New D&D Movie

[Seraphym]

Worth Mentioning? This movie was on the Scifi Channel on Saturday October 9th.

[Fitz]

There's a NEW D&D movie? You mean, after the appalling mess they made of the first one they thought they'd do it again? Good grief. My only consolation is that it couldn't possibly be worse.... could it?

[Seraphym]

There's a NEW D&D movie? You mean, after the appalling mess they made of the first one they thought they'd do it again? Good grief. My only consolation is that it couldn't possibly be worse.... could it?

Actually when they cut off the end off the original D&D Movie on TNT, I think it made a good movie. But eliminating the heroic sacrifice of that thief (whatever his name was) killed it in my book.

I was really glad they got rid of the thief. He was completely annoying.

[MadCow]

Much better than the first, but only worth mentioning to fellow geeks and gamers. As a movie on its own, it's just a mediocre effort but if you play D&D, it'll be a fun ride trying to identify all the elements of the movie in game terms.

[Sketchpad]

I enjoyed it :)

[Crimson-Hawk]

Much better than the first, but only worth mentioning to fellow geeks and gamers. As a movie on its own, it's just a mediocre effort but if you play D&D, it'll be a fun ride trying to identify all the elements of the movie in game terms.

I agree with MadCow. Because SciFi had the reigns on this production, it was much, much better than the first movie. At first, I was disappointed the characters from the first movie were not in the second one (save for Damadar, who makes a fairly decent villain). But the new characters were very, very good. The story made for an excellent epic quest. And the feel of the movie was much closer to that of D&D.

People who dismiss the movie without watching it simply because it is associated with the D&D game are missing out and should not be forgiven their shortsightedness. People who dismiss the movie because they hated the first movie can more easily be forgiven but are still missing out.

It's a fun ride and should be tried at least once.

[Curufea]

Better than the first (but everything is). Almost watchable. I have, unfortunately, watched and now dismiss it.

To paraphrase Dogbert-

They say that given an infinite amount of time and an infinite amount of monkeys, they would write the complete works of William Shakespeare.
This movie - 5 monkeys, 10 minutes.

[Old Man]

There was a first movie? Sure. Next you'll be tellling me they made a sequel to Highlander.

[Curufea]

Denial.

It isn't just a river in Egypt :)

[Crimson-Hawk]

I've yet to see someone who did not like it offer up actual constructive criticism as to why it was subpar.

People here have either watched it and liked it, watched it and dislike it for unmentioned reasons, refuse to watch it for either anal or unmentioned reasons, or wish to heckle it without mentioning whether they've watched it or not.

[Jeff T.]

Anyone happen to know when it repeats...I guess I could check it out.

[Theron]

Anyone happen to know when it repeats...I guess I could check it out.

This Thursday (Oct 14) at 9 Eastern, I think. Check the Sci-Fi website for a schedule.

I thought it was OK. Not brilliant, but fun in a Hercules and Xena sort of way.

[Jeff T.]

This Thursday (Oct 14) at 9 Eastern, I think. Check the Sci-Fi website for a schedule.

I thought it was OK. Not brilliant, but fun in a Hercules and Xena sort of way.

Well, I enjoyed the Hercules series. It knew where its strengths were and didn't take itself seriously.

[Theron]

Well, I enjoyed the Hercules series. It knew where its strengths were and didn't take itself seriously.

Exactly. As I said on another board, sometimes, Red Gamer needs brain candy. This was pure choco-fluff. Bad dialogue, a plot straight out of someone's convention game, stereotypical characters, the works, but they did a nice job of marrying it to the essence of the D&D experience (The scene where someone casts Detect Magic in a little hut and when the party leaves, all of them are glowing was a really cute joke).

Hopefully, when they re-run it, they'll also be carrying the commercials from Wizards, because that was half the fun ("In this case, the book really is better than the movie.")

[prestidigitator]

I didn't see it, but as a slight aside, how come a D&D movie can only be fun to those geeks who have played D&D, but just about every other movie can STINK for only those geeks who read the book? I know the Earthsea movie Sci-Fi made was a decent production as long as you hadn't actually read any Ursula Le Guin (if you did it stunk in a rather major way, but we're used to that from books-made-movie, right?).

[Theron]

Well, for one thing, D&D doesn't have a story for the film production to screw up. Or universally known and loved characters. So that, in and of itself makes it a somewhat easier trick to pull off. If they'd been doing DragonLance: The Motion Picture, or something focusing heavily on established Forgotten Realms or Greyhawk canon, then there would have been more squawking. But as it is, if you create a fairly paint-by-numbers fantasy quest and properly utilize the archetypal material from D&D (characters that clearly represent classes, critters out of the Monster Manual, fire and forget spellcasting with proper special effects), you've covered your bases from a fan perspective.

[Seraphym]

I've yet to see someone who did not like it offer up actual constructive criticism as to why it was subpar.

People here have either watched it and liked it, watched it and dislike it for unmentioned reasons, refuse to watch it for either anal or unmentioned reasons, or wish to heckle it without mentioning whether they've watched it or not.

Reasons I liked the movie:

References to classic D&D Modules/Locations (Ghost Tower of Inverness, Barrier Peaks).
It advances the fantasy roleplaying game genre.
They had a magmin (one of my favorite monsters for D&D).Reasons I didn't like the movie:

Plot was weak.
Characters were weak, though there was a glimmer of personality at times.
Monsters seemed haphazardly placed.I think the first movie was better without the original ending (***)(see the TNT version). I think the second movie was weak (*).

[Seraphym]

Anyone happen to know when it repeats...I guess I could check it out.

Dungeons and Dragons: The Wrath of the Dragon God. Thursday, 9pm EST. www.tvguide.com (http://www.tvguide.com) has a search function. I don't use the TV Guide print version anymore, you can search for any movie there.

[Seraphym]

I didn't see it, but as a slight aside, how come a D&D movie can only be fun to those geeks who have played D&D, but just about every other movie can STINK for only those geeks who read the book? I know the Earthsea movie Sci-Fi made was a decent production as long as you hadn't actually read any Ursula Le Guin (if you did it stunk in a rather major way, but we're used to that from books-made-movie, right?).

I thought the EarthSea miniseries was two stars. The ending just left me cold, there was no real buildup to it, apart from the romantic interest.

[Seraphym]

If they'd been doing DragonLance: The Motion Picture, or something focusing heavily on established Forgotten Realms or Greyhawk canon, then there would have been more squawking.

Dragonlance didn't float my boat. I would watch something about the Temple of Elemental Evil.

Personally as far as Fantasy Roleplaying goes, I can't stomach D&D anymore. I play Fantasy Hero exclusively. The only draw for me with D&D is the large living campaign (Greyhawk), the art and some spell ideas. Other than that I have no use for it.

Personally, MERP (Middle Earth Roleplaying for all you newbies) was an excellent idea source for me. Too bad it went south.

[TheRavenIs]

I liked it, it was simplisitic, but it had to be. DnD isn't everyone's cup of tea. I like the way it did most of what it did. I've played DnD on and off from the small brown book days, gods I'm old. So I have to say all in all it was good, now if someone could figure a way to make a DnD series, that didn't suck.

[Seraphym]

I liked it, it was simplisitic, but it had to be. DnD isn't everyone's cup of tea. I like the way it did most of what it did. I've played DnD on and off from the small brown book days, gods I'm old. So I have to say all in all it was good, now if someone could figure a way to make a DnD series, that didn't suck.

Don't worry I was around then too. ;) I just didn't start playing until the hardcover books came out.

[pinecone]

I only saw the second half...Twice!...what I saw was an "OK" movie but much of the acting was of the Miles O'Keefe flava...ie: "Hmmm did I remember to wear underpants today?" as the entire range of emotion...I think most any gamer would like it...non gamers? Maybe......

[Lysando]

Personally, MERP (Middle Earth Roleplaying for all you newbies) was an excellent idea source for me. Too bad it went south.

Didn't they make a movie out of that too? That guy that is doing the King Kong movie did it.

[Curufea]

Yeah - I think I read that somewhere....

I think they screwed up the elves' SD scores though. Plus they kept doing B criticals..
Or something
:)

[AmadanNaBriona]

Didn't they make a movie out of that too? That guy that is doing the King Kong movie did it.
LMAO!!!!

Seriously, it was a pretty mediocre movie. A couple of fun bits throughout. Enjoyed both the fighters, tho the pretty girls acting was a bit wooden. The specters the Lich summoned were done rather well. The Lich himself, OTOH, blew bad enough that I'd have prefered leaving him out completely. How hard is it to do a halfway convincing rotting corpse anyway?

[Captain Obvious]

Reasons I didn't like the movie:

Plot was weak.
Characters were weak, though there was a glimmer of personality at times.
Monsters seemed haphazardly placed.

This last one is part of the D&D genre, though, isn't it?

"You open the door, revealing a 10' by 10' room. The huge, ancient red dragon living here isn't happy."

[Robert Harrison]

This last one is part of the D&D genre, though, isn't it?

"You open the door, revealing a 10' by 10' room. The huge, ancient red dragon living here isn't happy."

Yes, Seraphym's reasons for disliking the movie describe just about every D&D game I've participated in. The movie must have done a good job of capturing the D&D experience.
:)

[Susano]

This last one is part of the D&D genre, though, isn't it?

"You open the door, revealing a 10' by 10' room. The huge, ancient red dragon living here isn't happy."

I still recall opening the locked door to the 10x10 room (or whatever) and finding two or three carrion crawlers inside. After we fought (and killed them) we looked for the (presumed) second entrance -- and didn't find it. In an abadonded/deserted/ruined tower. The game folded soon after that, as this was the last straw in what was basically a "GM does random crap" game.

[AmadanNaBriona]

Another very small good thing about the movie...

No ice blue lipstick on the badguy.

[Seraphym]

Yeah - I think I read that somewhere....

I think they screwed up the elves' SD scores though. Plus they kept doing B criticals..
Or something
:)

Haha. Well that's Tolkienesque you know. All the goblins would fall dead, and never be knocked unconscious.

[Seraphym]

Another very small good thing about the movie...

No ice blue lipstick on the badguy.

LOL.

[HewhoisMatt]

The plot was pretty weak and the heros were a bit shallow but it was okay brain candy. I think they just need a better GM.


For anyone who missed it, I think it will be getting alot of air time in the weeks ahead.

[Seraphym]

Yes, Seraphym's reasons for disliking the movie describe just about every D&D game I've participated in. The movie must have done a good job of capturing the D&D experience.
:)

Pretty much. We had some personaly rich characters in D&D though. But most of the game was about getting more powerful. FH is so good, I could run a game based totally on skills, and it would be nearly as good as one with combat.

[Seraphym]

I still recall opening the locked door to the 10x10 room (or whatever) and finding two or three carrion crawlers inside. After we fought (and killed them) we looked for the (presumed) second entrance -- and didn't find it. In an abadonded/deserted/ruined tower. The game folded soon after that, as this was the last straw in what was basically a "GM does random crap" game.

Well, actually with Gygax's "so hard to find you would almost certainly miss it approach," most treasure would easily not be found, If you played his dungeons. In high level dungeons I would go ethereal and walk through walls to make sure I didn't miss anything.

[Curufea]

Yes, Seraphym's reasons for disliking the movie describe just about every D&D game I've participated in. The movie must have done a good job of capturing the D&D experience.
:)

This is the main reason it fails as a movie.

Most people go see movies for a movie experience - not a roleplaying experience. Most certainly not for a roleplaying experience that requires levels of esoteric knowledge about one particular system.

Story, characters, setting.

Difficult to do, with a D&D slant because it is such a conglomerate of myths and subsystems ripped out of many sources, and not integrated correctly.

Tolkein managed to fit his multiple sources together.

[Susano]

Difficult to do, with a D&D slant because it is such a conglomerate of myths and subsystems ripped out of many sources, and not integrated correctly.

I believe the quote is as such: "the fantasy genre D&D is best at simulating is D&D."

[Curufea]

Yes, but I've used that before - and don't want to quote myself :)
Besides, the way I phrased it is less likely to offend the religiously defensive.

[Curufea]

Just watched FFVII: Advent Children.

I think this movie is closer to actual D&D than the "official" movie.

You have characters with improved evasion, huge amounts of hit points not worrying about falls from great height, multiple attacks a round, feats, and ludicrous magic weapons.

Perfect for D&D.

[Rapier]

Much much better than the first D&D movie.

But still not a very good movie. The characters were entirely one dimensional and classically "D&D" (eg the little annoying thief, the berserker barbarian, the elven sorceress).

Although I find that a lot in the sci-fi movies. They don't do very well with characters. They also tend to assume quite a bit of previous knowledge of the setting (like in RiverWorld).

It was interesting, but just barely worth mentioning.

[SuperPheemy]

I think this is where D&D2 couldn't fail. It was going to be immediately compared to D&D1 and let's face it, it's pretty challenging to be as bad or worse than D&D1. It also aired on the Sci-Fi channel, so it gets a second comparison to movies aired on that show. Classics like "Mansquito", and "Chupacabra: Dark Water". Compared to most of the Sci-Fi channel flicks, D&D2 measures up very well.

That being said. The movie is NOT good by any objective ruler. Bad plot, bad acting, and bad special effects. Probably a star and a half at BEST, if that.

But the trick in looking good sometimes is lowered expectations. ;)