Quote from: Persimmon on April 05, 2023, 12:09:04 PM
The preview was so cringeworthy & stupid I knew there was no reason to watch it.  Lame jokes at every turn.  Dialogue written for 6 year olds.  Hamfisted Forgotten Realms lore insertions.  Something designed for elementary school intellects like J. Scott Garibay to enjoy.  And what was up with the Led Zeppelin music?  Even if you were going to use Zeppelin, why that particular song as opposed to stuff inspired by Tolkien?

I agree.  When I saw that I wondered if I was watching the trailer from the original D&D movie.  Just Campy crap.

I might watch it if it's on free TV, but certainly won't go out to the theatre to see it.

Quote from: GhostNinja on April 05, 2023, 01:36:47 PM
I agree.  When I saw that I wondered if I was watching the trailer from the original D&D movie.  Just Campy crap.

  Every trailer I saw for the new movie gave me flashbacks to the old one. But then, I made the mistake of seeing the 2000 film in the theater...

I'm not seeing it, and due to the OGL asshattery I deliberately will never buy a WOTC product again. Everyone in my group feels the same way. I had already decided to stop buying WOTC's rpg products shortly after Tasha's cauldron came out, but I was open to the idea of going to see the D&D movie. Others in my group were still buying the occasional WOTC product, but that has ground to a permanent halt.

Saw it Tuesday. It was alright. Very faithful to WoTC D&D I thought (eg the spells, the monsters, & all the black people in the far north of Faerun  ). It wasn't nearly as hostile to the male characters as you'd expect from the director/writer comments.

The only thing that really bugged me was how fake the city & castle looked; there was no sense at all of lived-in-ness. Very much the opposite of Star Wars, or the original Milius Conan film. Also they kept saying sh*t purely to bump the age rating up (to 12 in UK), it was extremely inoffensive, really a PG film, tops. That fits with WoTC D&D. The lack of gayness was striking though, the film had a lot of heterosexual marriage(!) in PC backstories, the two PCs who hadn't been married were explicitly straight, and fatherhood was a major theme. Very not-JC (Jeremy Crawford). Given how campy the film was otherwise, that was just as well. I don't know if this was for the Chinese market, but it was nice to see.

Quote from: S'mon on April 06, 2023, 02:16:25 AMIt wasn't nearly as hostile to the male characters as you'd expect from the director/writer comments.

Not hostile at all. Maybe they did a bit of editing after the reaction to those comments. Or maybe those guys were just telling the interviewers what they thought they wanted to hear. I understand that happens a lot.

Quote from: S'mon on April 06, 2023, 02:16:25 AM
Saw it Tuesday. It was alright. Very faithful to WoTC D&D I thought (eg the spells, the monsters, & all the black people in the far north of Faerun  ). It wasn't nearly as hostile to the male characters as you'd expect from the director/writer comments.

The only thing that really bugged me was how fake the city & castle looked; there was no sense at all of lived-in-ness. Very much the opposite of Star Wars, or the original Milius Conan film. Also they kept saying sh*t purely to bump the age rating up (to 12 in UK), it was extremely inoffensive, really a PG film, tops. That fits with WoTC D&D. The lack of gayness was striking though, the film had a lot of heterosexual marriage(!) in PC backstories, the two PCs who hadn't been married were explicitly straight, and fatherhood was a major theme. Very not-JC (Jeremy Crawford). Given how campy the film was otherwise, that was just as well. I don't know if this was for the Chinese market, but it was nice to see.

I enjoyed the subtleness of taking jabs at the paladin class (and over role playing) and the group pounding speak with the dead into the ground until they got what they wanted. There were quite a few Easter eggs that did not derail the overall experience for people who wouldn't get them.

Between the bad JC, the OGL fiasco, etc. I will never buy or run a WotC product until there are massive changes. Changes I doubt will ever happen.

But, and this is in general, with nothing to do with what I quoted from S'mon...

This is a hobby. Something I carve out for fun in my life. I've had hundreds of hours playing this game with my family. This fall, my first leaves the house for college. And last weekend, I was able to see him laugh several times out loud rooted in something we have done together for the last decade plus on the big screen.

Quote from: S'mon on April 06, 2023, 02:16:25 AMfatherhood was a major theme

Fatherhood is the theme of the movie. The main character is a father trying to get his family back from another character envious of his family. It's a well put together story and leaves the main character with a classic D&D dilemma at the end.

Aaawww CMON Man! It's Michelle Rodriguez - big-nosed chics are hot AF!!

The funny HAT was #1 its opening week!! Take THAT everybody-who-wants-to-be-WOTC-but-can't!! Take THAT Simon Gruber!! Next on the docket --- DRAGONLANCE!!! (and we're gender-swappin' EVERYBODY!!!)

To me the vibe and the execution was "Fantasy Guardians of the Galaxy" and IMHO they largely pulled it off, maybe at an A- or B+ grade if you assume a reference point of GoG being an "A" (obviously, Guardians of the Galaxy isn't everyone's cup of tea, but I think that is the comparison). If you dislike the Marvel movies and especially the humorous side of those movies, then D&D movie is not something you will like, which is perfectly fair.

The movie is not, and obviously was not, intended to be "serious" in the vein of the first D&D movie, Conan the Barbarian (original or remake), or many other fantasy movies. For what it is, I think it is pretty good. Frankly, most fantasy/sword & sorcery movies, classic or modern, feature laughable acting, underwhelming special effects, and extremely questionable plot sequences. I think we view many classic movies in the genre with enormous amounts of unacknowledged nostalgia.

Quote from: Armchair Gamer on April 05, 2023, 08:45:00 PM
Every trailer I saw for the new movie gave me flashbacks to the old one. But then, I made the mistake of seeing the 2000 film in the theater...

I didnt see it in the theater and after seeing I am glad I didnt.

Quote from: GhostNinja on April 04, 2023, 11:28:44 PM
Plus they put in a lot for advertising.  Not sure if the number is correct but I heard $100 million for ads.  Still has a way to go before it breaks even.

The industry standard calculation is that marketing basically doubles the budget (except for Disney, who often spend one and half times the budget for marketing purposes), and then you have to account for the cut from the cinema chains, which comes to between 20 and 30% of the gross take (Disney tends to get better numbers here, theaters know Disney movies tend to be bankable so they only charge 15-20% of the gross).

A 151 million budget means this movie cost about 300 million to make and market, and whatever comes in as the total gross (domestic and international) needs to be cut to about 75% in order to get the actual return.

Figure about 500 million needed to turn a profit, to be safe.

P.S.: In the not-so-distant past there were also massive distribution costs that needed to be accounted for, but these have been cut substantially due to digital copies becoming more prevalent. Film rolls are fucking expensive.

Quote from: S'mon on April 06, 2023, 02:16:25 AMI don't know if this was for the Chinese market, but it was nice to see.

If it had been made with the Chinese in mind, there would have been a lot fewer black people in it.

Looks like $150-200 million for budget, unknown marketing budget.  $80 million worldwide so far in ticket sales.

The thing is, WotC aren't looking for break even, or a small profit; they're expecting marvel blockbuster money, and the start of a juggernaut movie franchise.

Absolutely delusional, but suits surrounded by Yes-Zem can be very detached from reality.