Ubiquitous <
web...@polaris.net> wrote in
news:tqc2mc$1lfki$
2...@dont-email.me:
>
spallsh...@gmail.com wrote:
>> Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha <
taus...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>>I'm certain it will live up to the standards of the various
>>>movies. You know, the garbage.
>>>
>>>What a *stupid* idea.
>>
>>The problem with a D&D TV show is that - as a source for
>>narrative - D&D is boring.
>>
>>I'm not saying the games we play are boring (I wouldn't still be
>>reading a nearly empty Usenet newsgroup after all these years if
>>that were the case ;-) but that D&D, alone, lacks the structure
>>and character for an interesting movie.
>
> Aren't there YouTube channels or something with people playing
> D&D? I heard they're fairly popular, or maybe that's just with
> gamers.
In the grand scheme of things, they're small potatoes. For the
gaming industry/community, yeah, they're a pretty big deal.
>
>>Sure, you can take elements from the game - regenerating trolls,
>>wizards who memorize spells on a daily basis, heroes who plunder
>>ancient tombs - and work them into a story... but then you've
>>got a fantasy movie that happens to use D&D tropes. It's not the
>>D&D stuff that really makes that movie interesting; it's
>>everything around it: the stories, the setting, the characters.
>>I mean, if you look at a lot of D&D games we play, they rip off
>>movies and TV shows incessantly because D&D, itself, isn't that
>>interesting.
>>
>>Now, were Wizards to license some of its IPs - Dragonlance, Gord
>>the Rogue*, Planescape, Spelljammer - then we might get an
>>interesting movie or TV series. But that never seems to be the
>>case. Instead we get a generic fantasy movie - usually written
>>by the cheapest hack they could find and then tailored to fit
>>the broadest audience - that has some recognizable features from
>>D&D taped onto it.
>
> That would be a great idea, but that takes money that no one is
> willing to spend.
You really need to do some research into how movies are financed.
If you're making a movie, you *never* spend your own money. You
recruit investors, leading them to believe (incorrectly) that
they'll get a share of the profit (because if somebody gets a
percentage of the net, there will *never* be a net, no matter what
accounting magic they have to invoke to make it happen[1]) And
investors aren't hard to find, especially if you actually have some
credits on IMDB (even bad ones), because there's always people who
want to buy a piece of the Hollywood magic.
(And, if you ensure the movie never makes a profit, you can sell
well over 100% of the production to investors. If you've never seen
the movie _The Producers_ - the original, with Zero Mostel, and
Gene Wilder, I've never seen the remake but I'm confident it sucks
- I highly recommend it as a work of comedic genius, and, while the
production in the movie is a stage play, it is a damning indictment
of Hollywood as well.)
[1]Like using a wholely owned subsidiary to buy a $5 lamp at the
Goodwill store, then renting it to the production company for
$5,000/day for the entire six month schooting schedule. Lather,
rinse, repeat for every prop.