"Does D&D have anything that differentiates it from generic fantasy as far as making a film goes?" I don't think it does, unless you stretch "D&D" to mean its various settings. And of course, Hasbro would want tie-ins to feature the current edition of the game, which isn't going to make the Grognards too happy. I do think the name "D&D" has been ghettoized enough that you might want to underplay it in the title and marketing.
#PIRATES OF THE CARIBBEAN SQUIDMAN MOVIE#
It's a movie so it wouldn't capture the essential nature of roleplaying, but it could make some money, get good reviews, AND inspire people to check out the game, which would be a success in my view. But the Whedonesque tone would be about right for D&D. A Peter Jackson style adaptation would be too serious. Set it in one of the well-known campaign worlds (probably Forgotten Realms, because it's most well-known across the fan base and pretty accessible.) Base the story around an adventuring party with well-written characters in an ensemble cast.Īctually, thinking about it, this seems ripe for a Joss Whedon project. You could emphasize monsters that are only found in the game (for example, as you say, a beholder). You'd need someone in charge who cares, and a good script, and a (decent but not huge) budget.
#PIRATES OF THE CARIBBEAN SQUIDMAN TV#
Unless you reduce the game either to its basic concepts or to a brand, there's nothing there on which to hang a film or a TV show, so why bother? I know the answer, but it annoys me nonetheless. There are no characters or stories inherent to Dungeons & Dragons except the ones you and your friends create at your game table. "They philosophically felt girls who play with Barbie dolls are projecting their personalities onto the doll," says Guggenheim "If you give the doll a voice and animate it, you're creating a persona for it that might not be every little girl's dream and desire." Strangely enough, I feel the same way about D&D. Mattel declined, because, in the words of producer Ralph Guggenheim
I remember that, when Pixar made the first Toy Story movie, they approached Mattel about including Barbie in it, so that they could have a recognizable female toy as a character in the film. (It'd help if the films bearing this name were actually any good, but that's a different matter entirely) Even so, I find myself wondering: how can you turn D&D into a film? I could understood a movie made about, say, Elminster or Drizzt or the Dragonlance novels or even one set in Eberron, but Dungeons & Dragons in a "generic" sense? What does that even mean? Nearly everyone has heard of Dungeons & Dragons and has a vague sense that it's "some fantasy game," so having that name attached to your fantasy film theoretically gives it a leg up on its competition. For them, the name is what's important, because it's a very recognizable one. Speaking for myself, the answer is an emphatic no, but, clearly, someone somewhere thought otherwise, or else we wouldn't have these awful movies bearing the Dungeons & Dragons name. What does D&D offer that can be transferred to the big (or small) screen? The obvious answer is that it has lots of stuff, which is to say, monsters, spells, magic items, and even terminology that can then be dropped into a script willy-nilly to give it some nebulous D&D "flavor." But is the presence of a wizard casting a "magic missile" against a "beholder" enough to turn a fantasy film into a " D&D movie?" How can you make a film of Dungeons & Dragons? It's a question I asked myself back in the days of the D&D cartoon too. I realize, of course, that there's already been a Dungeons & Dragons movie - two of them, in fact - but I still myself wondering what the logic was behind the making of these films.
0 kommentar(er)
