasy world he doesn't believe is anything more than a dream.... Now after Birdman I could see Keaton in that role, perhaps. Robin Williams RIP would have been special in that role (think 1 hour photo). Others? Easily disliked Jeremy Piven, with a liitle weight loss and aging might help give the role the anti hero opposing tension it needs (you really need to actively dislike/pity the protagonist for long stretches of the book, if you want to get the full impact and tension).

To me The Song of Ice and Fire and the Unbeliever series are apart from the rest of the genre in being Fantasy for grown ups, examining the human condition in a way that is both more effective, and yet more subtle than the best of normal or classic literary fiction..

MMM also the Deathgate cycle could get HBO treatment

[Therrilliar]

The Dark Elves of Norse Mythology and the Thor Movies have absolutely nothing to do with the Drow!
The ones in the Movie are closer to the Dark Eldar of Warhammer 40k and indeed call themselves Eldar at times too!

Yes they do. Where do you think Gygax got them from? And even if they were unrelated as such, the fact is you have dark skinned elves as bad guys in Thor and the African American community was not in an uproar. I agreed it would be a thorny issue...but I do think it could be done.


I really don't get the hatred of Snails {He's probably the best actual character in the whole movie!}. I know that's not saying much but Marlon Wayans is most definitely not to blame for everyone hating said movie {He's just an easy target!}.

I don't get how you don't get it. He was horrible. His character was horrible. His dialogue was whiny and annoying and not a bit funny. It says something when a protagonist dies and the entire theatre applauds because they won't have to watch or listen to him again. Wayans is a decent comedic actor but was completely out of place in that movie.


He's been a bit tardy on that 5 years then - The original came out in 2000, the second in 2005 and the 3rd in 2012!

I believe the 5 years is to make the films, not release them.


Like Whoever has the rights to D&D will EVER allow a Movie of those books to be made WITHOUT said moniker!

If Hasbro wants to rehabilitate the D&D franchise they are probably going to have to first get some good movies under their belt without the moniker and then reintroduce it, Otherwise, the movies will NEVER get made and the audiences (outside of gamers) will stay away in droves. Hasbro could stand to make a lot of money with the books and other merchandizing if a Forgotten Realms movie took off. They could certainly heap D&D onto its coattails in a major way, but it wouldn't be "D&D" in the movie title. To quote you: NEVER GONNA HAPPEN!


As a fan of 2nd Ed. I'd hate to see a D&D Movie made by someone who'd only ever played 4th/5th Ed.!

I doubt you would ever see a 4th edition movie. There's nothing to really show. A lot of the 4th edition powers and abilities are somewhat inexplicable visually (someone tell me how a crossbow user will hit 20 foes within 30 ft of him in a single round). My guess is any D&D movie would be based on 3.5 or 5.


And honestly with all the Home-Brewed rules systems I'm not sure how it can be said that someone has a knowledge of D&D just because they play a roleplaying game with that title!

It's not like you need to have in depth rules effects on the screen. What we need is a D&D movie that shows things the way they are often shown in DDO. A beholder in combat, recognizable spells being flung, et al.


A Drizz't, Elminster, Gord, Mordenkainen, Dragonlance, Dark Sun, Spelljammer, Eberron, Ravenloft or even Planescape Movie should concentrate on being a GOOD MOVIE first of all!

Of course. Lord of the Rings raised the bar on all fantasy films. You can't go into theatres anymore with crud.


Strangely enough the Ravenloft novels "I Strahd" and "Mordenheim" because of their similarities to Dracula and Frankenstein AND because of the proliferation of BAD Gothic movies like I Frankenstein, The Underworld Series and Van Helsing would probably be the easiest to get Hollywood to make.
And would also be the easiest to get the holders of the D&D licence to agree to not having said D&D moniker on - Ravenloft would be enough!

Ravenloft would be unlikely, since it confuses genres, and Hollywood likes nice neat boxes to market their films.

[Hoglum]

They could certainly heap D&D onto its coattails in a major way, but it wouldn't be "D&D" in the movie title. To quote you: NEVER GONNA HAPPEN!




This is what I'm talking about. I remember the same thing but with "Marvel" in the title. Go back and watch the first X-men. They actually made fun of "wearing tight spandex" or something to that effect in the movie. They were so afraid nobody would take it seriously. Fast forward to now. Nobody in their right mind questions the validity of comic book movies. They were all proven wrong and everyone wants a piece of the action.

Make good movies and "Dungeons and Dragons" will become a draw.

[FranOhmsford]

I wont go so far as best comic book movie, nothing from DC can live up to that billing, but best batman? sure, mostly because Keaton is just that good, one of the all time underrated actors IMO.

As I said - Not a Fan {Of that movie that is - Keaton's a great actor!} - Wasn't overly impressed with Batman Begins either but Dark Knight is another story {So's Dark Knight Rises but that's because it's utter trash!}.


IMO Game of Thrones will do a HUGE boost to the genre for movies and series.

How?

It's been how many seasons/years now that that show's been going? Where are all the movies it's supposed to have made possible?


Would love to see The Chronicles Of Thomas Covenant as a HBO series it would need a bigger CGI budget than GoT as the lands and creatures are far more fantastical. As for casting... Liam Neeson? Bale? pfffft,... the last thing that role calls for is an Alpha male action star, the protagonist is a, depressed, middle aged broken man with Hanson's disease (leprosy) thust into a fantasy world he doesn't believe is anything more than a dream.... Now after Birdman I could see Keaton in that role, perhaps. Robin Williams RIP would have been special in that role (think 1 hour photo). Others? Easily disliked Jeremy Piven, with a liitle weight loss and aging might help give the role the anti hero opposing tension it needs (you really need to actively dislike/pity the protagonist for long stretches of the book, if you want to get the full impact and tension).

Bale can act - Stop thinking of him as Batman!

Neeson's too old now, Williams is dead, Keaton's also too old {Just look at him in Robocop to see!}, Who's Jeremy Piven?

Benedict Cumberbatch and Tom Hiddleston seem to be put forward for literally every role these days and neither are what you'd call Alpha Male material so...


To me The Song of Ice and Fire and the Unbeliever series are apart from the rest of the genre in being Fantasy for grown ups, examining the human condition in a way that is both more effective, and yet more subtle than the best of normal or classic literary fiction..

Eurgh - Books are supposed to be read - Literature is for Schools!

It's really not a good idea to use terms like "Fantasy for grown ups" as Personal Taste is what it's about!

[FranOhmsford]

Yes they do. Where do you think Gygax got them from? And even if they were unrelated as such, the fact is you have dark skinned elves as bad guys in Thor and the African American community was not in an uproar. I agreed it would be a thorny issue...but I do think it could be done.

Gygax {and other D&D creators} got a lot of things from a lot of places - Most of which are very different in D&D to those other places {Just look at Orcs and Goblins - Nothing like their LotR counterparts}.

Drow in D&D bear as much resemblance to the Dark Elves of Norse Mythology as to the Night Elves of WoW!

Oh and ONE Dark Eldar in Thor: The Dark World was shown to be black - ONE!
The leader had stark white skin {not painted} and the majority were hidden behind masks!

And again - That WAS Political Correctness - BUT it was acceptable because the 1st movie had already given us an Englishman of Nigerian Descent as Heimdall and an Oriental companion for Thor!
The 1st movie had made it known that the Asgard despite being the Gods of the Vikings were of ALL Racial types!
So the Dark Eldar also being of all Racial types isn't a stretch!

D&D However has made it very clear for as long as Drow have existed in the game that Drow aren't just dark skinned - They don't come in multiple skin tones - THEY ARE JET BLACK!
Which means that the skin colours of ANY Actors asked to play Drow would have to be darkened - Something that is not looked upon in a good way in today's world!


I don't get how you don't get it. He was horrible. His character was horrible. His dialogue was whiny and annoying and not a bit funny. It says something when a protagonist dies and the entire theatre applauds because they won't have to watch or listen to him again. Wayans is a decent comedic actor but was completely out of place in that movie.

Yes he had that bad dialogue.

But I still found him no more {actually quite a bit less} annoying than anyone else in said movie!


I doubt you would ever see a 4th edition movie. There's nothing to really show. A lot of the 4th edition powers and abilities are somewhat inexplicable visually (someone tell me how a crossbow user will hit 20 foes within 30 ft of him in a single round). My guess is any D&D movie would be based on 3.5 or 5.

The same could be said about 1st, 2nd, 3rd Edition abilities.

People have spent time figuring out which spells were cast in the Movies so far made as well.

Plus - The only way to really portray D&D Spellcasting in a Movie and actually have it be recognisably D&D rather than just generic LotR style Fantasy would be to make a strong point of using the Vancian System of Magic {Oh sorry - I forgot to add - 3rd Ed is NOT D&D!}


It's not like you need to have in depth rules effects on the screen. What we need is a D&D movie that shows things the way they are often shown in DDO. A beholder in combat, recognizable spells being flung, et al.

See above: The Original Movie back in 2000 gave us a Beholder {not in combat I know}, Dragons in Combat and recognizable spells!

What more do you want?

Well a coherent plot would be nice!
Better dialogue would be a plus!
and no Jeremy Irons!


Of course. Lord of the Rings raised the bar on all fantasy films. You can't go into theatres anymore with crud.

Yes you can - I give you I Frankenstein for example!

And if every Fantasy film made from this point on has to be at least as good as LotR then no wonder there's so few being made!
You're setting the bar a bit too high there!


Ravenloft would be unlikely, since it confuses genres, and Hollywood likes nice neat boxes to market their films.

On the other hand Hollywood loves Gothic Fantasy/The Supernatural rather more than Heroic Fantasy - There's been multiple movies in that Genre that no matter how bad have done well at the Box Office:
Underworld and its sequels/prequels
Blade and its sequels
Van Helsing
Priest
I Frankenstein
Hansel & Gretel {This one's actually really GOOD!}
Brothers Grimm {Another Good Movie}

[LeslieWest_GuitarGod]

My guild Tyrs Paladium ran this poll a few months ago on our website. Many in our guild are current or former long time D&D PnP tabletop players... not to mention having played all the official D&D RPG computer titles dating back to at least the Atari 2600 and Commodore 64 (SSI gold box series).

http://i62.tinypic.com/2wp5xyg.png

[Hoglum]

"Sometimes it’s hard to fathom that the X-Men franchise is solidly in its teenage years. It’s going to start driving and dating soon. The series is so significant to cinema history that it is responsible for launching the modern superhero film era. (Remember that this film came out only three years after Batman & Robin.) Without X-Men, there might not have been Christopher Nolan’s Dark Knight series or The Avengers films. With Days of Future Past hitting the theaters, it’s time to look back to the year 2000 when superhero movies weren’t given $100m budgets and unlimited power automatically. Writer/director Bryan Singer had something to prove with X-Men, and with a limited budget and a production schedule shortened by five months, he succeeded. Five months into shooting X2: X-Men United, Singer recorded a commentary for his groundbreaking film for the X-Men 1.5 DVD, which is preserved throughout subsequent DVD and Blu-ray releases. Here » "

From this article: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0120903/news

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"Far surpassing all industry expectations, "X-Men" took in $54.4 million during its debut this past weekend--nearly as much as "Star Wars' " $64.8 million. "

"By design, the movie was understated. It cost $75 million to make, was somewhat dark "to reflect the true spirit of the comic," Mechanic said"

"But to garner such a bonanza at the box office, "X-Men" clearly went far beyond its core audience of young comic-book fans and appealed broadly to both genders."

These quotes from LA Times archive July 18, 2000 found here: http://articles.latimes.com/2000/jul/18/business/fi-54830

The expectation that superheros could make good movies was low. X-men turned that around. Everyone take special note on the statement about the "true spirit of the comic". We need a movie that reflects the true spirit of Dungeons and Dragons.