The movie looks really good. But I am getting pretty angry at people who are refusing to watch it because of the OGL crisis. That's just taking it too far.
The movie feels EXACTLY like someone's homebrew campaign that started out as an Arthurian homage but quickly became something else.
"OK, here's my backstory for my level 1 fighter. I'm the long-lost son of the deposed king, but my identity is hidden because otherwise the current king, my uncle, will have me killed. I got taken in by prostitutes as a baby, but now I run the Thieves Guild in the largest city in the land. Oh, and I'm already attuned to an artifact-level magic sword that belonged to my father, although I haven't actually found it yet."
Carric Aquissar, elven wannabe artist in his deconstructionist period (Archfey warlock) Lan Kidogo, mapach archaeologist and treasure hunter (Knowledge cleric) Mardan Ferres, elven private investigator obsessed with that one unsolved murder (Assassin rogue) Xhekhetiel, halfling survivor of a Betrayer Gods cult (Runechild sorcerer/fighter)
Variety interview (condensed) with the screenwriters (or directors, I don't know), Goldstein and Daley.
Some takeaways:
- Monty Python, but not really Monty Python, honestly...
- Respect source material, but if it gets in the way of creativity, well...
- We're stereotyping what we think D&D players are actually like at a table
- DM's are there to screw with their players
- Emasculating men is funny, fun and fresh!
- It's funny and shocking that some Hollywood actors don't like being emasculated
- Looking weak is the most fun you could have as an actor
To reference:
Monty Python: "That’s not quite the tone, but what those guys did very successfully was make intelligent absurdity — to shine a light on the ridiculousness of medieval clichés. We’re trying to do that with the fantasy genre." Which I got from the opening of the trailer where Chris & Michelle head to a tavern, because where else would you go to hash out a plan?
Source material: "What we learned doing “Spider Man: Homecoming” was that while you have to have a certain reverence for and love of the source material, you can’t let the weight of that thing hinder your creativity." I saw this in the LotR movies also. The books had a chapter for "we walked up a lot of stairs". Do you really want a 15 - 30 minute scene of walking up big stairs outside a city? No, most people do not. Get on with it already! That said... "We had people looking over our shoulder from the brand, from the studio. Even on set, we had advisers who said, “Well, she has to say something if she’s going to do the spell, because the spell has a verbal component.” so it's not they are just doing whatever. They are D&D players, with D&D advisors, making a D&D movie.
Stereotyping: "Xenk, played by Regé-Jean Page, is very much the nerdy player that doesn’t make jokes and adheres strictly to the rulebook. Whereas Edgin, Chris Pine’s character, is the more casual player. He doesn’t bother to learn about the Bardic spells and would prefer to just hit people over the head with his lute." These are some pretty broad stereotypes, and I wouldn't pin them down to just D&D or TTRPGs. There's the serious one (paladin), the lazy one (bard), the direct one (barbarian), the in-over-his-head one (sorcerer), and the wierd one (druid).
DM screwing: "The plot twists that we throw at our characters are what a DM would do at the table, just to screw with you and make it more fun. It was our way of capturing what goes on when you’re playing D&D, without breaking the fourth wall or becoming meta with it." So yes, but not just to screw with the players. They are telling a actual story here, not making Borat 3.
Emasculating men & the remainder: It's a whole section, not gonna quote, but it's at the very end. Pretty surprised by this one. They seem to think it's a goal in and of itself targeting at the entire gender. Not a specific man or type of man, all of them. And that Chris Pine is fine with it. (the millions he is being paid may have something to do with that) They do think it is only for "leading men", as they talk about using Tony Stark to emasculate Peter Parker in Spiderman. So TS being a alpha male is fine, because the movie isn't about him, I guess? Note that neither Goldstein nor Daley has ever been a leading man, so may be something else going on. But I haven't seen any signs that Regé-Jean Page or Justice Smith get taken down like Chris Pine does. We'll see.
Regarding the “emasculating leading men” comment, anyone who says they’re targeting “all men” either doesn’t understand Hollywood or is trying to push an agenda. It also means whoever is saying that is functionally illiterate or thinks the folks they are talking to are functionally illiterate, since they disavowed that interpretation multiple times in the interview.
“Leading men” are a specific type of actor, not simply a catch-all phrase for a man who happens to be leading a movie. The exact nature of a “leading man” changed with each generation, but they generally share traits of being physically attractive, charismatic, and in good shape.
Chris Pine is a pretty clear “leading man”.
Hollywood presently has a problem with a number of members of their “leading man” class refusing to play a role in a movie unless they are contractually unable to lose any fight. A number of actors, such as the Rock, are so afraid that their curated masculine image would be hurt if they were ever defeated that they force their movies to suffer as a result (after all, if you know going into Black Adam that the main character is never going to really struggle because the actor will not allow them to, what’s the real point?).
That entire segment of the interview was calling out, in all but name, this ridiculous trend in film, and laughing about how happy they are that Pine is willing to actually have fun and isn’t so obsessed with his masculinity that they couldn’t make the movie they wanted to make.
(Monty Python) No comment, as I'm not 100% clear what you're referring to - I've made it a policy that I don't respond to vague comments anymore, for various reasons.
(Not sticking closely to source material) They used Spiderman: Homecoming as an example...a film that, at least the part I was able to sit through, hewed too closely to the source material for me to enjoy. This doesn't worry me in the same way it worries you, I expect.
(Stereotyping) Yeah, there'll be stereotypes. Unless the film is going to take itself very seriously (would it really capture the spirit of D&D if it did?), then yes, it have them and poke fun at them. The question is the tone in which they do it
(DMs screwing with players) I didn't get that from the interview. I got the idea of DMs being creative and spontaneous in providing challenges for players. That's not messing with players, but it depends on how they're doing.
I agree that the quote was cringe and awkward while the intent isn't immediately obvious. The follow up discussion makes it plain though - there are actors who are so fragile in their masculinity that they can't take the idea of losing a fight. Steven Seagal is the one that comes to myind and it makes his films basically unwatchable - even without the obvious endings, the fights all become identical and boring, and I'm not watching his films for his dramatic abilities. Again, it'll depend on how they do it, but it's a message that needs to be said.
See above. It's like those men who can't wear anything pink. Their masculinity is so fragile that yes, it's funny when you pole fun at it. If the film just emasculates men in general then I won't like it, but if they're poking fun at this trope, then it'll be good. That ego needs deflating.
That's not what they said. Weakness is an integral part of a good role. I didn't like Captain Marvel because she didn't struggle in the film. Everything was too easy, and the only weakness she showed was being duped by the Kree. Yawn. Give me Batman over that any day. Actors who are afraid of being weak are pathetic actors (that's not a reference to Larson), and their move is to make a point about that.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
If you're not willing or able to to discuss in good faith, then don't be surprised if I don't respond, there are better things in life for me to do than humour you. This signature is that response.
The movie looks really good. But I am getting pretty angry at people who are refusing to watch it because of the OGL crisis. That's just taking it too far.
If anybody would like my GMing playlists
battles: https://open.spotify.com/playlist/2mRp57MBAz9ZsVpw895IzZ?si=243bee43442a4703
exploration: https://open.spotify.com/playlist/0qk0aKm5yI4K6VrlcaKrDj?si=81057bef509043f3
town/tavern: https://open.spotify.com/playlist/49JSv1kK0bUyQ9LVpKmZlr?si=a88b1dd9bab54111
character deaths: https://open.spotify.com/playlist/6k7WhylJEjSqWC0pBuAtFD?si=3e897fa2a2dd469e
"OK, here's my backstory for my level 1 fighter. I'm the long-lost son of the deposed king, but my identity is hidden because otherwise the current king, my uncle, will have me killed. I got taken in by prostitutes as a baby, but now I run the Thieves Guild in the largest city in the land. Oh, and I'm already attuned to an artifact-level magic sword that belonged to my father, although I haven't actually found it yet."
Active characters:
Carric Aquissar, elven wannabe artist in his deconstructionist period (Archfey warlock)
Lan Kidogo, mapach archaeologist and treasure hunter (Knowledge cleric)
Mardan Ferres, elven private investigator obsessed with that one unsolved murder (Assassin rogue)
Xhekhetiel, halfling survivor of a Betrayer Gods cult (Runechild sorcerer/fighter)
The official 'Dungeons & Dragons: Honor Among Thieves' movie poster.
Dungeons & Dragons: Honor Among Thieves (2023) - IMDb
It looks like I've just fallen down and they're all mildly concerned for my health but not concerned enough to do anything about it.
I love it.
[REDACTED]
Another official 'Dungeons & Dragons: Honor Among Thieves' movie poster.
https://variety.com/2023/film/news/dungeons-dragons-honor-among-thieves-directors-chris-pine-rege-jean-page-hugh-grant-1235539888/
Variety interview (condensed) with the screenwriters (or directors, I don't know), Goldstein and Daley.
Some takeaways:
- Monty Python, but not really Monty Python, honestly...
- Respect source material, but if it gets in the way of creativity, well...
- We're stereotyping what we think D&D players are actually like at a table
- DM's are there to screw with their players
- Emasculating men is funny, fun and fresh!
- It's funny and shocking that some Hollywood actors don't like being emasculated
- Looking weak is the most fun you could have as an actor
To reference:
Monty Python: "That’s not quite the tone, but what those guys did very successfully was make intelligent absurdity — to shine a light on the ridiculousness of medieval clichés. We’re trying to do that with the fantasy genre." Which I got from the opening of the trailer where Chris & Michelle head to a tavern, because where else would you go to hash out a plan?
Source material: "What we learned doing “Spider Man: Homecoming” was that while you have to have a certain reverence for and love of the source material, you can’t let the weight of that thing hinder your creativity." I saw this in the LotR movies also. The books had a chapter for "we walked up a lot of stairs". Do you really want a 15 - 30 minute scene of walking up big stairs outside a city? No, most people do not. Get on with it already! That said... "We had people looking over our shoulder from the brand, from the studio. Even on set, we had advisers who said, “Well, she has to say something if she’s going to do the spell, because the spell has a verbal component.” so it's not they are just doing whatever. They are D&D players, with D&D advisors, making a D&D movie.
Stereotyping: "Xenk, played by Regé-Jean Page, is very much the nerdy player that doesn’t make jokes and adheres strictly to the rulebook. Whereas Edgin, Chris Pine’s character, is the more casual player. He doesn’t bother to learn about the Bardic spells and would prefer to just hit people over the head with his lute." These are some pretty broad stereotypes, and I wouldn't pin them down to just D&D or TTRPGs. There's the serious one (paladin), the lazy one (bard), the direct one (barbarian), the in-over-his-head one (sorcerer), and the wierd one (druid).
DM screwing: "The plot twists that we throw at our characters are what a DM would do at the table, just to screw with you and make it more fun. It was our way of capturing what goes on when you’re playing D&D, without breaking the fourth wall or becoming meta with it." So yes, but not just to screw with the players. They are telling a actual story here, not making Borat 3.
Emasculating men & the remainder: It's a whole section, not gonna quote, but it's at the very end. Pretty surprised by this one. They seem to think it's a goal in and of itself targeting at the entire gender. Not a specific man or type of man, all of them. And that Chris Pine is fine with it. (the millions he is being paid may have something to do with that) They do think it is only for "leading men", as they talk about using Tony Stark to emasculate Peter Parker in Spiderman. So TS being a alpha male is fine, because the movie isn't about him, I guess? Note that neither Goldstein nor Daley has ever been a leading man, so may be something else going on. But I haven't seen any signs that Regé-Jean Page or Justice Smith get taken down like Chris Pine does. We'll see.
Regarding the “emasculating leading men” comment, anyone who says they’re targeting “all men” either doesn’t understand Hollywood or is trying to push an agenda. It also means whoever is saying that is functionally illiterate or thinks the folks they are talking to are functionally illiterate, since they disavowed that interpretation multiple times in the interview.
“Leading men” are a specific type of actor, not simply a catch-all phrase for a man who happens to be leading a movie. The exact nature of a “leading man” changed with each generation, but they generally share traits of being physically attractive, charismatic, and in good shape.
Chris Pine is a pretty clear “leading man”.
Hollywood presently has a problem with a number of members of their “leading man” class refusing to play a role in a movie unless they are contractually unable to lose any fight. A number of actors, such as the Rock, are so afraid that their curated masculine image would be hurt if they were ever defeated that they force their movies to suffer as a result (after all, if you know going into Black Adam that the main character is never going to really struggle because the actor will not allow them to, what’s the real point?).
That entire segment of the interview was calling out, in all but name, this ridiculous trend in film, and laughing about how happy they are that Pine is willing to actually have fun and isn’t so obsessed with his masculinity that they couldn’t make the movie they wanted to make.
Another official 'Dungeons & Dragons: Honor Among Thieves' movie poster.
DORIC
If you're not willing or able to to discuss in good faith, then don't be surprised if I don't respond, there are better things in life for me to do than humour you. This signature is that response.
Another official 'Dungeons & Dragons: Honor Among Thieves' movie poster.
EDGIN
Wait, that guy's a bard? I thought he was just a fighter who plays the lute. Huh.
[REDACTED]
Another official 'Dungeons & Dragons: Honor Among Thieves' movie poster.
XENK
Character sheets just dropped:
https://www.dndbeyond.com/claim/source/tg
Another official 'Dungeons & Dragons: Honor Among Thieves' movie poster.
HOLGA
hopefully this means tickets will go on-sale soon. less than a month to go.
Another official 'Dungeons & Dragons: Honor Among Thieves' movie poster.
SIMON
Nice. I'm unsure how useful the stat blocks will be, but they're fun to have.
[REDACTED]
yeah, a good promotional thing that provides some lore. and for those FR enthusiasts, new NPC's maybe to toss in here and there.
Another official 'Dungeons & Dragons: Honor Among Thieves' movie poster.
FORGE