The setting thing is fine. But what references to D&D proper would enhance the movie as a whole? I mean, unless it’s a comedy, but if you do that you focus in on the 500k players and ignore the millions of paying movie goers who care nothing/know nothing about it.

having the hero’s get a critical miss and randomly drop their quiver in a random physical comedy moment wouldn’t play well :)

so I really am not being facetious, what d&d reference would play well in a movie that wasn’t essentially jumanji 

Quote from XIX >>

The setting thing is fine. But what references to D&D proper would enhance the movie as a whole? I mean, unless it’s a comedy, but if you do that you focus in on the 500k players and ignore the millions of paying movie goers who care nothing/know nothing about it.

having the hero’s get a critical miss and randomly drop their quiver in a random physical comedy moment wouldn’t play well :)

so I really am not being facetious, what d&d reference would play well in a movie that wasn’t essentially jumanji 

I don't think the film has to name check D&D to be a D&D movie - If there is a beholder in it, it's D&D!
There are many tropes of D&D that it could highlight - preferably subtly - to ensure it is seen as something other than a generic fantasy that is merely sponsored by WoTC.

A lot of it's success or failure with "true fans" will hinge just as much on what it leaves out. (Scottish Dwarves, modern morality, jovial clerics, villains that go "Mwahaha", teenagers with perfect hair and skin, princesses needing rescuing, the villain standing triumphant over the hero and getting shot by the offscreen and previously wimpy female who has finally worked out how a hand crossbow works, Sylvester McCoy.)

Personally, my fingers are crossed for a Chult Setting - sort of Indiana Jones (ToD) meets Jurassic Park. 

Quote from The_Plundered_Tombs >>

I don't think the film has to name check D&D to be a D&D movie - If there is a beholder in it, it's D&D!
There are many tropes of D&D that it could highlight - preferably subtly - to ensure it is seen as something other than a generic fantasy that is merely sponsored by WoTC.

A lot of it's success or failure with "true fans" will hinge just as much on what it leaves out. (Scottish Dwarves, modern morality, jovial clerics, villains that go "Mwahaha", teenagers with perfect hair and skin, princesses needing rescuing, the villain standing triumphant over the hero and getting shot by the offscreen and previously wimpy female who has finally worked out how a hand crossbow works, Sylvester McCoy.)

Personally, my fingers are crossed for a Chult Setting - sort of Indiana Jones (ToD) meets Jurassic Park. 

Quote from XIX >>

 

Quote from The_Plundered_Tombs >>

I don't think the film has to name check D&D to be a D&D movie - If there is a beholder in it, it's D&D!
There are many tropes of D&D that it could highlight - preferably subtly - to ensure it is seen as something other than a generic fantasy that is merely sponsored by WoTC.

A lot of it's success or failure with "true fans" will hinge just as much on what it leaves out. (Scottish Dwarves, modern morality, jovial clerics, villains that go "Mwahaha", teenagers with perfect hair and skin, princesses needing rescuing, the villain standing triumphant over the hero and getting shot by the offscreen and previously wimpy female who has finally worked out how a hand crossbow works, Sylvester McCoy.)

Personally, my fingers are crossed for a Chult Setting - sort of Indiana Jones (ToD) meets Jurassic Park. 

 

 Completely agree.  Make a great Fantasy movie (include beholders or whatever is unique in terms of villains or settings, but not the "mechanics" references)

"Yeah, I think mechanics references would be a terrible idea."

Maybe after some guy is eviscerated, the comic sidekick could say "Ooh, he's gonna need a new character sheet...."
Do it quickly, don't draw too much attention to it - a bit like a Stan Lee cameo in the Marvel movies.

I'm surprised mechanics has even come up in this thread. A D&D movie needs to have iconic D&D monsters, locations, races, classes and gods. Probably set it on Faerun for the first one since its so well known, but eventually the other settings would be great (but people are going to want to, you know, be able to play in them in 5e).

What any movie needs is a good plot, writing, etc. If this movie doesn't have those, it's sunk regardless what else happens. I'm tired of pretty movies that suck. It's also going to be heavily dependent on CGI so they better hire a good studio and budget generously for it.

I went through this thread and one thing I haven't noticed mentioned is that part of the reason Allspark Pictures is doing this is because they are working on a shared universe of Hasbro properties. While D&D was not specifically announced to be in the shared universe with GI Joe, Micronauts, ROM, and others it was announced that it was going in to production at the same time as some of the other properties. So while D&D may not being looked at as a glue to hold this universe together I think its being watched to see how well it does. If it does well then Hasbro could put a single character or some of the fan favorite characters into crossover movies, like the Avengers but with Hasbro properties. Because a movie featuring an elf with a sword or a bow and arrow will look great (read as dumb as hell) next to a solider with at least an M16 or possibly much more futuristic weapons and of course ROM and Micronauts always much more sci-fi than ground reality.

With all of that said I think it is hard to tell a compelling story in a single movie format. Without getting a three picture order its very hard tell a full fledged fantasy adventure and set the properties of world in a single movie. I had a discussion about this with a friend who recommended doing a serial Netflix like show. Each season would be a journey through published 5e adventures. One season could be SKT, followed by Elemental Evil, and even HotDQ/RoT and so on. Using all new characters as the leads the series could put in known Realms characters as mission givers or at least people of interest. Similar to how the game Neverwinter does it. Have Bruenor tell the main characters to check some of the lower tunnels in Mithral Hall as the word is that something crazy is happening in the Underdark and the lower tunnels lead to the Underdark and that could kick off OotA. Have a massive battle and all of sudden Minsc and Boo show up. The group could fall in with the Harpers or Emerald Enclave and meet Farideh who are investigating the Cult of the Crushing Wave or whatever. I think going about this as a show giving each arc the time it needs to develop and by making it a show vs a movie it could allow the character's own issues/needs/wants/whatever to develop also.

"I think it is hard to tell a compelling story in a single movie format."
It may be hard, but dozens of films manage it every year. Very successfully.

A standard pub conversation is "Name a sequel that is better than the original." 
A film or story should be as long as it needs to be, and not a moment longer; too many series stretch out the plots in the name of having more episodes/sequels.
Films are also a different medium to TV series - unless very focused, they rarely venture deeply into the character's psyche. 20 something 007 films later, we don't know much more about Mr. Bond than we did after the first film or two. And for most people that is fine.

I would argue that films are more compelling than series'. You may 'invest' more in a character in a long running show, and feel you 'know' them better, but there are probably less compelling moments in a series than you think. A major one at the series finale, a smaller bump halfway through...and a whole heck of a lot of filler in between.

I can't think of a single series that has gripped me, even to the point of getting frustrated for 7 days to roll around for the next episode. Maybe "The Almighty Johnsons" but even that lost it's way towards the end.
I can think of many films where I have left the cinema desperately wanting to see the next film.

Other than that, I believe the Upcoming D&D Film ought to be a film not a series because, well the clue is kind of in there.

My fear with a movie is that it will have to introduce 4 or 5 main characters and an antagonist as well as a world and because of this we will verge into Suicide Squad territory. Suicide Squad did something insane which was try to introduce nearly nearly 4 main characters, 5 supporting characters that were still necessary for the plot and two antagonists.  One of the few movies I can think of that introduced so many main characters well was Guardians of the Galaxy which was developed as as single movie. I know a lot of people point towards Lord of the Rings as the best source of inspiration for a potential D&D film but that was planned as a trilogy. No one at New Line had Fellowship shot and waited to see how it did to order Two Towers. So while I hope this can be pulled off I don't have high hopes for this movie mostly because its Allspark Pictures. They haven't had a real hit that both the critics and audience loved.

I don't think we should mention Suicide Squad - it was confused on so many levels. No characters worth remembering. A plot stolen from Ghostbusters. Stupid decisions from writers/director/characters.....yeah, it was a mess. 

The Magnificent Seven (take your pick which one) managed to introduce at least 5 characters of note. Kingsman had 5 plus a bad guy. Predator, 5 (maybe 6 if you include the joke telling guy..) main characters and a bad guy.

Two of the three plots from above would transfer to a fantasy setting without any effort. I'm not saying they should use them as inspiration, just that the obstacles are a long way from insurmountable.

What I fear the most is something as embarrassing as the recent serialisation of "Elfstones of Shannara." Hooboy was that a festering pile! Or "The Sword of Truth" (managed part of one episode...eugh, had they even read the books?) 

My worry is they will tromp the party around iconic places with no reason other than nostalgia. I also worry they will cram too much dnd lore into the movie to try and satisfy fans. I like that the cast's movies got good reviews, that gives me a glimmer of hope this movie won't be like the last one.

I feel like Kingsman really only had 2 main characters, Eggys and Harry. Sam Jackson as the bad guy and Merlin was a secondary character. I haven't seen the sequel and I haven't seen Magnificent Seven even though I keep meaning to so I will have to take your word for it.

I agree though some of the more recent adaptions for fantasy series have been HORRIBLE. I hope this works out but I'm afraid this will be a cash grab at best.

dnd could in theory work as a tv show in the right hands, but I don't think It will work in the movie format. I think they aren't really taking the world's greatest roleplaying game seriously. They consider bad writers and directors and make it a possible comedy for the sake of everyone else. Too bad, they just don't understand the popularity and potential.

Quote from XIX >>

IMO rather than making a D&D movie they should make a good Fantasy movie...AFTER it's good call it D&D: [Fantasy Movie Title Here] 

True, but maybe include something like "A Dungeons and Dragons Movie" in the poster so that it's not hard to learn it's d&d and get non-fans into the hobby (if it's good.)

My beef against hollywood is that they think they can do better the author himself which is way too often false. So id definitely hire salvatore or chris perkins to do a story.

Salvatore would be awesome! I've always said I would watch a Legend of Drizzt TV show. 

Ed Greenwood would also do good work with the movie.

Quote from 4GnomesInATrenchCoat >>

maybe include something like "A Dungeons and Dragons Movie" in the poster so that it's not hard to learn it's d&d and get non-fans into the hobby (if it's good.)

If they wanted to go the comedy/players route, they could always do something similar to the film The Gamers: Dorkness Rising.  That film doesn’t have the best acting, but the general premise of actors playing both their character and the player works.