Originally Posted by fool_of_a_took!
Thanks for the info Joker.
Havent read the books, but looking forward to it!
Why is it that its so damn difficult to make a good fantasy movie??!
I recently tried to watch that D & D movie, made it through 30 minutes.
I wanted to like it, but couldnt. I thought with the "D&D" name - it has to be good!
If you have some recommendations, I'm all ears!
Hollywood screws up everything.
Not sure what you mean by recommendations.
If you mean recommendations too not make a D&D movie suck,
1) Evil is not portrayed by actors speaking in EEEEVIIIIL voices.
2) If you want your male super-antagonist to be really scary, keep him away from neon purple lipstick.
3) Racial stereotyping is not clever; particularly when the Black Guy speaks in street slang while everyone else speaks in descript Medieval English.
4) Avoid Jeremy Irons.
5) Do not hire your son's Playstation club as the CGI effects team.
6) Choose a setting for the movie, not just whatever is handy to toss behind the actors. Follow these simple steps and you too may not embarrass yourself with a Dungeons & Dragons fiasco.
THIS ONE IS NOT EVEN WORTH RENTING!
This movie is a total joke and insult to D&D gamers everywhere. I have read many reviews that say gamers are expecting too much from the movie, but this was pure garbage.
i watched "Earnest goes to the Army" the night before and its acting, plot, and messy effects were better than most of the stuff in DnD.
...it also sucked.
I'm not opposed to a by-the-numbers fantays tale. There's something to be said for tradition. But come on, it's taken us decades to get big-budget fantasy back into the cinemas. Things were going good for a few years. I just can't see why something so video game-like and totally formula as this story, with absolutely nothing unique to offer, gets the green light for a big-budget Christmas tentpole movie.
**** you, Hollywood, there's hundreds of far better books that have been waiting years, even decades for good cinematic treatment, and instead we get this told-a-thousand-times-already crap? $100 or $200 million (if you count marketing) would have been far better invested in Conan The Cimmerian, or a REAL Dungeons & Dragons film (with Gygax writing the story). On my Control Panel Of Movie Monitoring, right next to the Bull****-meter and the Cheese-factor-meter, there is the Predictability-meter, and it just broke.
Eragon owes me money for fixing it. If you're going to go formula, at least try to make it FEEL new and interesting (as in, Star Wars IV). But no, we get the young-farmboy-jerk, the obligatory-wiseman, the evil-despot, the "you're our only hope" subplot (as in substandard plot), and everything else right off the shelf. If people today are impressed with stories like this, they ought to go back and try reading a few REAL novels, before commercialization and marketing-brainwashing made them as common as chick-flicks and sports-comeback-underdog movies.
Eragon is nothing but a testament to how waterered down and UNimaginative the FANTASY genre (which last time I checked was supposed to rely on imagination) has become. Or try this: Go read Robert E. Howard for a few pages, then TRY to read Jordan (the standard-setter for today's mediocraty) or any other popular author for this generaton. They just don't compare. And Howard's Conan, a total stereotype, is far more interesting, developed, and
engaging than a dozen characters in your average fantasy novel today.
Howard, merely 26 years old, takes a brute and makes him a legend through sheer evocative narration. Jordan, with 15 novels and just as many characters, can't keep me from snoring. What's wrong with this picture?
Maybe, just maybe, it's a lack of real skills, imagination and spirit
The only thing that bothers me about this movie so far is its too short.
90 mins for a fanatsy movie is short.
Sounds like a fanatsy movie for people with Attention Deficit Disorder.
It reminded me of when G.I. Joe would run 5 connected episodes for one week when I was a kid.
If this is going to be anything like that, I would rather see a series on cable network(like the clone wars).
Something like 12, 30 minute episodes for Dragons of Autumn Twilight/series one.
That way the story line would allow for growth instead of cramming everything into 90 min.
this film as an animated feature with a time constraint at 90 minutes isn't a gift to dragonlance fans,
The screenwriter has already confirmed that it's going to be 90 minutes. You'd better be prepared for a lot of scenes to by clipped, cut, or reordered. It's not going to be some kind of scene by scene translation of the novel.
It's just sad.....
But I have also heard that the Script is well written and tight.
Dragonlance as a movie, especially with the authors having so much say in the material. This is promising without a doubt, and I just hope they can give it the dark eerie feeling of impending doom that it deserves.
I am not disappointed with the choice of animation. I some hate anime, and am not a big fan of any cartoons not done in 3D
If there is a live action film,
I really wanted Peter Jackson to do this project because he is the only man alive I believe who could do it justice.
But alot rest on this animated movie, if it does well it may open the gates on further decent fantasy projects (Forgotten Realms...)