TheRPGSite

It sucked. 

Most of the acting was goofy.  Too many goofy personalities.  It's like every character was being played by a 13 year old.  They tried to cram too much high level stuff, into one movie.  They always quickly found the person / magic item / solution to the problem.  Nobody had to die, and stay dead; except for the bard's wife, in his memory flashbacks.  They survived an encounter, that should have been a TPK.  One of the big bad guys, was laughable.

I guess the best acting, was done by the paladin.  He was ok.

 :'( So the record holds: not a good one yet. Oh Jeremy Irons, your acting chops were wasted on it before, Chris Pine your... eye candy? was wasted on it now.  ;D I keed, I keed.

I liked it quite a lot.

I think if you like Marvel movies like Guardians of the Galaxy you will like this movie. But if you are looking for a more serious tone you will be disappointed.

It did get a surprisingly large number of good reviews from critics, for what that is worth. I thought critics would slam a movie like this.

It was NOWHERE near as good as GoTG 3. And that was a highly flawed movie.

Quote from: Mistwell on May 28, 2023, 12:26:18 PM
I liked it quite a lot.

I think if you like Marvel movies like Guardians of the Galaxy you will like this movie. But if you are looking for a more serious tone you will be disappointed.

It did get a surprisingly large number of good reviews from critics, for what that is worth. I thought critics would slam a movie like this.

Sorry. Hard disagree. Guardians 1 is my second favorite MCU movie and this D&D movie sucks by comparison. Watching these actors try and act in this movie was painful. It was very obvious that these big actors were acting like they honestly couldn't believe they were doing a Dungeons and Dragons movie, and the unknown actors were acting like they couldn't believe they were acting in a D&D movie with these amazing celebrities.

And the fan service... One of the worst examples of fan service I have ever seen in a movie.

I watched it. I happen to have the streaming service on a discount month and the movie showed up there.

I liked it. I still don't like the later-edition stuff like Tieflings, Dragonborn, and Magic item attunement. They could have added a major dwarf or elf character.

The movie didn't "suck"—that should be reserved for about half of everything that has come out in the fantasy genre, which suffer from some of the worst acting, cheapest effects, and goofy plots of any movie genre. The new D&D movie compared to Red Sonja or to Krull is no contest, in D&D's favor.

What the D&D movie was is essentially a B+ version of the Guardians of the Galaxy franchise. It has the same sort of ensemble construction, same types of jokes, same sorts of plot twists, as the GotG movies. It wasn't quite as good as GotG, but it was nonetheless decently executed. This doesn't mean you should LIKE the movie, because not everyone enjoys the James Gunn style, and having it imported from superheroes to fantasy might not be what some were looking for. It was a deliberate design choice, and I can see the argument of those who find it disappointing. But that is not the same thing as saying, "it sucks" like a 14-year old reviewing their high school dance team's performance at a pep rally.

I saw it pretty recently too, once it became available by "nautical" means.

I was pleasantly surprised. It's an extremely straightforward story with passable performances and effects, and IIRC it actually made me laugh once or twice. To me, the fact that it feels like a Sci-Fi Channel original movie from 10 years ago is more a feature than a bug. That's precisely what I would want from a D&D movie.

This might be a hot take, but I'm of the opinion that a serious tone would actually be inappropriate for an adaptation of the tabletop game. For those of us that are super-deep in the hobby, it's easy to forget that D&D --as experienced by the vast majority of people-- is a game where you sit up late at night, with a few friends and a bunch of unhealthy snacks, and joke around about the adventures of your imaginary characters. That was every bit as true in 1980 as it is now. A cartoony action-comedy is a far more faithful representation of most of campaigns than a serious fantasy epic would be.

As far as the 5e stuff goes, well that's the current edition. I'm not sure why anyone would expect differently.

The big surprise for me was how much of a straightforward good-vs-evil story it was. I fully expected it to be full of post-modernist subversion, and if anything it played things too safe. I was shocked that they let the paladin character actually be a paladin. As soon as that character was introduced, I was looking for the heel-turn. But no, they just let him be lawful good. The villains aren't secret victims or misunderstood anti-heroes; they're just evil dickheads. That alone is kind of refreshing

I didn't love the movie, and I'll probably never feel the need to watch it again, but the mere fact that it's basically inoffensive is a gold star from me.

EDIT: Come to think of it, the most accurate representation of a D&D campaign on film is probably Army of Darkness. Dark and gory, but also dumb and silly. And the protagonist is a self-serving meathead who somehow bumbles his way to success.

Quote from: ForgottenF on May 28, 2023, 08:02:30 PM
The big surprise for me was how much of a straightforward good-vs-evil story it was. I fully expected it to be full of post-modernist subversion, and if anything it played things too safe. I was shocked that they let the paladin character actually be a paladin. As soon as that character was introduced, I was looking for the heel-turn. But no, they just let him be lawful good. The villains aren't secret victims or misunderstood anti-heroes; they're just evil dickheads. That alone is kind of refreshing

Yeah, I did like that. Though technically Forge Fitzwilliam (Hugh Grant) does have a Face-Heel Turn. Possibly because the film was in development for so long, it evoked 5e D&D as published ca 2014-16, before WoTC went Full Woke. It even had a Half-Elf!  ;D

I think personally I'd prefer "a movie set in D&D world" than "a movie that feels like watching people play D&D".
The obvious one would be a Driz'zt movie, but WoTC are terrified of SJWs and so terrified of using the Drow onscreen.

Quote from: S'mon on May 29, 2023, 02:32:54 AMI think personally I'd prefer "a movie set in D&D world" than "a movie that feels like watching people play D&D". The obvious one would be a Driz'zt movie, but WoTC are terrified of SJWs and so terrified of using the Drow onscreen.

While I agree that a Drizzt movie would be preferable to a generic action movie, I don't think that this addresses the main issue, which is the budget. Hasbro spent so much making this movie that even though it earned $200 million at the box office, it still managed to lose over $75 million. A cheaper, more focused movie seems to be the main move here (assuming that they actually care about making money).

Luckily, the dungeon offers the ideal setting as it's confined, can be shot mostly on a sound stage, and the darkness reduces the need for CGI. 2005's Descent looks like a good template. Just replacing the hillbillies with goblins.

Quote from: S'mon on May 29, 2023, 02:32:54 AM
I think personally I'd prefer "a movie set in D&D world" than "a movie that feels like watching people play D&D".
The obvious one would be a Driz'zt movie, but WoTC are terrified of SJWs and so terrified of using the Drow onscreen.

It does seem like an obvious choice, what with Drizzt being one of the few D&D heroes with any name recognition. But yeah, drow on film are probably a losing proposition. If you cast black actors, you're validating all the things dumb people say about the Drow (and being lore inaccurate at the same time). If you put your actors in makeup, you'll get the blackface complaint and it'll probably look terrible.

The fact that there were no dwarves, gnomes, halflings, or animal-people in the party suggests to me that they weren't comfortable with their effects for anything other than humans with pointy ears or horns. If you do want to do the weirder D&D races, I feel like you'd be better off going for an animated film.

I also wonder if there might be a rights issue. There have been fewer direct adaptations of the Drizzt stories than I would expect, in any medium. I'm pretty sure WOTC owns the rights to the characters, but maybe they have to pay Salvatore royalties if they use his actual stories.

A Driz'zt movie would be about a Drow, who is a black man with pointy ears, had to leave the benevolent, matriarchal utopia of his birth because something something white patriarchal racism. Maybe give him a sister who was way better than him, but who died saving Driz'zt from a horde of evil blonde men, after Driz'zt felt emasculated and ran off, only to realize his toxicity got his sister killed.

Quote from: ForgottenF on May 28, 2023, 08:02:30 PM
This might be a hot take, but I'm of the opinion that a serious tone would actually be inappropriate for an adaptation of the tabletop game. For those of us that are super-deep in the hobby, it's easy to forget that D&D --as experienced by the vast majority of people-- is a game where you sit up late at night, with a few friends and a bunch of unhealthy snacks, and joke around about the adventures of your imaginary characters. That was every bit as true in 1980 as it is now. A cartoony action-comedy is a far more faithful representation of most of campaigns than a serious fantasy epic would be.

Yeah. For me, a lot of both the silly parts (like speak with dead) and the smart parts (like the wagon heist) evoked a lot of my teenage D&D experience back in the 1980s.  A lot of the teen appeal of D&D was messing up DM plans by alternately being too dumb and too smart.

I'd have been fine with a lower budget and fewer name stars, but then I also know that tons of lower budget movies flop - even moreso than big-budget movies. It's never as simple as saying "Hey, The Descent made money. If we make a movie like The Descent with goblins, then we'll make money."  Some mediocre movies make a ton of money, and some mediocre films flop.

An opportunity to showcase forgotten realms to people who refuse to read...i imagine they squandered it?

Could be worse, they could have made a dragonlance movie...which they would most assuredly screw up by not casting porn star stacey bloom as kitiara.
Yes I know Sturm nutted in that shit.

#lanced.

Quote from: Slipshot762 on May 29, 2023, 10:44:40 PM
An opportunity to showcase forgotten realms to people who refuse to read...i imagine they squandered it?

Revel's End looked good.

Neverwinter and Castle Never looked good.

The Underdark looked good.

I liked the movie. It wasn'exactly perfect, but did deliver where it counted and wasn't polluted too badly with real world politics and stuff like that. A strong B "would watch once more later to catch more references and easter eggs" from me.

Quote from: Opaopajr on May 28, 2023, 11:50:54 AM
:'( So the record holds: not a good one yet. Oh Jeremy Irons, your acting chops were wasted on it before, Chris Pine your... eye candy? was wasted on it now.  ;D I keed, I keed.

We have so far gotten all of 1 passable D&D movie. The second one. Low budget maybe but its still more D&D than the first or third.

The new movie tries too hard to be Guardians of the Galaxy without understanding what made it fun to begin with.

It bothers me, that it made their challenges seem so easy to overcome.  Oh, I just so happen to have this magic item.....  And I just so happen to have this high level spell......  And I have this staff with lots of charges.....

But the characters weren't being put forth, as paragons of their respective character classes.  It was all so happy go lucky.  It cheapened the play experience.  Death wasn't much of a concern.

Quote from: Jam The MF on May 30, 2023, 05:52:51 PM
It bothers me, that it made their challenges seem so easy to overcome.  Oh, I just so happen to have this magic item.....  And I just so happen to have this high level spell......  And I have this staff with lots of charges.....

But the characters weren't being put forth, as paragons of their respective character classes.  It was all so happy go lucky.  It cheapened the play experience.  Death wasn't much of a concern.

Sounds like perfect 5e emulation.

In my opinion, a better idea would have been for the movie to have taken place in both worlds. A father that's having a hard time connecting with his son or daughter. Stereotypical dad that doesn't identify with his son and vice versa. Dad is somewhat forced to play in a series of DnD games with his son to try and connect. When they enter the world, it we see it on film. They and the rest of party (maybe a neighbor, friend, and uncle that games and is DM) and the father and son go on an epic journey via DnD and they also become closer in real life. The dad's eyes are opened to his son's abilities and the son learns to appreciate his dad.  This would be done without corny and sappy dialogue. This all mixed with DnD lore and adventure.  There would be tons of room for funny quips about the game and all that type of stuff, but the movie would have a heart and soul, which the current movie lacks.

I mean, isn't this the heart of the game anyway?  Friends going on an epic adventure, sharing experiences together, and living a story.

Quote from: Pen on May 31, 2023, 10:20:54 AM
In my opinion, a better idea would have been for the movie to have taken place in both worlds. A father that's having a hard time connecting with his son or daughter. Stereotypical dad that doesn't identify with his son and vice versa. Dad is somewhat forced to play in a series of DnD games with his son to try and connect. When they enter the world, it we see it on film. They and the rest of party (maybe a neighbor, friend, and uncle that games and is DM) and the father and son go on an epic journey via DnD and they also become closer in real life. The dad's eyes are opened to his son's abilities and the son learns to appreciate his dad.  This would be done without corny and sappy dialogue. This all mixed with DnD lore and adventure.  There would be tons of room for funny quips about the game and all that type of stuff, but the movie would have a heart and soul, which the current movie lacks.

I mean, isn't this the heart of the game anyway?  Friends going on an epic adventure, sharing experiences together, and living a story.

I think D&D used to be about that stuff.  Now it's all about expressing your individuality by playing a transgender, wheelchair bound half tiefling-half angel or whatever....

Quote from: Persimmon on May 31, 2023, 10:43:54 AM

Quote from: Pen on May 31, 2023, 10:20:54 AM
In my opinion, a better idea would have been for the movie to have taken place in both worlds. A father that's having a hard time connecting with his son or daughter. Stereotypical dad that doesn't identify with his son and vice versa. Dad is somewhat forced to play in a series of DnD games with his son to try and connect. When they enter the world, it we see it on film. They and the rest of party (maybe a neighbor, friend, and uncle that games and is DM) and the father and son go on an epic journey via DnD and they also become closer in real life. The dad's eyes are opened to his son's abilities and the son learns to appreciate his dad.  This would be done without corny and sappy dialogue. This all mixed with DnD lore and adventure.  There would be tons of room for funny quips about the game and all that type of stuff, but the movie would have a heart and soul, which the current movie lacks.

I mean, isn't this the heart of the game anyway?  Friends going on an epic adventure, sharing experiences together, and living a story.

I think D&D used to be about that stuff.  Now it's all about expressing your individuality by playing a transgender, wheelchair bound half tiefling-half angel or whatever....

Lol. Sad but true.

It was free on Paramount+, I found it to be utterly formulaic drivel, both visually and story-wise. Made it about a third way through before abandoning it from sheer boredom and am now kicking myself for the wasted time.

Quote from: Persimmon on May 31, 2023, 10:43:54 AM

Quote from: Pen on May 31, 2023, 10:20:54 AM
In my opinion, a better idea would have been for the movie to have taken place in both worlds. A father that's having a hard time connecting with his son or daughter. Stereotypical dad that doesn't identify with his son and vice versa. Dad is somewhat forced to play in a series of DnD games with his son to try and connect. When they enter the world, it we see it on film. They and the rest of party (maybe a neighbor, friend, and uncle that games and is DM) and the father and son go on an epic journey via DnD and they also become closer in real life. The dad's eyes are opened to his son's abilities and the son learns to appreciate his dad.  This would be done without corny and sappy dialogue. This all mixed with DnD lore and adventure.  There would be tons of room for funny quips about the game and all that type of stuff, but the movie would have a heart and soul, which the current movie lacks.

I mean, isn't this the heart of the game anyway?  Friends going on an epic adventure, sharing experiences together, and living a story.

I think D&D used to be about that stuff.  Now it's all about expressing your individuality by playing a transgender, wheelchair bound half tiefling-half angel or whatever....

I know you're exaggerating but I am unsure if you're aware how much you're exaggerating. All those topics are topics which have come up in the field. However, not sure if you missed it, but almost all of them ended up not happening in the books WOTC put out, or not happening in a meaningful way but more like a brief side note. The wheelchair thing in particular simply never happened in a reality in their books. They gave that topic lip service, and then even the book they claimed would work it in...didn't. A bunch of people complained online, WOTC ignored it, and that's that. Same with Transgenderism. Literally I'd say Pundit has given that topic a more serious look in books he's published (before all this became a fad) than WOTC has in their books. Again, lots of lip service, very little actual stuff published.

People keep focusing on the two "You don't need to fight much" adventures they've published and ignoring the bulk of what they've actually published. WOTC has put out a ton of hard core dungeon and hex crawl adventures. But that stuff doesn't make sexy news and political talk circles because it's just...ordinary D&D. The exceptions are what gets talked about the most, and then those exceptions get exaggerated by those who support it and those who oppose it.

I did just have to dump a whole group of players I'd known for years, when they decided that D&D was indeed about 'expressing your individuality", and objected to their PCs being challenged with actual threats. Or even being expected to face social challenges such as not insulting their most powerful ally, or making up with her after insulting her.

Players in my five other groups were pretty baffled by this, so it's still a minority view, but the players in the group I purged definitely thought they were 'doing it right' and I was 'doing it wrong'.

Quote from: Persimmon on May 31, 2023, 10:43:54 AM

Quote from: Pen on May 31, 2023, 10:20:54 AM
In my opinion, a better idea would have been for the movie to have taken place in both worlds. A father that's having a hard time connecting with his son or daughter. Stereotypical dad that doesn't identify with his son and vice versa. Dad is somewhat forced to play in a series of DnD games with his son to try and connect. When they enter the world, it we see it on film. They and the rest of party (maybe a neighbor, friend, and uncle that games and is DM) and the father and son go on an epic journey via DnD and they also become closer in real life. The dad's eyes are opened to his son's abilities and the son learns to appreciate his dad.  This would be done without corny and sappy dialogue. This all mixed with DnD lore and adventure.  There would be tons of room for funny quips about the game and all that type of stuff, but the movie would have a heart and soul, which the current movie lacks.

I mean, isn't this the heart of the game anyway?  Friends going on an epic adventure, sharing experiences together, and living a story.

I think D&D used to be about that stuff.  Now it's all about expressing your individuality by playing a transgender, wheelchair bound half tiefling-half angel or whatever....

Ha!!!

Quote from: S'mon on May 31, 2023, 03:43:26 PM
I did just have to dump a whole group of players I'd known for years, when they decided that D&D was indeed about 'expressing your individuality", and objected to their PCs being challenged with actual threats. Or even being expected to face social challenges such as not insulting their most powerful ally, or making up with her after insulting her.

Players in my five other groups were pretty baffled by this, so it's still a minority view, but the players in the group I purged definitely thought they were 'doing it right' and I was 'doing it wrong'.

Because they are being told at every turn in life now, that Their Way is the right way; as long as it is Woke Friendly / LGBTQ+ Friendly.  Their Way, is the right way.  You were just there to accommodate Their Way.

Quote from: Jam The MF on May 31, 2023, 05:30:58 PM
Because they are being told at every turn in life now, that Their Way is the right way; as long as it is Woke Friendly / LGBTQ+ Friendly.  Their Way, is the right way.  You were just there to accommodate Their Way.

This seemed to be the view. I was told that the existence of evil, non-redeemable Bugbears was Problematic.

My son wanted to watch it the other night, so we tuned in for free on Paramount. It was wasn't good. Had some funny spots, but I was unimpressed overall. I didn't care for the barbarian chick or the wizard characters in particular. Don't get me started on tieflings...  They checked some boxes though.

I doubt I'd watch it again. I'd much rather watch Hawk The Slayer, The Beastmaster, The Sword and the Sorcerer, or Conan.

Way too much 5E and Forgotten Realms for me.

Quote from: Jam The MF on May 28, 2023, 06:04:23 AM
It sucked. 

Most of the acting was goofy.  Too many goofy personalities.  It's like every character was being played by a 13 year old.  They tried to cram too much high level stuff, into one movie.  They always quickly found the person / magic item / solution to the problem.  Nobody had to die, and stay dead; except for the bard's wife, in his memory flashbacks.  They survived an encounter, that should have been a TPK.  One of the big bad guys, was laughable.

I guess the best acting, was done by the paladin.  He was ok.

I agree.  Most people I know liked it and I was confused because I thought it was trash.

Quote from: Batjon on June 04, 2023, 04:31:42 PM
I agree.  Most people I know liked it and I was confused because I thought it was trash.

Its aimed at Guardians of the Galaxy fans. So for some that quippy bantery style is going to get really old really fast.

Quote from: Omega on June 05, 2023, 07:04:35 AM

Quote from: Batjon on June 04, 2023, 04:31:42 PM
I agree.  Most people I know liked it and I was confused because I thought it was trash.

Its aimed at Guardians of the Galaxy fans. So for some that quippy bantery style is going to get really old really fast.

Especially in the hands of weaker writers & actors.

Quote from: Persimmon on June 05, 2023, 07:43:30 AM

Quote from: Omega on June 05, 2023, 07:04:35 AM

Quote from: Batjon on June 04, 2023, 04:31:42 PM
I agree.  Most people I know liked it and I was confused because I thought it was trash.

Its aimed at Guardians of the Galaxy fans. So for some that quippy bantery style is going to get really old really fast.

Especially in the hands of weaker writers & actors.

Exactly. GotG I enjoyed a bunch because the writing was good and the characters three-dimensional and interesting.

If this movie was aimed at me, Hasbro's aim is Stormtrooper-level.

So I watched this on Paramount+ the other night; I have a free subscription through Walmart. Anyway, I had a few drinks first and just told myself, "Pretend you are watching a movie made about a D&D campaign." And I was surprised that I actually enjoyed it quite a bit. The conceits of D&D/Forgotten Realms are taken mostly seriously and there's an actual plot that moves along and the acting is pretty good. Chris Pine has the exact sort of seriousness mixed with a bit of smarmy attitude to pull off carrying the movie. Michelle Rodriguez cannot act, but that's okay because she's literally a barbarian and utters random throwaway lines as needed. In true D&D fashion some of the characters forget they have appropriate abilities. Also in true D&D fashion, they abuse the fuck out of their abilities and come up with some very creative ways of solving problems.

The cameos of the old cartoon characters made the entire movie worth watching, too.

I'd rate it a B+ summer movie. I hate that Hasbro/WotC might actually make money off this, but for once they seemed to have done something that treats the property with a decent amount of respect.

It was okay I guess.  Caught it at the discount theatre.  Really generic and dull and bloodless.  Very much a second edition movie.  I guess they didn't want to ruffle any feathers.  Anyhow the owl bear, displacer beast, and mimic need their own show.  The fat dragon was pretty funny too.

Quote from: Brad on June 17, 2023, 11:26:24 AM
I'd rate it a B+ summer movie. I hate that Hasbro/WotC might actually make money off this, but for once they seemed to have done something that treats the property with a decent amount of respect.

If it helps, they didn't make money on it. It was a big flop theatrically. (This was discussed in the media forum (https://www.therpgsite.com/media-inspiration/dd-movie-is-not-going-to-tank/).)

I thought it was okay. With the state of the portrayal of the hobby what it is and has been for the past ten years, anything is okay - imagine how glad I was the first one came out back in 2000 was it?

The movie itself was alright, though the speak with the dead part was trying to be funny where it really was not. What I did like was the nod to the party of the cartoon being participants in the tournament. And I did remember thinking, okay, they know their lore better than the first time around. I guess it's something.

Finally got to see the movie with one of my players and...

Was surprisingly not bad really. Really appreciated the use of practical effects for several things like the Dragonborn and Aaracokra.
 
But fucks sake they really really wanted to ape Guardians of the Galaxy! Reminded me of watching Godzilla: Final Wars and realizing the director really really wanted to ape The Matrix.
 
Overall the comedy was surprisingly reigned in and not as hokey as some of the adverts were making it out to be. Its mostly just frequent snarking eachother and some actually funny gags along the way.
 
The plot was ok. But there was ALOT of WHF? moments like the situation in Neverwinter.
 
Thanks to the director/writers running their hateful mouths off, nearly did not see it. And had I red some of their later comments I'd have just flat out refused. Concerning the kids from the animated series.

I just watched this movie last night.  It seems alot of us are coming late to the party.  Overall I enjoyed it.  I'd rate it a solid "B".  Some minor spoilers below:

I wish we would have seen more classic races and monsters, like Elves, Dwarves, Orcs, Goblins, etc.  We briefly saw a dwarf in that maze at the end of the movie, and there was probably an elf or two in the background somewhere else, but major races and monsters received very little screen time, which I thought a bit odd.  Aarakocras and Tieflings have better casting agents than Elves and Dwarves, apparently.

Likewise, I was surprised there were no Drow at all in the Underdark scenes.  Too problematic, maybe?

Paladins are my favorite D&D class, and the Paladin in the film was my favorite character.  I really liked how he was portrayed.  They somehow managed to make him a straight-laced stick in the mud (the typical Paladin stereotype) while also making him the coolest character on the screen.  You would think those two things would be mutually exclusive, but kudos to the writers and the actor for making it work.

Chris Pine was excellent in his role.  His character may not be a badass on the battlefield, but his character has the most depth by far and he is definitely the heart of the team, while still being very much a scoundrel and rogue.  Pine portrayed this very well.  This character definitely had the most meat on its bones.

Rodruguez was ok.  I didn't love her, but didn't hate her.  The sorcerer was ok, though he probably had one too many sarcastic lines.  The Druid was ok.  She was cute and feminine looking, so the casting could have been worse.  Hugh Grant was good and nicely cast.

I was expecting the movie to be woke, but it was surprisingly not woke.  I thought for sure that at least one of the main characters would be LGBTQ+, but I believe there were zero LGBTQ+ references in this film.  It was actually very pro-hetrosexuality, with each male lead character expressing interest in women, and each female lead character expressing interest in men.  Very shocking, but actually nice to see.  WotC's Jeremy Crawford apparently had no influence on the movie in this regard.   ;D

All in all, it was a rather fun, breezy, lightweight movie.  It had a bunch of D&D-isms, but I wish there would have been more classic D&D races and monsters in the film.  And more dungeons would have been nice as well.  As someone else said, this is a Neverwinter city heist adventure movie, rather than a movie about dungeon crawls.  And it wasn't really old-school D&D, but I think most old-school gamers can still enjoy it.

Quote from: Crusader X on June 25, 2023, 11:52:38 AMI wish we would have seen more classic races and monsters, like Elves, Dwarves, Orcs, Goblins, etc.  We briefly saw a dwarf in that maze at the end of the movie, and there was probably an elf or two in the background somewhere else, but major races and monsters received very little screen time, which I thought a bit odd.  Aarakocras and Tieflings have better casting agents than Elves and Dwarves, apparently.

That was probably the worse aspect of the film. Way too much emphasis on nuD&D races, barely a mention of elves or dwarves. Otherwise it was a mostly forgettable, but largely inoffensive movie that didn't entirely suck and kinda sorta tried to stick to the lore.

I finally saw it. It was OK. Vox Machina was actually better than the D&D Movie, though.

Quote from: Crusader X on June 25, 2023, 11:52:38 AM
I wish we would have seen more classic races and monsters, like Elves, Dwarves, Orcs, Goblins, etc.  We briefly saw a dwarf in that maze at the end of the movie, and there was probably an elf or two in the background somewhere else, but major races and monsters received very little screen time, which I thought a bit odd.  Aarakocras and Tieflings have better casting agents than Elves and Dwarves, apparently.

My son hadn't seen it, so I watched it a second time with him as a watch-party on Father's Day. It was still fun.

The sorcerer Simon is half-elven -- it's mentioned multiple times, and he has pointy ears. Also, the barbarian Holga's ex-husband Marlamin is obviously a halfling.

Nearly all the featured monsters are from first edition:
- owlbear
- intellect devourer
- dragon
- displacer beast
- mimic
- gelatinous cube

There's also a few blink-and-you'll-miss-it references to axebeaks, rust monsters, and a few others.

(double post)

Quote from: VisionStorm on June 25, 2023, 03:35:51 PM

Quote from: Crusader X on June 25, 2023, 11:52:38 AMI wish we would have seen more classic races and monsters, like Elves, Dwarves, Orcs, Goblins, etc.  We briefly saw a dwarf in that maze at the end of the movie, and there was probably an elf or two in the background somewhere else, but major races and monsters received very little screen time, which I thought a bit odd.  Aarakocras and Tieflings have better casting agents than Elves and Dwarves, apparently.

That was probably the worse aspect of the film. Way too much emphasis on nuD&D races, barely a mention of elves or dwarves. Otherwise it was a mostly forgettable, but largely inoffensive movie that didn't entirely suck and kinda sorta tried to stick to the lore.

Uh... you two miss the elf city in the trees the Tiefling was helping? There were some elves there. I noted some pointy ears.

Theres halflings as more than background.
 
Also Aaracokra were a PC race as of 2e. Half dragons and Saurials were also around as of 2e. Just not prominent.

More interesting was the LACK of any weird wotc races prominent.

Something that I noticed through the movie and got me thinking.

Is Edgin really a Bard? I can not recall him doing a single Bard thing. And no bad singing is not a bard thing.

Is the Tiefling really a Druid? Like with Edgin she never once casts any spells and all she seems to do is wildshape far more than normal.

But is it wildshape? What she does is more like Shapechange or polymorph self.

Quote from: Omega on June 27, 2023, 04:06:17 AM
Something that I noticed through the movie and got me thinking.

Is Edgin really a Bard? I can not recall him doing a single Bard thing. And no bad singing is not a bard thing.

Is the Tiefling really a Druid? Like with Edgin she never once casts any spells and all she seems to do is wildshape far more than normal.

But is it wildshape? What she does is more like Shapechange or polymorph self.

The movie doesn't follow the D&D mechanics, but the characters are supposed to be an essence of their class as a simplified version.

Edgin's bardic abilities are simplified to just inspiration. He helps inspire the other characters.

Doric's druidic abilities are simplified to just wildshape.

Xenk's paladin abilities are simplified down to just smite. He's lawful good and great at fighting undead.

If you've ever seen a film adaptation of a video game, you'll know that it's hard to make game mechanics work on the big screen.

Thats just coming up with excuses.

And its been a false one for decades now.

There is a huge difference between what they say these two characters are. And what they are actually doing.

Quote from: Omega on June 27, 2023, 06:32:40 PM
Thats just coming up with excuses.

And its been a false one for decades now.

There is a huge difference between what they say these two characters are. And what they are actually doing.

I bet you complained that the X-Men weren't wearing yellow spandex when the first movie came out too :)

Quote from: Ghostmaker on June 27, 2023, 06:21:10 PM
If you've ever seen a film adaptation of a video game, you'll know that it's hard to make game mechanics work on the big screen.

They didn't have a problem with Scanlon doing over the top Bard things in Vox Machina......

Quote from: Ghostmaker on June 28, 2023, 10:33:08 AM

Quote from: Omega on June 27, 2023, 06:32:40 PM
Thats just coming up with excuses.

And its been a false one for decades now.

There is a huge difference between what they say these two characters are. And what they are actually doing.

I bet you complained that the X-Men weren't wearing yellow spandex when the first movie came out too :)

Ive said many a time that the Matrix sucked all the color out of near every movie after. X-Men was an early victim.

QuoteThey didn't have a problem with Scanlon doing over the top Bard things in Vox Machina......

Yes and not.
Scanlan in TV show is doing some weird magic - 99% Hand of course - but that does not represent really how Sam was playing it.
Mostly because show suck at showing combat teamwork of DnD 5e - so support characters are forced into more action mode - rather than supporting frontline, debuffing enemies and so on.

QuoteIve said many a time that the Matrix sucked all the color out of near every movie after. X-Men was an early victim.

Yes, and no.
Sure grimmer tone was dominant, but also you know X-Men in movie are no masked heroes, and basically they do not engage in vigilantism. So those original comics would be tonally totally off.

Quote from: VisionStorm on June 25, 2023, 03:35:51 PM

Quote from: Crusader X on June 25, 2023, 11:52:38 AMI wish we would have seen more classic races and monsters, like Elves, Dwarves, Orcs, Goblins, etc.  We briefly saw a dwarf in that maze at the end of the movie, and there was probably an elf or two in the background somewhere else, but major races and monsters received very little screen time, which I thought a bit odd.  Aarakocras and Tieflings have better casting agents than Elves and Dwarves, apparently.

That was probably the worse aspect of the film. Way too much emphasis on nuD&D races, barely a mention of elves or dwarves. Otherwise it was a mostly forgettable, but largely inoffensive movie that didn't entirely suck and kinda sorta tried to stick to the lore.

I think some are missing the point of WHY it was Dragonborn, Aarakocras, Tieflings, Harpers, Wizards of They, owlbears, displacer beasts, mimicks, gelatinous cubes, etc. and not elves, dwarves, halflings, orcs and dragons...

It's because it wasn't a D&D movie... it was a D&D IP movie. All the elements they chose to use in the film were the things Hasbro owns outright and are distinct from other fantasy settings.

THAT was the reason for what they chose to focus on vs. being a background detail.

It's basically the same reason the Vox Machina cartoon swapped out things like the Beholder, only in reverse.

Quote from: Chris24601 on July 04, 2023, 10:37:28 AM

Quote from: VisionStorm on June 25, 2023, 03:35:51 PM

Quote from: Crusader X on June 25, 2023, 11:52:38 AMI wish we would have seen more classic races and monsters, like Elves, Dwarves, Orcs, Goblins, etc.  We briefly saw a dwarf in that maze at the end of the movie, and there was probably an elf or two in the background somewhere else, but major races and monsters received very little screen time, which I thought a bit odd.  Aarakocras and Tieflings have better casting agents than Elves and Dwarves, apparently.

That was probably the worse aspect of the film. Way too much emphasis on nuD&D races, barely a mention of elves or dwarves. Otherwise it was a mostly forgettable, but largely inoffensive movie that didn't entirely suck and kinda sorta tried to stick to the lore.

I think some are missing the point of WHY it was Dragonborn, Aarakocras, Tieflings, Harpers, Wizards of They, owlbears, displacer beasts, mimicks, gelatinous cubes, etc. and not elves, dwarves, halflings, orcs and dragons...

It's because it wasn't a D&D movie... it was a D&D IP movie. All the elements they chose to use in the film were the things Hasbro owns outright and are distinct from other fantasy settings.

THAT was the reason for what they chose to focus on vs. being a background detail.

It's basically the same reason the Vox Machina cartoon swapped out things like the Beholder, only in reverse.

Hmmm.

I was going to argue about this, as the gelatinous cube and owlbear are part of the OGL -- but that may not matter at this point thanks to Hasbro/WotC trying to do away with it.

I wonder if that was part of the plan, actually. Push people off the OGL so that they outright own all of it and can use it in their IP exclusively?

Quote from: Chris24601 on July 04, 2023, 10:37:28 AM
I think some are missing the point of WHY it was Dragonborn, Aarakocras, Tieflings, Harpers, Wizards of They, owlbears, displacer beasts, mimicks, gelatinous cubes, etc. and not elves, dwarves, halflings, orcs and dragons...

Um... Theres an orc or half-orc at the start and a hafling is more than windowdressing in the movie. Nearly pointless characterbuilding, but least not just an easter-egg. Theres also a dwarf in a semi-non-background part. Did everyone just sleep through the elven village segment? Muted sure, but it was there.

The problem is more that they just toss stuff in willy nilly too much.

Quote from: Omega on July 04, 2023, 07:16:35 PM

Quote from: Chris24601 on July 04, 2023, 10:37:28 AM
I think some are missing the point of WHY it was Dragonborn, Aarakocras, Tieflings, Harpers, Wizards of They, owlbears, displacer beasts, mimicks, gelatinous cubes, etc. and not elves, dwarves, halflings, orcs and dragons...

Um... Theres an orc or half-orc at the start and a hafling is more than windowdressing in the movie. Nearly pointless characterbuilding, but least not just an easter-egg. Theres also a dwarf in a semi-non-background part. Did everyone just sleep through the elven village segment? Muted sure, but it was there.

To be fair, there was a Tiefling Karen sucking up all the attention in the foreground so I'm not entirely surprised it was missed.

But why a Tiefling when we already have a half-elf established and they're going into Elven territory (and it would make sense for a half-elf to know some elves)? An elf druid would make logical sense, but D&D elves are too generic to trademark... whereas a Tiefling is "product identity."

Apparently because the elves are more accepting than those nasty white humans are.

Quote from: Omega on July 07, 2023, 08:32:14 PM
Apparently because the elves are more accepting than those nasty white humans are.

uh huh. the whole tiefling schtick is, basically, virtue signaling. a token member of "oppressed minority" running away from "horrible patriarchy" and finding a new home with a "queer community". the cringe is so thick there you could chop it with an axe.

Could also be read as a dig at the whole thing too as she complains alot, yet I can not recall anyone actually treating her poorly throughout the movie.