Do-It-Yourself "Dungeons and Dragons" Film Review 397
"I honestly think that this is a disgrace to everything I had hoped it would be. The plot line was thin at best, the acting was horrible, the lines sounded like they were being read from cards during some scenes. The movie stole so many parts from Star Wars that I'm sure George Lucas is going to be trembling and crying if he sees the movie. All of them too, not just one of the Star Wars movies but all four. A slew of other movies were taken from as well to try to make some semblance of a plot, Indiana Jones, there was a Jurrasic Park scene, we even found a way to bring in Goonies. I was pretty suprised that Ewoks didn't jump out of the background in parts.
I guess I was hoping for more from the movie. I don't think many people are going to be happy with it, the dragon scenes were about the best parts, and those seemed way too short, considering that the rest of the acting didn't do much for the plot anyway. Why not throw in some more eye candy? At any rate the dragons were really neat, but a lot of the other CG was pretty poor. And no amount of special effects were going to make up for the poor acting, plot, and obvious rip offs of other movies."
Re:C+ or maybe B- (Score:2)
> I paid not only for myself but for my girlfriend
> and I feel fairly satisfied.
That's the only part of the movie that really got to me. I thought, "One movie I can go to where I won't be the only one over twelve years old without a date", and I was wrong. Maybe I should have talked to the pimp who was sitting four rows behind me.
Re:play the game (Score:2)
Re:D&D Update (Score:3)
Take a bad movie by a bad director, add on a half hour of what the director felt were the most worthless scenes of the movie, and that's "good news coming?" To whom? A future incarnation of MST3K?
Re:C+ or maybe B- (Score:2)
The dwarf was as much a part of the storyline as the average tree - useless background. You could have replaced him with just about anything else and the movie would have been pretty much unchanged. I consider this a plus, because I didn't like him.
Considering it was based on an RPG, I consider this an upside - I mean, without that (and comments like 'You're a mage! And a low level one at that.'), it wouldn't have been D&D, it woulda been a low-budget fantasy action flick that no one woulda thought highly of (but without the D&D name, it probably wouldn't have been blasted as much).
I seriously would have had less complaints about the movie if they'd replaced him with the actor that played the dwarf - even one actor quite obviously playing two major roles is better than a Wayans brother playing one of them.
Now, my beefs:
Just my two bits
~Sentry21~
Re:What a complete pile of rubbish! (Score:2)
FWIW, I know exactly 9 people who play the lute:
- 2 are full-time professional musicians.
- 1 is a combination English teacher / music teacher ("multiclass", in D&D terms).
- 6 are computer geeks.
Also FWIW, at least 4 of the 6 geeks work in Unix environments. (I don't know the other two well enough to know the details of what they do.)--
Re:God, I hate apologetics (Score:2)
Reviews. (Score:5)
"This film's only hope is to reach an audience too young to recognize its blatant rip-offs." -- E! ONLINE
"Dungeons and Dragons is the fantasy genre at its worst and will likely disgruntle even the most die-hard role-playing wonks." -- Rob Blackwelder, SPLICED ONLINE
"Gamer geeks, I speak your language! And I warn you: Flee!" -- Cody Clark, MR. SHOWBIZ
"As inept as his direction is, Solomon's script is worse, an awful screenplay that shamelessly swipes some of its characters and scenes from the Star Wars movies without as much as a simple acknowledgment." -- Jeff Vice, DESERET NEWS
--
Re:D&D is EVIL!!! (Score:2)
Uh, what was your point again ?
BTW thanks for sharing this elightening bit of American insight with us European readers.
--
Fred in Paris. (Started playing D&D about 20 years ago. This post isn't really by me, it's the voices, aaah, the voices in my head !)
PS: If you have any left of whatever it is you're smoking, don't leave it within children's reach.
Re:D&D is EVIL!!! (Score:5)
Thanks but no thanks. The guys I played D&D with are all decent, hardworking citizens who are productive members of society. Haven't yet met a truly tolerant Christian. ( Not that there aren't any, just never met one..) Mention homosexuality or wiccan and they rush to find the sections of the bible to support their bigotry and self-righteousness. Nevermind the sections that talk about tolerance, love for one another... that doesn't matter... IIRC it was religious nuts that stood outside the funeral of the Matthew Shepard who was beaten to death and hung on a fence in Montana by homophobes, not D&D players. "Christians" chanted and demonstrating that he deserved what he got and telling his parents that the boy was burning in hell... riiiight. And you claim D&D promotes unhealthy attitudes...
Color me a D&D player of old, and a Freethinker. Keep your organized religion. I'd much rather my son and daughter play D&D than absorb the values taught by your religion...
3C
Re: (Score:2)
Re:play the game (Score:2)
There was also never any real character development and throughout the movie I found myself wondering how come they all started acting almost as friends and why I was supposed to care about them.
---
Exactly! (Score:2)
not bad -- probably not that good for people who didn't play D&D too much as a kid -- but in Berkeley, we used to be hardcore...
willis/
Re:Did they use 3rd edition rules? (Score:2)
"You meet in a bar fight." I damn near got up and left when it immediately degenerated into a bar scene.
"Human hits on an elf 10x his age."
"Silly dwarf syndrome."
"The rock in the opposite direction trick."
"The black guy always gets it."
"There is NO honor amongst thieves."
"Item used to control dragons more than faintly resembles a dragon."
"Preordination."
"A guy, a girl, and adventure..."
"The adventure continues......"
"A dungeon out in plain sight."
"Escaping into sewers."
On a gib-scale of 1-5, I'd give D&D 2 gibs. Basically, go see this movie at a matinee. Only pay full price if you have no other option.
Chas - The one, the only.
THANK GOD!!!
I loved it... (Score:2)
My favorite parts include the lead male's wonderful Shatnerian yell "NOOOOOOOO!!!!!" (on his knees no less) when Sgt. Whisper (of the lavender lip brigade) does something really overdue.
Other wonderful additions are the fact that two characters do precicely NADA in the film, instead saying things like "This is up to them." and "We're not allowed to enter and help." I was really glad that they were there. A personal fave of mine was the 50 year old male queen who "lays on hands" (if you catch my drift) the strapping young buck who lies in his bed. Nice overtones that really adds depth to the movie.
And of course the wonderful subtlety of the good versus evil thing. While movie tends to point to Prothion as the evil one, it is the queen who after refusing the council's request to turn over a weapon of mass destruction, then uses the weapon and summons some 25-30 gold dragons to raze the city and destroy the somewhat undergunned mages. You see the mages do such dasterdly things as a shield of ice and run around ducking fireballs. Occasionally they shoot some fireballs back (I would to if 30+ dragons were trying to fry me) but they miss.
Then after the resolution of said battle, the people get to hear "You are all equal" from the lips of the tyrand herself. Man, I bet they were glad she was fighting for them, as their house burns to the ground and people lied dead under the bodies of fallen dragons. I'm sure those tears were for joy.
But of course I didn't expect the audience to catch the subtle "What is good and What is evil" argument. They were too busy waiting for the Queen to cast the "Power Tits stun" spell at Profian. And I guess I was too. God bless america.
Re:D&D is EVIL!!! (Score:4)
Au contraire, I think D&D is a nice, safe way for young children to learn to handle magical weapons and dangerous spells before they grow up and get their hands on the real things.
Responsible behavior is the result of a socialization process.
--
Re:I already saw Star Wars... (Score:2)
No Honor Among Thieves (Score:2)
No amount of drinking (short of passing out) could have made up for the suckiness of the file!
The one tiny amusing part, at least for me, as the No Honor Among Thieves bit, reminding me of that little picture somewhere in the old books I played from oh-so-long-ago.
Re:D&D Update (Score:2)
"Yes, and such small portions."
Dan
Re:All movies based on games suck (Score:2)
And that movie adaption was just terrible.
Okay then... let's see it! (Score:4)
Now here's the thing - all the posts I read make some comment along the line of "I could've written a better script". Well then, why are there so few decent fantasy movies out there? Every fantasy nut (I'm one myself) seems to think that every fantasy that comes out is nearly garbage, and that it would be terribly easy to make a better film. Will somebody please do it then? The guy who directed this got it made out of sheer will (first time director - just pushed until he got the deal). I wish to god that some of these genius scriptwriters/directors at Slashdot would put the effort in - half so that there would be a better film, and half so that they would shut up for a while.
I'm an amateur filmaker myself (Vendetta: A Christmas Story [crazyeddy.com]). No matter how much I suck, at least I'm doing something.
There aren't any new plots! Spoiler! (Score:2)
There where lots of scenes where I immediately spotted the "rip-offs" like the Elven Village, the cave with the dragon staff, etc... I don't understand why they did it that way but when you think about it some of them really aren't as strong a rip off as people are saying. I think we noticed them only because we are the type of people who can recall those movies with exacting presicsion and when we see the faint or even moderate similarities we jump all over them like it's sacrilegious or something. The vehement reaction most people have here seems undeserved. Yeah most of the movie was cliche`. So what? It's a movie, not a social commentary. Most of the acting was silly but how do you expect a dwarf or an elf to act? The characters were complete stereotypes of what we would expect of those fantasy races and character classes. What else would they put in the first D&D movie?
Some people clapped when Snails died, but at least in this movie the "comic relief" bit it, unlike another movie I could name... *cough* Episode 1 *cough*... And don't even mention the ending. I still haven't figured that out.
The summary of my point I think boils down to this. Movies of any of our favorite subjects are never ever going to satisfy hard core gamer/geek people such as ourselves. Could you fit a decent campaign within 2 hours? No! Why did you expect a movie to? You can only hope that it presents the subject matter in a way that makes other people understand what's so enjoyable about it to us.
Re:D&D is EVIL!!! (Score:2)
I suffer from clinical depression and exhibit most of the same symptoms you describe. It would be rather asinine (and irresponsible) of you to convince my parents that I am a D&D addict and am this subject to the possibility of committing murder, rape, mutilation, etc etc. Thats surely not the case at all, but my parents, like many, would see your post as a total red flag and likely have me locked up.
While I have never been involved in D&D and really have no interest in it, I find it somewhat hard to believe that completely normal youth will fall victim, so to speak, to the evil Dungeon Master (read: cult leader). However, I find it easy to believe that youth with emotional/social disorders could fall victim, in which case, I would hope that the parents would already be aware of the child's illness (and yes, most emotional/social disorders are treatable). For youth that have not exhibited any common symptoms of emotional/social disorders, the risk of being corrupted, so to speak, is probably nominal.
Also, I don't mean to rain on your parade, but I hold the opinion that we are all born with the right of religeous freedom, and some of us are not "God-fearing Christian youths". This negates the validity of the last paragraph of your post (and as a side note, if the youth really is a God-fearing Christian, I'd think they'd be much less susceptible to D&D-type brainwashing).
I'm sure you mean well, but please try to be more objective and factual about this stuff. I'd be intrested to see where you've gotten your information regarding your post.
And please refrain from scaring the parents of today's youth with notions that will make MANY of those parents exteremely paranoid toward thier children. This is equally unhealthy. Just because you imform parents of this supposed imminent danger hardly guarantees that they are going to handle things in a positive way, and really, you're not doing anyone a favor unless you can post some information as to how to go about rectifying a situation such as that you describe.
-DP
Re:Good Fantasy Adaptation (Score:2)
I can think of a dozen great scenes from that movie:
"Inconcievable!" --- "This word, I don'not think it mean what you think it means" "Mawage... Bwings uf twogwever today"... "I'm just going to have to get myself another giant"
And of course, the immortal line: "My name is Inigo Montoya.... You killed my father... Prepare To Die!" The Princess Bride is on my top ten list of favorite movies ever.
Torrey Hoffman (Azog)
Re:D&D Update (Score:2)
That aside, the D&D movie really wasn't that bad. As someone on SFFnet put it, it has great actors, pretty good CGI, but a poor script--but fortunately the actors were by and large able to rise above the script. I enjoyed it; the gamers I saw it with seemed to as well, for the most part. But then, there's no accounting for tastes.
--
I'm going to see it because... (Score:2)
Re:All movies based on games suck (Score:2)
--
Lolita (Score:2)
play the game (Score:3)
then you have to deal with a first time director. the director secured the movie rights when he was 19 (ten years ago) and he was coerced into directing the movie because of how diligent he was in getting the movie done in the first place.
third, you have a bunchy of whiners that go into the movie expecting perfection or the best cgi ever, but forget that the entire movie was only done on a budget of $35 million.
forthly, people also lambasted star wars episode one for its campiness, but forget that its more a childrens movie than a serious movie for adults. just because the reviewer has no grasp of the subject matter doesn't always mean that he knows what is best for the rest of the populace.
remember you can't be serious when you see this movie. take it for what it is, a table top game with all of its over the top antics turned into a movie.
i would write out my entire diatribe, but this will remain modded down to -1, like all my nice comments....bah...slashdot moderators suck!
Actually, it's a lot of fun... (Score:2)
If you accept the premises on which most D&D games are built, it's a pretty fun movie. The fight scenes are good; they would have been great with better use of the cameras. The plot is much more coherent than, say, The Matrix, or Mission Impossible 2, and it serves the same basic purpose; provide a vague justification for whatever you were going to do next.
I had a lot of fun. I might even go see it again. There were problems, but mostly it was a lot of fun.
However, it *really* requires you to have the right sort of suspension of disbelief.
The dialogue was a little weak - but *D&D IS LIKE THAT*. I saw nothing wrong with Profion's dialogue; I spend a good four to six hours a week either running characters that talk like that, or listening to someone else do it.
I run a couple of D&D games fairly regularly, and I play in another one.
I think the big lesson is this: This is a movie that you will like about as much as you like classic D&D. If you don't think dungeon crawls are fun, you won't like the movie. If you think gaming is for geeks, you won't like the movie - and I pity you. If you don't buy into the basic premises of the heroic fantasy world, you won't like the movie.
The acting may have been a little off, but compared to a middle-aged programmer saying "So, we tell her about the quest, uhm, and the gem" these guys were *into* their roles.
It's all relative. What amazes me is that people who liked the Matrix are complaining about the plot and the acting in the D&D movie. The thing the Matrix did better was effects and camera work. It did them a lot better, but that doesn't mean it had a plot, or that the actors were remotely convincing.
I still cant believe it (Score:2)
Relation between Fantasy and computing? (Score:4)
I would guess that it is because in their daily life, the computer nerd is very logical, indeed Spock like, and generally fits the INTP Myers Brigg personality profile (INTP = Introverted iNtuitive Thinking Perceiving). They also find it difficult to relate socially with other people, and indeed resort to usenet, IRC, weblogs etc such is their secret hunger for socialisation.
I think that fantasy allows an escape from these logical and social bindings. The computer nerds are free at last to let their imaginations soar upwards to the high plains of fantasy, and the roleplaying elements of D&D allow for socilisation as well.
Indeed, it has been known for some to become so entranced and invloved that they refuse to come out of it, which can become unhealthy. I have personally known two such people, and one of them had to be treated by a psychiatrist.
Still, in moderate amounts, I think that fantasy, D&D, and the like are very healthy pursuits for a nerd, and may give hime confidence in the wider world. As long as he is old enough to deal with the reality confusion that in depth play can sometimes engender, I have no problem with it.
KTB:Lover, Poet, Artiste, Aesthete, Programmer.
Re:Good Fantasy Adaptation (Score:2)
spam (Score:2)
i mean, i'm not on any movie mailing list, so i'm not sure who's giving them addresses.. but it's plain & simply spam to me.
Re:All movies based on games suck (Score:2)
I haven't seen the movie, nor do I intend to. I'd only have the tiniest of interest anyway since Hollywood takes fairly esoteric or old franchises and completely ruins them on a regular basis.
But after seeing the trailers, I _really_ don't want to see it. I could smell the wooden acting a mile away, as well as what I strongly suspect is a lot of lame attempts at humor.
A friend commented that it looks like "Bill and Ted Excellent Adventure". I disagreed because:
a. Bill and Ted was supposed to be stupid
b. It was actually very clever.
Anyhow, let's hope that the LOTR movie lives up toour expectations. I suspect that a few people in Hollywood are actually beginning to catch on about actually making movies based on something that the fans of that something would actually want to see. The X-Men was very good, but I think they've got a long way to go in general. After all, unless it would be an adaptation of one of the modules or novels (and the only one of those I ever read was so much of a rip-off of Tolkien than I never finished it), that would mean that a Hollywood person would have to actually write a plot, and we all know that there more creative writing talent in the average kindergarten class than in all of Hollywood.
It wasn't _that_ bad... (Score:3)
Unfortunately, there were more than a few moments of complete and utter suck. Usually these moments happened when one of the characters opened their mouth. There were honestly groans at some of the dialogue at quite a few points in the movie
Re:C+ or maybe B- (Score:2)
I was blown away by Marlon Wayan's performance in Requiem. Truly suprising. Other than the fact that I was seriously depressed for the rest of the day, it was a damned good movie.
-josh
Re:I disagree, it was alomst perfect (Score:2)
It was worth it, in my opinion. Just don't expect a timeless tale.
We're the Mario Brothers! (Score:2)
(*&@#ing lameness filter not allowing short posts)
Re:All movies based on games suck (Score:2)
----
Re:Hey man, I would, but... (Score:2)
I swear - that sounds truly great, man :). I mean, that's what any great artist does - just expresses their obsessions, ideas, etc. Then if a lot of people agree, they're a "good artist" and if only a few people agree, they're a "bad artist". Well who cares. I say you go for it.
Re:Okay then... let's see it! (Score:2)
Actually, that's just a joke, really. I don't think I'll be making another one. Sorry!
By the way - where's your sig quote from? I can't quite remember...
One interesting exception (Score:2)
When I got to the credits and saw one of the story credits went to Paul Dini (of Batman/Superman fame) I suddenly understood where some of the goofy, odd, and funny moments must have come from.
I disagree, it was alomst perfect (Score:4)
Imagine how aweful a movie that tried to take itself more seriously would have been. It would almost certainly not have satisfied the self-declared "purists", and would have been even less understandable to the rest of the audience.
I think you should save your dissatisfaction for "Lord of the Rings", which is actual a wonderful story, and will undoubtedly be ugly and mangled beyond recognition in its film rendition.
The movie was great, but... (Score:2)
I think this movie was fantastic otherwise though. It *felt* like a game of D&D and not to mention that every game of D&D is just a bunch of geeks sitting around being nerdy ("Where are the Cheetos?--Can I have a Mt. Dew?!" "Uhm, I'm, uhm, attacking the darkness!" "No no no! I wanted gray eyes! *waaah*").
Of course, every dragon in the movie was just, astonishing.
Hey, we also got to see teh Final Fantasy movie trailer!! That was more than worth my 8 bucks. :-)
Re:Relation between Fantasy and computing? (Score:2)
I think you'll agree me with me when I say that it is indeed possible to fake the test. If a computer geek has such a "secret hunger for socialisation", wouldn't they want to seem more sociable and likable? In this case, wouldn't they answer the "Do you like parties?" and the "Would you rather hang out with friends or read a book?" questions in a somewhat biased manner. I know from personal experience how easy it is.
I am a "computer nerd", although I usually dissapprove of using said term; no self respecting computer nerd proclaims that he is so, for he merely is. I enjoy reading fantasy (still a close call between Feist and Eddings as my favorites), I've played D&D, I love computer games, IRC, chat, etc. I fit your description of those who have such a driving social hunger.
Then again, on the Myers-Briggs test, I wound up as an ESFJ, the exact opposite of your stereotypical nerd archetype. Although the E(xtrovert) characteristic was the only strong suit, as the other categories were borderline, I still do not see the validity of the test.
In regards to your argument, KTB, I agree wholeheartedly. I would just like to point out the fault in using the Myers Briggs test in any way as a determining factor.
Thank you.
47.5% Slashdot Pure(52.5% Corrupt)
Re:Blame it on the Director (Score:2)
Re: DnD movie 'stealing' from other films (Score:2)
Well, here's what I think, for what it's worth (Score:2)
No, the problem was that it WASN'T. They oriented it for mass-market appeal instead of making it D&D-ish. I understand the arguments for campiness, and I agree in part. I personally prefer a more serious campaign, but everyone has their own opinions. This wasn't campy though, this was just poorly-done.
I have not seens any magic items that permit contorl of dragons
Potion of Dragon Control. Dragon Orb. Certain high-level charm and control spells could do it, too. You stand corrected. =P
Personally, I'd have preferred a movie aimed solely at D&Ders, or one aimed solely for mass-market appeal. Part of the trouble here is that the producers couldn't decide which and so decided to try some half-assed mixture of the two. The directing did suck, and few movies overcome that. This one couldn't, though it might have if other things had been done differently.
Kasreyn
All movies based on games suck (Score:4)
Tomb Raider is in production. That could be the next Indiana Jones franchise, but probably not.
Comic books do better, probably because they have plot and character development. Superman, Batman, and X-men have all been made into successful movies. Games don't have enough literary depth to carry over into film.
Re:Hmmm... not too surprised.. (Score:2)
Tell me what makes you so afraid
Of all those people you say you hate
Re:Reviews. (Score:2)
That said, I'm still amazed that no one has adapted any of the TSR novels to the screen. Some of these are quite good (e.g., Prince of Lies, Cormyr), have plots simple enough to translate well to the screen, and I've been told that TSR/WotC/Hasbro makes more money from the novels than from any of the game aids. Where are the film versions? With the state of the art in CGI, and the proven appetite in the market for fantasy fare, what's the impediment?
With any luck, Jackson's Lord of the Rings movies will demonstrate that literary quality Fantasy will make money at the box office.
Re:God, I hate apologetics (Score:2)
::sighs::
Re:Blame it on the Director (Score:2)
Re:Geeks and narratives. (Score:2)
Good taste in art is a matter of two things. Variety: Can you find the beauty in something as humble as country music? If so then I applaud you. Depth: I am an avid reader of comics books. To truely appreciate Asterix books you have to read each one at least once and Asterix in Norway 17 times. The art is fabulous and the dialogue is witty and the story is great.
The fact that you can't appreciate that there is beauty to be found in fantasy novels reflects poorly on your sense of aesthetics. The fact that you think that makes you better than other people reflects poorly on you as a person.
I haven't seen this "Dungeons and Dragons" movie. It's probably awfull. But fantasy is a valid art form. And people who like it don't have to take any crap from you.
Tom Baker? (Score:2)
slashdot... (Score:2)
- A.P.
--
* CmdrTaco is an idiot.
Sadly, I can defend this. (Score:2)
He tries making his own, and fails. So he manipulates the Council into trying to strip Amidala -- sorry, Sarvina -- of hers. But when he learns that there's another rod of dragon control out there, he sends Darth Maul -- sorry, Damodar -- to recover it. (But he still wants the other one, to further weaken his opposition...)
For my take on the movie (written at 2 A.M., so I lose steam near the end) go to my K5 diary [kuro5hin.org].
Jay (=
Re:All movies based on games suck (Score:2)
That means they spent another $40 million promoting it, just for the theatrical release.
In other words, the studio will have called it "break-even" when it made $60 million.
So it's made $70 million, which barely covers the cost of making a sequel.
The TV series is where they could have made some real money. It flopped, too, which sucks because it was filmed near here. I was hoping to run into Dana Hee.
-
better magic - lower budget (Score:2)
Spellcasting I think is best in those little spells that require almost no special effects. Light spells, unlocking spells, featherfall, false images, persuasion.... these are the spells that a real mage would be casting on a regular basis, not waking up everyone within a mile with a huge fireball to fry an oponent that he could have just made go to sleep.
What was the coolest thing obi wan did in the first movie? "these are not the droids you're looking for". A clear indication that he was something more special and powerful than Luke had ever seen, and the "effect" used was dialogue. Real magic doesn't need a big special effects budget.
-Kahuna Burger
Saving Private Ryan was NOT realistic (Score:2)
It surprises me for a country that seems to concerned about race and sexual relations [the birthplace of `affirmative action', and where it seems socially forbidden to describe someone whose skin is dark or light in color as `black' or `white'], the US has a tendency to pretty much create history in any war film.
This Movie Breaks The Laws of Physics.. (Score:3)
------------
CitizenC
My name is not 'nospam,' but 'citizenc'.
Re:Relation between Fantasy and computing? (Score:3)
Some time ago I read an alertbox [useit.com] column which had an interesting point about gui interfaces (tried for about 15 minutes to locate it again... it's in there somewhere).
Jakob describes the early non-gui interfaces (eg. unix) as "black caves". The user needs to form a mental image in their mind of the the directories, files, and other resources, and then type commands to operate on them with little or no on-screen information, in much the same way you'd have to navigate through a black cave, keeping a mental picture of where you are. He claims the early computer interfaces worked well for engineers, because of their superior ability to form mental models, but ended up being worthless for ordinary users.
Indeed, D & D appeals to people who naturally have this ability to form mental models. Perhaps playing D & D helps one learn and improve their ability to form mental models. I believe the more likely scenario is that the game has a fairly high barrier to entry, in terms of using mental models and imagination, and at least to start playing and enjoy it enough to continue, you either have it or you don't. Considerable time spent playing probably improves one's mental modeling abilities, much like experience using non-gui computer interfaces, but to get started and actually enjoy the game, as a player or DM, you really need to have that ability to envision the D & D world.
Programming computers is certainly a persuit which requires forming mental models. Programming does involve some work to compose the code, and learning to do this is similar to the effort required to learn a natual language, though computer languages are much simpler and have a very limited vocabulary. I believe it is this natural ability for form mental models which makes programming fun for some (whom you refer to as "nerds"), where for most people it seems like very hard work.
Frederick P Brooks writes in The Mythical Man-Month:
Perhaps imagination and mental models are a skill, of maybe it's inate, wired into ones brain from the beginning. Those who have it seem to have it much much moreso that those how have little or none. This ability is the key element that makes programming and role playing fun and interesting, and for the majority of the population without these abilities of mental modeling and a lack of imagination, programming seems like drudgery and D & D seems like a waste of time.
BTW: the movies still sucks.
Re:play the game (Score:2)
Hmmm... not too surprised.. (Score:2)
And who is this Keanu Reeves-looking clown [dndmovie.com] they've got starring in it??
DailyRadar agrees (Score:2)
- the literal dungeon becomes a metaphorical one; a dank, underground pit of despair from which there is no escape...
Included is an image [dailyradar.com] titled "Vader, we meet again... oops, wrong movie".One wishes one could enter Dragons' fantastical world solely to punch each and every one of [the actors] in the mouth.
--
Re:All movies based on games suck (Score:2)
But the truly sad part of this whole debacle is that DND does have the literary depth [geocities.com] that those video games lack. Solomon's movie apparently didn't use any of it.
TSR owns enormous worlds full of stories the movie could have drawn upon, such as the Forgotten Realms [wizards.com]. Anyone who's played any of the Bioware games has already been there. For example, some of the Icewind Dale [icewinddale.com] novels made the NYT bestseller lists. I bet their author, R A Salvatore [rasalvatore.com], would have been happy to write a decent screenplay instead of the neophyte hacks [imdb.com] that Solomon hired.
I suspect the problem boils down to licensing. The movie probably didn't have rights to anything except the DND name. The question is whether TSR was unwilling to provide more, or did Solomon not bother to ask for help?
Re:The Movie vs The Game (Score:2)
If I wanted to play D&D, I'd go look up my friends and say "Hey, let's do a campaign." I wouldn't go to the Movie theatre. The reason that people had high expectations for this movie, is that the movie makers had so much to begin with: Most fanstasy screen-writers have to make up their worlds from "scratch" (ok, most screen-writers "borrow" heavily from other sources for inspiration, but they still have to do some work to make up the world). In the case of D&D, you have a well-tested, well-balanced "universe" with lots of items, lots of spells, lots of character classes, lots of monsters, and lots of lands. The writer gets lots of cool stuff to use to make their well-structured story even more interesting and fun. It is possible to create really fantastic stories set in the D&D Universe.
Frankly, I'm not going to see a movie that tries to be a cheesy campaign. Nothing says a campaign has to be bad. It's just that most people aren't that creative when it comes to dialogue, and playing their characters. But if I'm going to shell out 8 bucks to see a movie, which is completely structured, I want it to be well written.
Re:Good Fantasy Adaptation (Score:2)
Geeks and narratives. (Score:4)
I know this sounds cruel or pompous, but there are geeks who are so far from "getting it" - who will never understand why we could tell a movie like this was a stinker from a thousand miles away - just as there as some people who are so clueless about technology that it's almost pointless to try to explain it to them. Which is fine - we all have our blind spots - until they try to engage you on those topics. Having a discussion with a stereotypically 'unlettered' geek about film or books or art is as frustrating as having a conversation with a suit or your grandma* about technology. And like the luddite who brags about being clueless about computers, it's also sort of sad to see geeks brag about being clueless about art, literature, and film outside of science fiction.
*Please, no anecdotes about your asm-coding circuit-soldering grandmas. You know what I'm talking about.
Skip this junk (Score:2)
Re:D&D is EVIL!!! (Score:2)
Look, neither D&D or Christianity is inherantly evil. They are what you make of them. You CAN have a cult-oriented group of D&D players looking for new members, or you can have a healthy group of well-adjusted people playing D&D together just as a way to spend time enjoying each other's company. In the same way, if you want to look to the Bible for justification for a holy war and rape/pillage/murder/whatever, I'm sure you could - it's been done before, for crying out loud. But that doesn't make Christianity evil. In the same way, a few wierdos don't make D&D evil.
These are similar to tools/computers, in that they have no intrinsic goodness or badness to them; they are simply what people make of them. If you twist D&D, sure, it'll be evil for you and your gaming group. If you twist Christianity, it'll be evil for your congregation, too. But neither of those cases make either of the items in question evil.
The real danger of D&D: (Score:2)
Well, be warned! Next thing you know, you can't use your kitchen because that's where the resin casting stuff is set, there are 40k books next to the toilet, and a big, heraldic, skull n' wings crest on the wall with 'Roll to hit, monkeyboy' carved under it in runes...
I found out too late, and now look at me. Next thing you know, I'll be looking for a fast food job, just so I can temper my chainmail in olive oil after I heat it in the pizza oven...
What a complete pile of rubbish! (Score:4)
It has to do with the same thing that further relates all of the above with music as well. I think if you were to do an indepth study of "nerds", you'd find a very large proportion who not only appreciate Sci-Fi and Fantasy works, but are also musically inclined - or artistically inclined via another medium.
What is this "thing" I speak of? It's called imagination. One cannot be creative if one cannot imagine the solution to a computing problem/compelling work of fiction/cutting edge song/fascinating painting/etc.
The fact is, all computer geeks are creative individuals - they have to be or they cannot possibly understand the complexities of modern computing environments. It is a strong imagination that fuels this creativity, and that lends itself perfectly to the appreciation of all things creative. Sci-Fi and Fantasy arts tend to push the edge of the imaginary possibilities, and are thus favored by those with the strongest sense of imagination.
Blame it on the Director (Score:5)
We all know that Mr. Irons is a great actor. I personally thought that Thora Birch was good in American Beauty. So why is the acting in this so bad? The director didn't have a clue.
Some of the stinkyness of this movie can be blamed on the studio for not supplying a good mentor for the first time director. I think they did a good job for the small budget and lack of directing experience. But it is still a stinker of a movie.
D&D Update (Score:4)
humor for the clinically insane [mikegallay.com]
Re:What a complete pile of rubbish! (Score:3)
-Paul Komarek
(deity of your choice) bless hypocracy... (Score:2)
"I hate it when you christians get things wrong and stereotype us pagans or things related to us, after all, all you are is a bunch of murdering raping dumbasses that don't believe in freedom or anything truly good and do bad stuff to innocent people. That's a contrast to pagans/athiests, who have done nothing but good in this world and are responsible for all good acts, and are just too modest to brag about it, like christians would. It's been proven that Christ was a pig-fucking orangutan and I'VE never met a single good christian, so by my population sampling you all are a bunch of ignorant asses. There have been documented occurances where christians ate babies and shot kittens then laughed about it later, and by those cases I think we can judge all other christians and their beliefs. I'd rather kids learn about anything else than about Christ and how he taught to murder, rape and hate, because even though I haven't been polluted by actually reading the bible or paying attention at a christian mass, I've heard that stuff from my other pagan/athiest friends who also hate christians, and I think we can thusly just take it as fact."
Sound familiar? We've all seen these posts responding to a religious zealot who says something stupid, who then becomes hated and is called ignorant. These responses, unfortunately are themselves by religious/anti-religious zealots who say things that are ignorant as well, but get praised by everyone else because it's always popular to bust on "those darn oppressing christians"... Don't get me wrong, I don't care what they believe in, nor do I judge them on it. What I judge them by is their apparent hating prejudice of people they don't know, like me, my family, and a some of my friends, and that they then have the audacity to claim it's all because people like ourselves are self-righteous, judgemental, and filled with hate.
Congratulations, you have all the qualities you claim are in the people you hate most.
Re:All movies based on games suck (Score:2)
PLEASE correct me if I'm wrong, but you have your monsters, "classes", etc and so forth, but no real central characters.
Take a video game, ANY VIDEO GAME, such as Mortal Kombat, and you have characters and a story. Do some thinking, and you can make a movie based off the characters/story.
Take a popular role playing system, and where's the characters? There's no "Joe" or "Dave" to play characters in the movie that were in the gaming system. You make the characters.
They could have still released this movie as a generic fantasy movie without ANY dungeons and dragons references and it still could have been played. Of course, THe D&D part was its whole marketing angle.
What next? A movie based off of friggin' GURPS?
Re:its supposed to be shocking (Score:2)
By watching it at home, a parent can better monitor their kids reactions, and possibly stop it to answer questions, etc. I DOUBT a six year old is prepared to handle all the ramifications of Saving Private Ryan, but if they want to leave a movie theater, and are crying, and their parent doesn't remove them from the theater, then that is abuse. Of ME!
Why a D&D movie? (Score:2)
But why would a director need D&D to do that? This is kind of like simulating a simulator.
As usual, marketing concerns win out over substance.
ps - Thanks for the review; now I can add it to my list of things not to do this weekend.
--
Star Wars and Fantasy (Score:2)
I have not seen this movie yet, but I intend to before it leaves theatres. That said I would like to say this:
Frankly being offended because someone stole something from Star Wars is laughable. Why? Because Star Wars is almost completely stolen from other places itself. The pod race is stolen from Ben Hur. The whole setting is essentially stolen from a dozen fantasy/fairy tales. Darth Vader is a black knight. The Emperor is an evil wizard. It goes on and on. Get the picture? Star Wars is a fantasy movie dressed up as a space opera. Do not blame an actual fantasy movie from drawing from its fantasy roots and coming out similar.
Also, do not criticise the movie for "copying Ep 1". This movie was written ten years ago, thats before Lucas started writing episode 1. Hence any coincidence between the plots (such as they are) of ep 1 and D&D are almost certainly due to working in parallel not due to "theft".
In short, just because Star Wars and D&D have many of the same characters and plot twists does not mean the D&D is intended as a copy of Star Wars. Both are movies deliberately making use of standard fantasy architypes. They should have many things that are similar.
Re:All movies based on games suck (Score:2)
$20 million budget. $20 Million on the opening weekend, $70 million total domestic. Pushing $40 million in rentals.
Nice "flop"!
Re:I disagree, it was alomst perfect (Score:2)
It felt like when I was roleplaying with friends back in middle school.
I also actually liked the ending - I felt that it was a good example of misuse of a magical item.
(If one party member is dead, and another makes a request of a powerful item that they be reunited, which is the easier method: Ressurrect the one, or kill the rest? )
--
Re:LOTR (Score:2)
Remember, LOTR is about 1200 dense pages long. Even done as 3 movies, there will have to be _major_ elements of the story glossed over or left out entirely... it's a limitation of the medium. Also, people have been reading these books for about 50 years, we've seen extensive artwork depicting the characters and places (I consider the Hildebrandt's work to be definitive myself), we all have mental images that the movie will contradict, perhaps gratingly, but I still think it's going to be worth the wait.
Re:God, I hate apologetics (Score:2)
If spielberg wanted the movie to be realistic and acurate, and remind people what has been done to protect our freedom, then maybe the movie should have portrayed something other than just realistic violence.
Re:D&D is EVIL!!! (So is Shakespeare!) (Score:2)
play, the sheer concept of such a production appalls me. Such works are
designed to lure impressionable young people who are seeking companionship
into joining the Cult of Theatre. A first time actor is given the
opportunity to join an imaginary community lead by the "director." Children
who are starved for companionship and human interaction are the most
susceptible targets for these types of cult tactics.
Once an actor (read: "impressionable mind") is recruited, the "director"
(read: "cult leader") attempts to subvert the new player's grasp of reality
to an even lower point by immersing a player in a fantasy world where the
player has total control over his or her chosen role, personality, and means
of expression. This kind of "free will" is not only unhealthy for children
to be subjected to, but in a few cases, is outright dangerous. Due to the
wide selection of possible Shakespearean plays, the Director (read: Cult
Leader) can incorporate such immoral activities as stealing, mutilation,
human sacrifice, murder, rape, etc., into the theatrical production. As
these acts of violence and perversion have no real-world consequences, a
young actor can easily be lead to believe that these blasphemous acts will
go unpunished in the actor's real life, as well.
The effects of a Shakespearean play addiction can range from almost
unnoticeable to fatal. (Parents: Please listen closely, as your child may
be at risk.) Some of the first signs may be a withdrawl from family and
friends; and a lack of interest in well-paying, off-Broadway jobs. As the
theatrical production progresses and the play's delusions become more
ingrained into the mind of the actor, certain
more apparent signs of a Shakespearean play addiction may manifest
themselves. These can include harassment by hecklers and failure to
maintain proper, strictly-Modern-English vocabulary. If you notice that
your child is apathetic about his or her sworn duty to conform to society's
fashion norms; fails to obey a strict, unyielding, obsessive-compulsive
daily routine; suddenly demonstrates the normal, physical signs of
adolescence; or begins to dress in togas, he or she may be falling victim to
Shakespearean plays. Such children are often labeled as 'drama geeks' among
their peers. Several more extreme cases have been documented in which
Shakespearean plays are linked to nudity, drug use, and suicide, all
occurring at the suggestion of the director (read: David Koresh), or in the
last case, as a direct result of the actions of the Casting Agent (read:
Adolf Hitler). In most of these cases, the victims were so totally engulfed
in their fantasy world that they could not grasp the consequences of their
actions.
Shakespearean plays also teach otherwise God-fearing Christian youth values
that are atheistic or "monotheistic" (read: polytheistic) -- that is, values
presenting a belief in many gods rather than one God. As the Shakespearean
play, Julius Ceasar, asserts, the world is ruled by Jove and other
Olympians; and these beings meddle in the affairs of Man for their own
amusement. This contrasts with the biblical teaching that there is only one
true God and that this God is moral, not amoral. Most Shakespearean plays
also have unbiblical views on God; and totally
super-duper-double-dodeca-abiblical views on the existence of fairies,
witches, and ghosts.
Shakespearean plays are wholly evil, demonic, and dangerous works that
corrupt the minds of our nation's youth.
--This satire brought to you by the twisted mind of Rico.
God, I hate apologetics (Score:2)
Let's back up a bit, shall we? I've played various roleplaying games since I was 8, when I started with (surprise) D&D. I still say this movie is utter and complete crap. It's not a matter of failing to understand the background material (how many people had read the X-Men comics before seeing the movie? How many people saw that film?), it's that the filmmakers had their heads firmly lodged in their asses on how to bring the material to the screen. Movies should not require a concordance to watch.
As far as the target audience, who cares that it's for kids? When did "made for kids" suddenly have to equal "utter unwatchable crap for adults?" As much as I hate to admit it, at least Disney usually tries to give a couple of sly asides to parents in their better films. And if you want to take your kids to a good family film, try Iron Giant.
Beyond that, I think it's pretty fucking hypocritical to say that something is made for kids when it's got a PG-13 slapped all over it for violence. Yeah, why don't we just cut out the middle man and have little Billy watch Saving Private Ryan instead?
Re:play the game (Score:2)
The CG of the dragons was really cool, but really short. I wasn't aware of the budget for the movie, and while I wasn't expecting perfection out of the CG, it just seemed that most of it looked really cheesy. Also, the same spell over and over again wore pretty thin, since there really wasn't much casting to begin with. My two cents, but if others were expecting wonderful CG with tons of really, really neat effects I thought I'd throw out a heads up.
As for your 4th comment, I didn't think Star Wars I was that bad. Sure, it wasn't quite the trilogy I grew up with, but I didn't think it deserved all the flaming received. I'm still kid enough I guess. But as a serious gamer I was hoping that this movie would play out more like a one shot campaign rather than the farce it made of itself.
Re:God, I hate apologetics (Score:2)
You have to play the game?!?! (Score:3)
Re:Good Fantasy Adaptation (Score:2)
Re:All movies based on games suck (Score:2)
Its interesting that you have replaced the word "Adventure" with an instance variable of its class... ie:
AdventureMovie some_title = new AdventureMovie("Indiana Jones");
TombRaider would also be an instance of AdventureMovie ie:
AdventureMovie some_title = new AdventureMovie("Tomb Raider");
Its very telling of your relationship with popular culture and the memes it has produced... hmmm interesting. Much like the way Proctore&Gamble(?) replaced the word 'tissue' with 'Kleenex' - which is a brand name (or instance of tissue)
Re:Good Fantasy Adaptation (Score:2)
If they wanted to convert RoLW into "Final Fantasy" they should have numbers floating up from anyone who gets attacked.
Re:God, I hate apologetics (Score:2)
I already saw Star Wars... (Score:2)
- Wayans = stupid comic relief character... Jar Jar Binks
- Hero's friend dies half way through... Obi Wan Kenobi
- Princess wanting freedom... wasn't that Episode 1?
- Sword fight w/ dragon battle simultaneously... Light saber duel w/ star battle
- Hero goes through maze alone... Hero races car-things alone
- Evil mage has brute-force-man to do his bidding... Emperor has Darth Vader to do his bidding
- Terrible movie made after successful pen & paper game... Terrible pen & paper game made after successful movie.
Some of that might be a stretch, but I'm no expert in either one. And I have no goal to be. One thing sure - The Final Fantasy movie had better not suck out loud like D&D. D&D all but killed pen&paper RPG games for me. Let's hope FF doesn't kill video RPG games for me either.Tell me what makes you so afraid
Of all those people you say you hate
Hilarious and homoerotic (Score:5)
Re:I already saw Star Wars... (Score:2)
What about the dragon who is killed by a falling steel door? A guy I was watching this with called it from a mile away and yelled "RIPOFF!" at the top of his lungs when it finally happened.
How about when Darth Vader persuades Princess Leia in the dungeon or Amidala's meeting with the Senate? The list goes on and on.
I think the only difference between this and Star Wars is that when Luke has the chance to kill Vader and Palpatine, he does.
Anyone remember what color Vader's lips were in ROTJ when Luke takes his mask off? I could swear that they're blue.
--
Re:All movies based on games suck (Score:2)
C+ or maybe B- (Score:4)
- piecemeal character development
Did the dwarf even have a name? D&D the game (not that I play it) is all about character development, and the movie lacked it sorely. Of course, the main few characters were explored decently, but at the expense of everyone else, apparently. (also made many individual scenes highly predictable)
- cheesy RPG style plot
The Empire is in danger. To save it, an unlikely assortment of characters band together. They need to find a magical artifact. To get that one they need ANOTHER one. Swashbuckling along the way. Yadda yadda, blah blah. Good guys win.
- a Wayans brother
'nuff said.
But now to the upsides...
- effects used tastefully
In recent years there's been a glut of eye-candy movies, that have no draw besides the special effects. This was not one of them. Effects were used sparingly and appropriately, and the integration of computer animation with live action was nearly seamless.
- decent acting
Snails was rather annoying, but I suppose in some sort of good way. Damadar was highly convincing. And the "not all mages are evil!" scene, though extremely cheesy, demonstrated that some actors can actually ACT like REAL PEOPLE in a movie.
- Tom Baker
Did anyone else catch that the healing elf was frickin Tom Baker? w00t!
- it was entertaining
In the end, does anything else really matter, so long as the movie was entertaining? The guy quoted in the official post must have really high movie standards if he thinks he could have spent 2 hours and $0 just sooooo much better in some other way. I paid not only for myself but for my girlfriend and I feel fairly satisfied.
MoNsTeR
Re:Geeks and narratives. (Score:2)
I consider myself a "geek". This does not imply a lack of social life, nor does it imply a lack of cultural or aesthetic appreciation. If you want to use the literal definition, a "geek" refers to a person who will indiscriminately eat anything, frequently seen at a circus freakshow. While I'm sure that a minor subset of
So what are we trying to say, here? I'm assuming that by a geek you mean a person who is very passionate about science, technology, engineering, or a related field, taking a personal interest in his or her work. If this is not your definition of the term, then you can reply with your own meaning. Being a geek myself, specifically in the area of computer science, I would have to strongly disagree with the generalization that's being made. I would venture to say that perhaps when many geeks are younger, they have few to no friends, and little appreciation for the arts. However, as most geeks get older, they tend to acquire an appreciation for these things, and because they are generally (correct me if I'm wrong) ostracized and alienated from their peers when they're younger, they learn to accept and appreciate their own opinions without feeling that they have to conform to some larger norm or accepted set of guidelines. Geeks have emotions as real as anyone else, and the arts very strongly appeal to those emotions. Especially when faced with the emotional strain of social alienation from one's peers, many geeks tend to turn to the arts to help them express and articulate the emotions they might have trouble with by themselves.
I realize that this post was not aimed at geeks as a whole, but rather a subset of them with certain characteristics. My purpose here is just to say that at least in my personal experience, this subset characterizes the exception, rather than the rule
/* Steve */