Ain't It Cool News: The best in movie, TV, DVD, and comic book news.

Badass DUNGEONS AND DRAGONS Trailer Big Clear and Ready For You To Swallow!!!

Yahoo! by crucible	Oct 26th, 2000 12:41:12 AM
Good news man, as a fan too I just thought I'd tell you that Yahoo Serious only just released a new movie about 2 months back, so pretty soon all you guys can worship on the alter of supreme acting ability again =) or not. Actually it was pretty well publicised and shown all over .au so I guess he didnt shoot it completely dead. Oh and he did have "Reckless Kelly" after "Young Einstien" as well.. cruc.
what about the really big one? by Slicer_D	Oct 26th, 2000 12:45:11 AM
I want the 640 by 480 one why can't I see that one tell me now.
Little Cheese never hurt any one!! by Slicer_D	Oct 26th, 2000 12:49:14 AM
Well ok maybe cheeseyness hurt a few movies ala Godzilla but this looks cool if nothing else a popcorn flick with cool fx but I'M praying it will be epic coolness
This is fantastic! by Spaceman Spliff	Oct 26th, 2000 12:50:48 AM
I've been waiting twelve long years, but they finally made a sequel to Willow, and this looks to kick just as much ass. I especially like the choice of Jeremy Irons. He packs every bit the dark, edgy, non-blow-dried punch I expect of William Hurt as Duke Leto.
d&d movie == buttcrack by lilgorgor	Oct 26th, 2000 12:58:19 AM
Wayans? BWHAAA?!?!? The CG looks so goddamn crappy. The "beholder" in big trouble in little china looked a lot better than that big blue cartoon piece of crap in this trailer. bet it cost a lot less too.
I just have three words for ya. by Zeylan	Oct 26th, 2000 12:59:04 AM
RICHARD FUCKINNG O'BRIEN!!!!
Hmmmmm... by Grimjack99	Oct 26th, 2000 01:02:17 AM
Well, Lord of the Rings is only a year away...Sorry, Harry, Justin Whalin doesn't have a good track record with me, and this doesn't look like it's going to improve any time soon.
10 things i hate about this trailer by human2	Oct 26th, 2000 01:08:41 AM
1) the director's name is 'courtney', 2) blue lipstick on a man, 3) crappy lookingdragons, 4) jeremy iron growling crappy dialogue, 5) the protagonist looks like a jerry o'connell wannabe, 6) lowbrow humor, 7) totally anachronistic slang, 8) cliched 'black sidekick', 9) self-referential genre in-jokes, 10) D&D is for bearded 19 year olds with glasses. Can I get an amen?
Talk about crap by Dr.D.Evil	Oct 26th, 2000 01:13:15 AM
This moving looks to be on the same level as Mortal Combat 2 and Super Mario Brothers. Those dragon animations were fucken horrible. D&D fanatics are going to be mad.
You hated Young Einstein?!!! How dare you!! by 0007	Oct 26th, 2000 01:14:12 AM
How dare you savage one of the most cleverly satirical and fun movies ever! Now I know why Ebert wanted you on his show. That movie is pure gold to me and scores of my friends. Do you hate UHF as well? Harry, I love your site and most of your tastes in film, but your puking over this and Mary Shelley's Frankenstein really raises my hackles since you blatantly bash them left and right without EVER giving them the right to a formal review that states WHY you loathe them!
DnD by Snafu	Oct 26th, 2000 01:14:18 AM
Now, up front, I'm not a big DnD fan, I don't think it's dumb or anything, just never got into it, but I do enjoy fantasy movies somewhat. I just don't understand why there aren't any really serious fantasy movies ala Legend and Willow anymore. These movies managed to be more or less appropriate for all ages, but didn't throw in a lot of cheesiness and bad dialogue and Marlan Wayans. Why Marlan Wayans? And the kid that used to play Jimmy on Lois and Clark? Why? Why not just make a good epic fantasy? I will admit, the effects look ok, and I will see it in theaters, but I'm not optimistic about the overall quality of the movie.
awwwwwwwww!!!! by THE WALLACE	Oct 26th, 2000 01:15:20 AM
The cute little eye-ball thingy from "Big Trouble in Little China" is all grown up! First Kim Cattral shows up on "Sex in the city" and now this...Haven't seen Lo-pan in a while though..
D&D by center52	Oct 26th, 2000 01:17:31 AM
All right. This trailer: Labyrinth looks like a better "maze" film, Willow is a better "sorcery" film, and Final Fantasy VII on Playstation had better CGI. Granted I am not speaking as a D&D fan but rather a fan of 80's fantasy movies but. . . does anyone feel me on this.
dnd by mac-dad	Oct 26th, 2000 01:18:08 AM
The trailer looks awesome...I can't believe how much of a junky I'm being about this movie, but it's just incredible that it's finally happening...I honestly think we all have to do what we can to make this movie a success, so that we can see more movies like this...I hope New Line feels the same.
That's gotta be the lamest CG I've ever seen by Pagz	Oct 26th, 2000 01:45:20 AM
Jeezus. I didn't think CG effects that bad were possible in a major motion picture anymore. That has got to be some of the weakest CG I've ever seen in my life. It's ugly, it's toony, it's downright BAD. I don't care how good the rest of the film is (and I doubt it's any good at all judging from the contents of this trailer) there's no performance on earth that could save this film from those special effects. Dungeons and Dragons deserved and epic fantasy film. Too bad this is what it got. I predict D&D will bomb big time, and will be oft compared to Godzilla. What a shame.
Makes me wish they would use this technology to do a "Sword and by Choda	Oct 26th, 2000 01:58:41 AM
I know that is the kind of project I'd be pitch'n if I were in Hollywood.
What's that Stench? by RedFive	Oct 26th, 2000 02:06:56 AM
Geez and i thought hercules sucked a fat monkeys nipple.Isn't that the kid from childs play 3?.Boy he sure knows how to pick up those god-awful parts.I agree with everyones negative posts,it's too bad filmakers these days waste so much time trying to create something spectacular and not something great.Filmakers still dont relize how much characters and story matter to a movie cause movies are STORY TELLING.I wouldnt even watch that movie on TV if it was a toss up between DnD and info-mercials.I guarantee the movie sucks.Just like 99.9 percent of all the shit HOLLYWOOD thinks is good and tries to cram down film fans's throats.Make a real movie for a change ..assholes.
Oh, no... by Motoko_UK	Oct 26th, 2000 02:18:16 AM
Firstly lemme say I've never played D&D (have played Heroquest though) so I have no idea how close it matches the game but purely as a trailer for a film I am majorly disappointed. This just looks cheap. It looks like a TV movie thats a pilot for a series. Granted this film didn't have the biggest budget but they seem to have frittered it all away on regular SFX rather than saving it for something really cool. Poor Jeremy Irons must have needed the money if the script was like this when he got it. And Thora Birch...great actress (see American Beauty and tell me I'm lying) but she's being treated like Nat Portman. A 10 star actress being given 5 star material and trying to say it straight. "All people deserve to be free and equal." Oh God. This'll turn into Phantom Menace with Dragons. Probably fun while you watch it (while you're not laughing at it) but instantly forgettable, if not stupid, once you're out the theatre. I want a great Dragon movie. I want a great fantasy movie. I want a fleet of Draco's flying across the screen knocking seven bells out of a forboding tower with archers desperatly lobbing anything they have at them and Mages standing on parapets lauching spell after spell. This film ain't it. I hope there's a lot of post-production still to be done ala X-Men and a lot of better footage in the can. They'll need it. It's only a trailer but I hoped for so much more.
Looks better than I thought, but... by Robin Goodfellow	Oct 26th, 2000 02:57:31 AM
it does look like a pretty cheap rendering of Dungeons and Dragons (Satan's Game... hehehe). The CG, which would look nice for a PC or console game, looks just so-so for the big screen. Jeremy Irons hams his lines up with perverse glee in each part of the trailer his wrinkled grimacing mug occupies. I guess I was hoping for something more in terms of story and adventure. From the trailer, it seemes like a bunch of ambitious yet unimaginative 13 year old D&Ders decided to make their campaign a feature film. Then again, this is only a trailer so who knows. No matter what, I'll see this to bring back all of those fond, anti-social memories of high school. Nothing like rolling D20s with a couple of your buddies with your English teacher DMing. "Where's the Mountain Dew?!" hehehe... sorry
Chill the hell out everyone by Demon Cleaner	Oct 26th, 2000 03:11:41 AM
I'm sorry if this belligerent but can everyone chill out till they see it or leave it alone!! This is a long awaited and carefully made film despite the fact it is not an 'epic.' It was never supposed to be. The main influences are Raiders and the 'Wars. I'm starting to feel like Harry is one of the only film fans, not professional critics, on this website. "Marlon Wayans," "It's like the fanboy menace" bugger off as we say in Blighty. Ok, if it is crap then I'll be more gutted than anyone, but if you guys are on a power trip to trash anything you don't think is cool. There is room for Reqium for a Dream AND DnD dudes. Or maybe I'm being defensive. Just give it a chance and don't do everything in your power to trash it. In the end it doesn't do anyone any favours.
That was some of the shittiest CGI ever by Dellis	Oct 26th, 2000 03:16:30 AM
I had high hopes for this film, but the effects LOOK like effects. And bad ones at that. What a disappointment...
MARLON WAYANS??!?!?!??!?!?! HAS THE WORLD GONE MAD?!?!?!? by Tender Branson	Oct 26th, 2000 03:18:10 AM
Not that I give a shit, because I made up my mind about "D&D" the day I walked past that gaming shop and saw what horrible acne the clientele had, WHOOF! I became convinced that if should delve into the dungeon with them, then whatever made their skin so pale and riddled with yellow puss filled globules would infect my skin as well. (I later discovered it was their constant diet of Cheetos and Fried Mozzarella Sticks that did it, but still, I dodged a bullet by simply continuing on to Tower Records where I found that "Twisted Sister" single and met the girl that eventually was going to strip me of my virginity 80's slut style. God, you really don't meet girls like that anymore! I'm also fairly certain my skin stayed so clear because I didn't harbor fastasies of caveman love with fairies and anime cartoon characters. I stand by this assumption, as an unproven and far fetched, but still based in science, type of theory.) But, I still love the whole "Sword and Horses and Sorcery" genre. "Conan" fucking rocked. (The sequel, not so much, but still Grace Jones as scary, cavewoman! Now there's a woman that would BREAK YOUR ASS IN THE SACK!) This looks more on par with shit like "First Knight", you know, lame ass dialogue, horrible casting, bizarre "Star Trek"-like costume design and FX so bad you not only see the strings but the hand and fingers moving shit around. The trailer looked like "Willow" reenvisioned by Ed Wood. What a hunk of shit, really and no humor intended. Still, I intend to avoid this flick like the plague as I wish to maintain my dermal integrity and you just know a theater filled with the likes of your average "D&D" player will just ooze with puss causing cooties! Now, Harry, who do I speak to about compensating me for the twenty-four minutes it took me to download that Cheeto Fart?
Oh the pain! This looks like.... by Groinstomp	Oct 26th, 2000 03:18:53 AM
This looks like a FMV game for my peice of shit $700.00 3DO game system. I'd rather be stomped in the groin.
Movie fanboys attacking Gaming Fanboys, now that's funny. by 'scuse me chief	Oct 26th, 2000 03:59:39 AM
POT, KETTLE, BLACK.
Hey! I'm a bearded 19-year-old with glasses... by Ambrose Chappell	Oct 26th, 2000 04:09:14 AM
...and I still thought this trailor was crappy. Yeah, the self-referential in-jokes bugged me too. And the dragon designs. And the fact that it looks like 90% of this trailor was computer animated...which is cool, but not when you can TELL that it was computer animated. I want to be emersed in the world of Dungeons and Dragons, not be reminded that I'm watching live-action actors and actresses running around in a 3D cartoon. Where's the lush realism? Call it a hunch, but I have a feeling that this won't be the film that makes the high fantasy movie genre profitable again...but we only have to wait until Christmas of 2001 for the movie that will.
I guess I'll watch it when it comes on basic cable by freexter	Oct 26th, 2000 04:42:25 AM
and there's nothing on at the time. i ain't paying no $20 bucks to see a friggin' movie with some half-assed kid trying to win the heart of the princess by saving the kingdom against overwhelming odds and a bad adult. and how the hell cast this movie, anyway? the dialogue sounds like it belongs in one of your standard '90s 2-guys-in-a-room flick. nice sfx, though.
Blue lipstick? by Toranaga	Oct 26th, 2000 05:02:40 AM
What the hell were they thinking? How in the hell are they going to make money off merch with this crap. Like Halloween costumes, for example. With Star Wars you could be a Stormtrooper or Vader. Maybe even Boba Fett. And the costumes sold like mad. Big money. With this movie, a kid would have the choice of a Jeremy Iron's mask, or a bald cap and blue lipstick. What the hell kind of villan wears blue lipstick? Someone please answer me that! BTW, this trailer sucked ass. It seems thats the general feeling around here. And I agree with everything that was said. Hopefully Hollywood wont fuck up Eyes of the Dragon, if that ever gets made. Yeah right.
Fantasy and Sci-fi by Sepulchrave	Oct 26th, 2000 06:10:36 AM

Harry is Drunk by Maupin	Oct 26th, 2000 07:04:37 AM
Only a drunk man could call this trailer "cool as hell." I don't know about the film, but this trailer is a paint-by-the-numbers production with frequent, meaningless text and computer graphics straight out of the demo real of a computer game designer wanna-be.
Looks like shit to me by Manhoganistic	Oct 26th, 2000 07:05:29 AM
Here's hoping that LOTR looks absolutely nothing like that crapstain. Are special effects supposed to look like that? I thought the point of CGI was so you couldn't tell what was fake. Darth Siskel is right on.
yawn by frenchie	Oct 26th, 2000 07:36:44 AM
I'm usually not bitchy here, but I'm sorry it looks REALLY bad :(
The Rock sez.. by TheRock	Oct 26th, 2000 08:08:54 AM
I don't think 'bad' is a strong enough word for whatever the hell that was I just saw. Ugh.
hmmm indeed by kelf	Oct 26th, 2000 08:11:27 AM
Well it looks entertaining. Lord of the Rings cannot come sooner. Everyone knows thats gonna be GOLD!!! Theres no way in the world anyone would dare frigg that up. About DND.. whos that swank 'hero' ?? I have a feeling he is going to ruin the whole damn thing.. for me anyhow
That's the cheesiest thing I've ever seen, and do you know what by r_dimitri22	Oct 26th, 2000 08:15:21 AM
It means this thing is a bomb waiting to happen, and I am NEVER going to get my Dragonlance movies. :-( Hollywood, if you had just given us the story of Raistlin, Tasslehoff, Tanis, Sturm, Kitiara, etc., I guarantee people would have flocked. I'm talking a story as universal as Star Wars. But no. And this dud is going to turn off a lot of people to the prospect of a serious treatment for the sword and sorcery genre for another 20 years. (I recognize that Lord of the Rings could redeem us all, but there's an important difference between respected literature and the pulp fiction that I adore. I fear no one will take the chance.)
As a long-time RPGer... by The Gline	Oct 26th, 2000 08:40:24 AM
...I don't know whether to laugh, cry or vomit. I think I'll just vomit. This looks like the absolute worst possible thing they could have done with this material.
Sweet Mother of God!! by Dash101	Oct 26th, 2000 08:40:47 AM
Ohhh how does one say. What are the words I'm looking for. Ahhh yes now I remember: Star Wars who? Naturally I dont mean that, but is it just me or with films comming out like LOTR and now D&D, that we as an audience may get sick of George's money hungry film making? Hmm, lets see "FRODO vs JAR JAR BINKS".. Yeah... 'nough said I guess.. -dash101
One way to save it by Domi'sInnerChild	Oct 26th, 2000 08:44:51 AM
Thora Birch has to show her luscious tatas again. Seriously though, what's with her Excallibur knock-off gold armor?
Only way I'm seeing this movie... by jhurshman	Oct 26th, 2000 08:58:00 AM
...is if it's got a Lord of the Rings trailer!
Attention span favors D&D by edaj	Oct 26th, 2000 09:00:31 AM
I think it looked good, and I think it may do better than LOTR because the latter is not an action-packed, humorous film. Special effects are secondary to a good time, hence the popularity of Xena and Hercules, and Dr. Who, and Star Trek (original), and so forth. Elitist snobs need to watch it.
... by Wino Forever	Oct 26th, 2000 09:01:36 AM
Okay Harry, you were obviously on drugs when you posted this, so I won't call you any names. As for anyone else leaping to the defense of this movie or decrying the cynicism of people like me: "Go Fuck Yourself", as we say in America. I spent a few adolescent hours with D&D. I liked the Saturday morning cartoon. I know that the goofy CGI eyeball thing is called a "Beholder". And this movie still looks like utter bullshit. Not because it's a betrayal of the source material, but simply because it looks like bullshit. Sub-"Mortal Kombat: Annihilation" CGI. Retarded use of 80's slang. Wacky stepanfetchit black sidekick. Jeremy Irons slumming in previously undreamt of ways. "You must find the Crystal Scepter +4 vs. Red Dragons". Whatever. I can't believe what Hollywood spends money on.
Didnt look half as bad as I tought it would be... by Lyingman	Oct 26th, 2000 09:24:47 AM
I have to agree with the majority here and say that Beholder is one of the worst CGI animation I've seen in a long time. I've seen stuff on Sinbad that was better. I dont really like the dragons except that they're fast, I like that. Jeremy Irons looks like he's asleep, but I did not expect him to even try for a fantasy movie. But I do think the rest of the cast will be up to par. I like the story, and I think if the chemistry between the actors works we'll have a decent Fantasy movie to watch this December. I refuse to shoot this movie down before I see it. I just wish they had better CGI creatures but they're really expensive and I understand they did not have the really high budget a movie like Jurassic Park would have. The most imprtant thing is the story and the magic between the actors, everything else is just garnish.
ALLRIGHT!!! by Xfonhe	Oct 26th, 2000 09:58:26 AM
Oh great, just what we've been yearning for: a gothic swords & sorecery verison of Mortal Kombat! Sahweet! It's hip, it's fresh... it's got attitude - not to mention neat-o SFX & a jammin' soundtrack! Hey, we can get that girl from American Beauty to play the role of Princess Amidala, errr... the princess, yeah! We'll market the crap outta this!! Buy a Taco Bell
garbage by kylerayner	Oct 26th, 2000 10:04:41 AM
That's how it looks on my screen anyway. Maybe with a T3 or something, it would look better? No, I think it's just crap--Spawn-quality effects at work on a cliched story (save the world, get the girl). Anyway, I'd like to reiterate someone's amusement at the movie fanboys' trashing of gaming fanboys. Ridiculous, kids. And we all should know better. Personally, I straddle both worlds (have even made a film and I recently began a new D&D campaign, with 3rd edition rules, which rock), and I'm older than 19 and have no chin hair, nor earrings, nose rings, or other metal accoutrements, except glasses of course. Come on, guys--equal-opportunity geeking should be the rule. Oh, and by the way, to dispel another nasty myth--every member of our gaming group has a girlfriend, fiance or wife. Some of us even go outside once in a while.
not even 'carmina burana' can save this one by rogerboxlightner	Oct 26th, 2000 10:05:58 AM
A brief reminder: d+d is not a story, it's a list of rules. fish, plankton, sea greens, and protien from the sea!!!
First Post In A Long Time But... by vergence	Oct 26th, 2000 10:06:42 AM
Jesus Christmas, this crap is awful! I guess they just had to include a bunch of dragons and a shitload of dungeons so people wouldn't confuse it with the Matrix! What a pile a trash! Isn't the director supposed to be some huge fanboy who is a "live long player". I'd hate to see that dude's campaign..."OK, you've just vanquished another of the Old Gods and conqueror the Unconquerorable Armies of The Undead. You find another +10 Vorpal Poleax, 10 million and another ring of ten wishes. What do you do now?"
I watched it on a T3. It's still crap. by bltpdx	Oct 26th, 2000 10:15:47 AM
I didn't know Ray Harryhausen was doing CGI now. Did Thora Birch's character remind anyone of, oh, I don't know, Queen Amidala? I mean down to standing in front of a wise council and pleadin....oh, screw it. I don't have the energy.
Two more things... by bltpdx	Oct 26th, 2000 10:20:31 AM
I actually thought Marlon Wayans, with his sarcastic "You too" was the only actor (besides Jeremy Irons) with any fun going on in that trailer. And as far as KNOWING Lord of the Rings will be GOLD....we've known a lot of things about a lot of movies and a lot of movies have sucked. I'm almost ready to give up on the whole concept of keeping up on productions. No I haven't.---------------------- --------------Brandon. 98% ellipses free since 1998
Sepulchrave Nails It - Read His Post by vergence	Oct 26th, 2000 10:21:56 AM
Right on, man. Very well put...
The ironic thing is..... by Terry_1978	Oct 26th, 2000 11:18:25 AM
that everybody who's trashing this flick is gonna go right to the theatres in a couple months and see it anyways.
I've seen better computer graphics on Moon Patrol. by ThanosX	Oct 26th, 2000 11:18:37 AM
Anyone remember a time when studios didn't have to rely on computer effects to tie together a weak plot, bad acting and crappy production design? And raise your hand if that little shot of the tunnel and green light reminds you of the starting to the Space Mountain ride at Disneyland.
D&D by Darth Grego	Oct 26th, 2000 11:20:45 AM
This will suck. Harry is insane. I liked D&D when I was 12, but for God's sake... Does anyone else look at Jeremy Irons and see Boris Karloff, or is it just me? BTW, "Britney's Rack" is the funniest ID I've seen.
SNIFF SNIFF ???? by Capt. Hilts	Oct 26th, 2000 11:23:54 AM
Let me light a match,..... I think I smell 'The Dark Crystal'.
Hyperbole, thy name is Talkback! by Wesley Snipes	Oct 26th, 2000 11:39:52 AM
You guys think this looks "worse than Xena"?! Geez, exaggerate much? Yeah, the Dragons look too artificial (maybe they should've licensed the Dragonheart program/art?), but the visual look is still quite nice an certainly better than any TV show. And that initial flyby of the bridge and building is Phantom Menace quality! It looks like good, cheesy fun! And you just KNOW all the whiners here will be there opening day. :)
Jeremy Irons was much better as Jon Irenicus in Baldur's Gate 2 by IAmLegolas	Oct 26th, 2000 11:43:59 AM
Wish they would make a movie based on that story line...
This is gonna suck. by Theta	Oct 26th, 2000 11:45:33 AM
The special effects aint all that special, since they're all pretty blatantly fake. The script, at least what we get of it from the trailer, is utter crap, and it has Marlon Wayans doing black sidekick shtick. Still, this might be fun. Luigi Cozzi's movies are complete shite, but fun. If nothing else, the cast is a bizarre hoot; where else would you find Jimmy Olsen (Whalin), Humbert Humbert (Irons), Lester Burnham's daughter (Birch, of course), a heroin addict (Wayans), Dr. Who (Tom Baker, and if you don't know THAT...) and the director of Rocky Horror Picture Show (at least I think it's the same Richard O'Brien) in the same movie?
Also...I like how every talk back on here that rips on this movi by IAmLegolas	Oct 26th, 2000 11:55:23 AM
Being a huge fan of D&D, I am stoked to have the monsters and classes and spells brought to life on the silver screen (and by the way, the one-eyed creature that someone said was a rip-off of the eye monster from "Big Trouble In Little Chine" is actually a BEHOLDER which has been in the D&D world since the mid 70's). I agree that some of the effects are cheesy as hell, but as always, us fanboys have to make do with what GOOD scraps come out of the production process. I don't think it's going to suck ass, but I don't think it's going to be monumental ala LOTR (though nobody knows for sure yet, haven't seen either). Just have to wait and see.
stop exagerrating by Airchinapilot	Oct 26th, 2000 12:22:44 PM
Everytime Harry pops a trailer up here there are always people who think it's the worst thing since Zardoz or the biggest Oscar winning phenomenon of the year. That trailer isn't all that bad and it certainly isn't good. Good: 1) Cheese and lots of it. Some of you don't want to see D&D be cheesy but I remember adventuring as being fun and sometimes hilarious. Jeremy Irons looks like he is having fun. 2)Big scale effects. I saw all those dragons fighting it out in the air above the city and I thought it was great. Sure the individual FX don't hold up to standards now but there are lots of them. That will fill up the big screen. Bad: 1) Blue lipstick 2) Supercheesoid villain from Highlander:Endgame 3) So the FX are slightly better than Xena but not much more. But there's lots of them. 3) I hate all the Wayan's brothers. They are black stereotypes. 4) Bad bad fighting. Terrible fighting. If you can't have fighting better than Gladiator (and certainly attempting to approach CTHD)then you might as well be fighting with pretzels dressed in tutus.
Didn't Eddy Murphy pick up in his limo the "girl with the expand by Fatal Discharge	Oct 26th, 2000 12:25:43 PM
Anyhow, it's got dragons in it so I'm there. Brings back memories of the great looking one in DRAGONSLAYER. But also reminds me of Sean Connery's voice coming out of the one in DRAGONHEART....shudder!!
It looked pretty good to me by Eyegore	Oct 26th, 2000 12:29:32 PM
I'm a big fan of D&D, and I'm really looking forward to seeing this. The trailor shows me that they've got some damned good special effects and really put an effort into this. I'm not about to shit on them for it. I'll admit the CG wasn't up to perfection, but it's more than adequate to tell the story. When I was a teenager and totally obsessed with the game, the best movie we had that even closely represented D&D was "Hawk the Slayer". And we loved it damit! This compared to that is like comparing a pocketknife to a +5 Holy Avenger that can disintergrate it's foes 3 times per day. So all of you asses who are bashing the movie based on this suposedly lame trailer can kiss my ass. I'll be there on opening day with all my friends.
Oy! by Batutta	Oct 26th, 2000 12:37:55 PM
This looks like it could give Battlefield Earth a run for its money!
D & D Trailer by Mintgiver	Oct 26th, 2000 12:40:28 PM
Damn, my copy of Riven looks better than the beginning of this trailer. Oh, well, at least my 6 year old son thinks it looks cool.
yeah, a baldurs gate movie would rule by Dragonfire	Oct 26th, 2000 01:06:52 PM
That game had such a brilliant story line. Its to good to be made into a movie
There's already a DnD movie by praetorian	Oct 26th, 2000 01:06:58 PM
Man, that was the silliest damned trailer i have every watched. i can bitch about it but everything i wanna say about it has already been said.. i wont be seeing this in the theatre, thank you very much, id rather stick my nuts in a blender. Since we have this piece of shit that they wanna call DnD. we can all reast assured that we already have a DnD movie taht raelly kicked ass, you know what it was? it was Conan the Barbarian. Was that movie just not the classic DnD adventure? I think it was, you had a bunch of thieves (a barbarian, an archer, a valkyrie, and even a damned wizard) they meet htis king, he gives thema quest and they go out and beat some ass. That's the typical DnD adventure if i ever saw one. To hell with this CGI bullshit. Im gonna go pop in my Conan DVD and have a beer.
Chill, folks by krosshair	Oct 26th, 2000 01:09:56 PM
It doesn't look THAT bad. The CGI was a little uneven (why don't film makers focus more on physical fx?) but I've seen much worse (anyone remember the alien at the end of Species?). Also, it's not totally fair to judge CGI based on a trailer, outside the context of the movie. It's like looking at production stills and saying a movie will suck (although Norda's armor DOES look plastic in the pics I've seen-yuck). I'll admit the delivery on some of the dialogue did not sound promising. But the movie could be fun. I believe Harry still has a fan-boy love for adventure movies. It's ironic that most of the rest of us think we are professional movie critics and trash on EVERYTHING that comes out. There isn't a SF/F movie ever made that hasn't been mocked and ridiculed by the "fan-boys" who frequent this site. These Talkbacks seem to get more negative with every post. To be honest, even if my worst fears about this movie come to pass, it will still be a massive improvement over recent fantasy fare like Kull the Conquerer (sound of retching). Well, I'm sure I'll be there opening day cheering on the heros, laughing at the in-jokes, and generally having fun. As to you posters who dog on D&D players for being losers... well, gosh, why don't you look in the mirror and try to figure out your motivation for bashing on other people's interests when they don't match yours.
this looks okay, so to hell with you all by Dragonfire	Oct 26th, 2000 01:13:32 PM
It doesnt look CRAP. It may not look brilliant or flashy or amazing but it looks good. Those dragons are cool and anyone who says the cg is bad is officially a fool. How can you judge the script by the five lines of dialogue or something there was in it. Jeremy Irons may overact a bit, but other than that I dont see anything seriously wrong. Infact it looks bloody amazing considering the budget. You all heard it had a low budget so you watched the trailer looking for every small thing you could mock about it expecting it to be crap cause as far as you're all concerned low budget = crap. So what if its not an epic. How the f*ck are you meant to make an epic from scratch. How many of you have actually played D&D. Most of you are just biased against Marlon Wayans. That shows low imagination that you concentrate more on the actors then the characters. Thats just stupid. You know that gold dragon getting mauled by those two red dragons, yeah that dragon represents all you D&D haters. Fools
CRAP-OLA!!! by Irie	Oct 26th, 2000 01:16:29 PM
This film looks worse than Quest for Camelot!!!
Bring IT on baby !!!! by John Bigbooty	Oct 26th, 2000 01:18:52 PM
I gotta give props to New Line to have the balls to show this trailer to the public. What a huge fuckin' mess. The dragons look pudgy and mis-shapened. Iron's mouth is wide open in every scene. WB teen actors-O-plenty...oh gawd puuuuuuuuuke. Cheese ball movies like Flash Gordon in the early 80's at least had adult actors and cool costumes. I wish I hadn't seen this trailer...no fuckin' way in hell would I pay matinee price with a free blow job to see this.
Awful awful awful suckfest trailer! by aeonite	Oct 26th, 2000 01:40:58 PM
This trailer is amazingly bad. I can't believe anyone likes it in the least. Read my full review of it at www.gamegrene.com. I invite your feedback there and here. What a horribly sucky trailer. Bad CGI, bad dialogue, bad effects, bad makeup, bad costumes. Bad bad bad.
trying to resist by kylerayner	Oct 26th, 2000 01:47:44 PM
but I cannot. Considering I've based my userID on a character whose powers reside almost wholly in the strength of his imagination, I must speak again against this trailer. It shows very little imagination (no, kids, imagination is not proven by being able to CGI-draw a dragon; that's technical ability, not talent). True, perhaps it's too soon to judge; perhaps the makers are still working the FX. But it does look bad. Those defending it must not be familiar with good SFX. Have any of you seen the LOTR pre-trailers? That stuff looks goood. Of course, Mr. Jackson and his crew are using physical FX as well as CGI. Furthermore, Hawk the Slayer (yes, I enjoyed it too, but I was only 12, and had much less taste and understanding of what makes film good then) and Conan the Bonehead (which I also enjoyed) notwithstanding, the "D&D movie" to look out for is Lord of the Rings. (Let's also not forget the D&D cartoon and the TV movie starring Tom Hanks.) Since that provided much of the inspiration for the creation of the game (tho' Gygax mightn't admit it), can't we just call that the classic D&D film and be done? Jackson has proven again and again that he has the sheer force of imagination to conceive a project of this scope, and even when his effects have been cheesy they've served his stories well. And I reiterate, the imagery so far released from that set looks good. Very good. And I'm more than ready to look for flaws there, for LOTR is THE fantasy series and my fanboy loyalty is much stronger to that than to Gary Gygax's gaming vision. I guess New Line figured they'd try to satisfy some fanboy craving early since LOTR is still so far in the future. (Oh, and btw, it's not a question of budget for me. I appreciate low-budget genre films, but you know what, why not just get Dario Argento to shoot the thing if story and quality effects are not a concern? At least that guy has style. I believe the budget was some 27 million. Wha'd they do, spend it all on Jeremy's pay? And what's up with the Bruckheimer font in the trailer? Looks like the typeface from, say, Gone in 60 Seconds? C'mon, New Line, at least design us some scripty, runic kinda lettering to go with our fanboy fantasies!)
BAH by ColdSun	Oct 26th, 2000 02:32:50 PM
Fuck all you dumb ass fanboys. Pot calling the kettle black for sure. I thought the trailer looked cool. Hell no it isn't lord of the rings but does every fucking film need 100+ million budget to be a good popcorn flick? BITE ME. I am looking forward to this movie and nothing you fucking chumps can say will change that. This site has totally gone down the tubes with all you closed-minded punks who think you know what the average person wants to see in a fucking movie.
Guess who owes back taxes. by Thurber Mingus	Oct 26th, 2000 02:37:35 PM
Jeremy Irons musta spent a whole hella'va lot of money last year. His role in this dirty tampon of a movie is the cinematic equivalent of giving blow jobs to pay off crack dealers. And Justin Whalen. I can't get that image of him masturbating to Chesty Morgan films in "Serial Mom" outta my head. Friggin' nasty! By the by, about those SFX. On par with those illustrations the Art Institute sends you in the mail to see if you can draw the fraggin' turtle, or the pirate, or (in this case) the red dragon. Cause, apparently, if you can draw 'Drippy the Dragon', you may have a promising career ahead in computer graphics. I just wanna know, who looks at each of the finished CGI shots and goes, "Cool. Looks good. Strike up another hit for New Line. Let's move on to the laser beam magic fight." This movie seems to take a nod from that second Hercules film with Lou Ferigno and the laser shooting chrome robot thingees. Only, that film knew it's lot in life. Video purgatory!
Kickass effect, shitty movie. FUCK I'm tired of saying that abou by Jopapa	Oct 26th, 2000 02:37:40 PM

budget by kylerayner	Oct 26th, 2000 02:54:20 PM
FWIW, the original budget of LOTR was $130 million--for THREE MOVIES. OK, I understand it's gone up, but that still does not equate to over 100 million for a single movie. Yes, they made this possible by shooting in NZ, making the budget effectively three times what it would be in the U.S., but that's smart, to their credit not the other way 'round. And no, you needn't spend 100 million dollars for a movie to be good (quite the opposite--consider Armageddon, which I know Harry likes but really was crap, and The Devil's Own). But again, cf. my earlier post, if you're not gonna bother to spend enough money to get good effects (and they're just not up to par from what I saw in the trailer; are the people who say these effects are godd the same people who went out and saw Dragon-whatever-it-was with Sean Connery, and Spawn), at least hire a stylish director who can do something cool with (or despite) crappy effects. Or, dare I say it, get a good script? Story, people, story. Yes, I'll forgive crappy effects if the story is good, if the acting is good, if the direction is high quality. But to spend 27 million and come out with this? Y'all do whatever you want, think whatever you want, but at least use some common barometer to judge this material. The FX, at least as shown in this trailer, are waaaaay below par. FACT. They look like Spawn Version 1.1 (or maybe 2.0). Go LOOK at the LOTR stuff. Just dribbles, but it looks real, not like obvious CGI. I urge you. Go look. Don't just mouth off. If you think you'll like it 'cause you like cheese, there's nothing wrong with that and I won't berate you. Shit. I liked Showgirls, but I don't try to convince anyone that it displays any sort of high quality. I enjoy it for its cheese. I might enjoy renting this, too, but I'll still assert that it's crap--that's honesty, not hypocrisy. I sometimes like crap; sometimes I'm a snob. Reality, people. I loved Michael Crichton's Jurassic Park (novel, NOT movie), but I won't try to convince anyone that he's a great writer. Get it?
kyleraner - LOTR budget, stylish directors... by Wesley Snipes	Oct 26th, 2000 03:10:41 PM
The 3rd part of the LOTR trilogy has been financed to the tune of $160 million. Check out www.cinescape.com for the news. That's $160 million for ONE movie. Second, the reason why there isn't some known director on the DND movie is because ONE guy (the director) singlehandedly shepherded this movie through years (a decade?) of development hell until he finally lined up the financing and what not. $27 million may not sound like much, but just try to find someone to invest that in you when you are completely unknown and handling a near-dead property. As far as I'm concerned, if you go through that shit then you are completely entitled to do whatever you like with the property. At least we know the director's a fan. Also, the director's visuals look fine. Maybe not Peter Jackson insane-brilliant, but fine in that smooth and competent studio director way.
What were they thinking? by usagibrian	Oct 26th, 2000 03:26:31 PM
Sorry, they effects work did look like crap (the initial fly-by was more like the Dark Kingdom palace in POWER RANGERS LIGHTSPEED RESCUE than TPM). The script... who cares? It's a D&D movie; what'd you expect? But the whole tone... Not for the adults who grew up on the game (yeah, I played for years; wanna make something of it?), not for current players, not for kids... Who the hell is supposed to see this movie? It doesn't appeal to anyone.
i give up by kylerayner	Oct 26th, 2000 03:45:22 PM
The adherents of this film just aren't listening to me. Fine. Whatever. Wesley--I acknowledged that I might not know the most up-to-date budgets of LOTR. I did use the word "original" in referring to budget. Furthermore, I have made a movie; I did go through the financing; and it does suck. I understand very well what the costs are and what the difficulties are--how hard it is to make a film. Prolly better than most of the Talkbackers here. If the budget for the third movie has been raised, that's great, but I'm willing to bet that the footage shown so far was from before that increase, from the first film or two, not from the third. But who knows? (I sincerely doubt that New Line has thrown that $160 million into the pot already, but I will dutifully go look at the site you recommend.) But please don't tell me that it's okay to make shit because you worked on it for so long (next thing you're gonna tell me is that Charlie's Angels has to be good since so many writers worked on it). And again, like what you like, be not ashamed, but be HONEST. (Yes, I mean to yell with my all caps.) Crap is still crap even if "smart people" like it. As for someone's comment that we naysayers don't know what the average moviegoer likes, you're absolutely right. My criticisms are not reflections of the average moviegoer's opinion. They're my opinions. Mine. I didn't say it wouldn't do well (it might); I didn't say I won't watch it (in fact, I said I might likely rent it). I said only that it doesn't look very good. I don't care what they spent; I don't care who raised the money. It falls below my expectations and desires. Mine. If you guys think it's fine, great, but don't try to convince me that these are good SFX (or that the direction is "studio slick"--it's competent, but only that). Yes, maybe for the money, but that doesn't make them good. They prolly didn't spend too much on Spawn either, and sad to say, the cartoon was much cooler than the live-action version. But now I'm done. I'm over this argument. Have fun continuing the fight.
budget by kylerayner	Oct 26th, 2000 04:01:12 PM
I checked Snipes' site reference. German investors, according to Variety, are creating a $150M investment fund for the Return of the King. "Are creating," Snipes. This means it's not a done deal. They're building the budget as they go. Kudos to Saul Zaentz et al for continually working to increase the budget, for we all know this film will much more than make back its money. However, to represent that any of the footage we've seen has benefited from this future fund is just wrong. It has benefited, I'm sure, from lots of gratis/spec work from Weta, the visual FX company owned (co-owned?) by Mr. Jackson, but not from the money you referenced. ($150M not $160M, for whatever that's worth.) But I said I was done. So... 'Nuff said.
Damn these Formula Sci-Fi Movies by FrogsFatA$$	Oct 26th, 2000 04:07:08 PM
The Matrix, Empire Strikes Back, Willow ...I feel these were effective Sci-Fi/Fantasy movies. Why? Because they were DARK, and somewhat complex in plot/structure. ( I don't mean complex in the pure sense of the word, I just mean that a 2-year old can't figure out the ending within the first few minutes) WHY OH WHY does Hollywood constantly cock up perfectly good sci-fi/fantasy ideas with this trite, transparent malarky? I mean WHY FOR THE LOVE OF HUMANITY did they choose to go with the black, ebonics talking character? This Wayans character is the reincarnation of Jar-Jar Binks. "Meesa getta the Dragon???" Christ. I was not an avid D&D nut, but I do like RPG's like Final Fantasy, etc., and have always held D&D as being the pure well that all RPG's sprung from. And now, it has gone through the Hollywood garbage disposal and been turned into a greeny-yellow sack of monkey spunk. Hollywood thinks that they can generate money-making machines by following the same, tired formula every year: good idea + so-so plot + 5th Grader WiseCracks = $$$. Putting the less-than-spectacular effects on this trailer aside, I almost vomitted on my keyboard within the first 15 seconds of this laughable trailer. I had SERIOUS doubts months ago, as soon as I saw a Wayans attached to this film. Now, my worst fears have been confirmed: they copped out, and instead of providing the many D&D afficionados (whether they are into pure D&D or just light RPG playing) with a good, solid, dark film, we have the sad, overacting Jeremy Irons, along with a Peanut gallery cast, and a trivial plot (and yes, I too cannot fathom why that guy had blue lipstick). Movies with darker plots can still have SOME humor: eg. The Oracle scene in the Matrix, or C3PO's antics in Empire. Hell, even Willow had lighter moments. But why oh why throw in the annoying sidekick character and "street talk" humor into a movie set in an agrarian society? This movie will be the laughing stock of the Western world, as will all of its offspring, until Hollywood cuts its string of ridiculous formula films. Let us all say a prayer that Lord of the Rings will hold strong, and provide the fans with a solid fantasy film that doesn't feature a sidekick with a Jamaican-accent.
Listen up! by Starkath	Oct 26th, 2000 04:14:26 PM
Ok listen up! The point of going to see this flik isnt to Oooo and Ahhh over the lame FX or to be blown away by the cheesy dialog. Its so that the move industly dosent compleatly right off the entire concept of making a great fantasy show some day! Yeah yeah i know that LOTR opens next year, thats the one to realy watch for, not this one. Its bound to be pretty bad! Go see this one for the same reasons folks went to see x-men that hated comics. To show support for a particular type of movie. Fantasy in this case. Look at all the hype that is going into making superhero movies again! Grit your teeth and sit through one showing to get the ticked sales up and send a message to the studios that these types of films will make them cash. That way the next one will be given a higher budget and the effects/story/actors will be better. I to cringe at the though of this show bombing and no one going to see LOTR when it comes out. That would just be sad.
Vallium anyone? by LordZanthos	Oct 26th, 2000 04:19:22 PM
Take a pill people, and stop acting like one. If the movie was more physically based sfx, you would all be bitching about how the effects aren't wild enough, and now your bitching about how they aren't cool enough... idiots. Thank you lucky stars this got made, support it, and look forward to the time when better movies will be made in this genre because we supported this film. The reason no more of these movies are made is that so many asses like you guys wine and moan that it's not perfect, then refuse to see it, and the studios look at the Box-office receipts and say well, I guess there's no audience for it, we won't do one of these for a while, and then we
It hurts so much I can barely type.... by xtc	Oct 26th, 2000 04:24:03 PM
asfakm'bsfgbcvzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz Total shit......................xczg adfoign gadfo dafkong[lkfg.... B grade slop for geek masses........................ ..oh the pain...................great actors reduced to cardboard............adfgadjjj . Argh!!!!!!!!!bnxvjm vvvvvvhjcfbn7hu890o98y6tvr5r
one more comment by kylerayner	Oct 26th, 2000 04:31:38 PM
The success or failure of Dungeons and Dragons: The Movie will have no effect on the success or failure of LOTR. New Line did not greenlight LOTR because of the great success of fantasy films. They greenlighted it because they believe (thanks, Misters Shaye and DeLuca) that Peter Jackson and his team (his team, let's not forget his team) have the wherewithal (vision, talent, whatever) to pull it off, and--most importantly--because they know about the huge built-in audience. For millions around the world of all ages from 10 to 100, they won't even need to advertise the film--just tell us the date it opens and we will be there. LOTR is a much-loved, decades-old favorite of people ranging from fanboys to people who don't otherwise dig "fantasy" to serious scholars. It's canonical. It's fortunes will not be swayed by the D&D movie. We should all be able to agree on this, whether or not we agree on the quality of the D&D trailer. Think, people, that's all I ask.
Why does everybody think that saying "I'm a huge D&D fan" gives by xtc	Oct 26th, 2000 04:32:26 PM
And the next turd who drags out some lame analogy using common objects and D&D items needs a sever beating.
I SAW IT ON THE BIG SCREEN AND THE MOVIE TOO! by SANTOS	Oct 26th, 2000 05:23:12 PM
ON THE BIG SCREEN THE TRAILER LOOKS AMAZING. BETTER YET, I SAW THE WHOLE MOVIE YESTERDAY AND IT DEFINITELY 'KICKS ASS'! AND I AM NOT, I REPEAT NOT A D&D FAN. I DIDN'T EVEN KNOW IT. HARRY, I HAVE E-MAILED YOU MY REVIEW. PLEASE PUT IT UP. MOST OF THE 'TALK BACKERS' TO THIS ARE WRONG YOU KNOW...
This really doesn't look good... by BiPolarBear	Oct 26th, 2000 05:24:09 PM
Lucky for me, I often enjoy movies that suck. Now,some go too far, like the Urban Legends sequel.
Wrong target audience by kevkrom	Oct 26th, 2000 06:07:10 PM
I'll go against the crowd here and say that I actually liked the look of the movie. Yes, the CGI effects were noticable CGI effects, but that doesn't bother me. My problem is that the longer I watched the trailer, the worse the acting/dialouge/plot looked. I would assume that the target audience for a D&D movie would be people who grew up in the 80's (say, the 20-32 range or so) but that this movie seemed to be designed to appeal to, if anyone, the 12-15 crowd. Do today's kids really know D&D like those of us who started with the "Basic Set" oh, so many years ago? Why should they care? Seems stupid when making an obviously commercial film (this was never going to be "high art", after all) to pay no attention to your target audience.
cheesy, but good by ben murphy	Oct 26th, 2000 07:05:05 PM
cheesy isn't bad, some of the best movies in the world are corny as hell. this might be decent.
Just here to piont out the CGI by DeMoNiCMurray	Oct 26th, 2000 07:26:58 PM
You, know not everyone is as rich as Lucas. I know the Dragons looked like crap, but what can you really do with Dragons? In DragonHeart which was done by ILM looked about the same as they did in these dragons. Now, maybe I'm wrong, but if you think the dragons here were not even close to DragonHeart please post back and tell me why. I haven't seen the movie for a while so point it out to me. One thing I don't get it is why does parts of it seem like a comedy. I'd rather have some dark premise on the whole story. What can you expect with Marlin Waynes in it. For everyone that's pointing out the blue lipstick, Who CARES!? Suddenly the movie is based off the color of your lips? I don't really care. Does anyone not get enough out of their movies that blue lipstick and secure a movie's fate of success or failer? Some of the CGI was good. Like that wand that controls the red dragons. I plan to see the movie, but not with great expectations. The beginning reminds me too much of Episode 1. Anyways, I bet the movie will suck, but hey, I was suprised the X-Men movie was good.
Hmmmmmm Part 2 by Grimjack99	Oct 26th, 2000 07:36:05 PM
There's a fair number of people in this talk back who want the whiners and nay-sayers (of whom I am one) to quit their collective whining and do something meaningful with their lives. To those people I say: "UP THINE! AND THE HORSE THOU RODST IN ON!" If we wanna bitch and moan, then that's our right as Americans to do so. You want the people whom you don't like to be quiet and not bother you? Then move to a country where human rights aren't quite so prevalent and see how well you fit in. Until then, I say D&D is gonna blow ropey goat chunks, Long Live LOTR, and Brian Singer better DAMN well direct X-Men 2 and 3! 'NUFF SAID!
to HELL with the CGI by praetorian	Oct 26th, 2000 07:42:58 PM
the CGI looks like shit yes... but ill get past that for now.. ive had my rant about the CGI... screw it... and you know what else...screw the lame ass little scrawny dweeby dawson's creek looking nerd goober WEAKLING... that little pathetic swinging a sword was so laughable.... along with the insane stupid effects... the lines in the trailer from the hero and his trademark black sidekick... were so friggin stupid.... i dont care to go see this cause it all sounds so stupid.. marlon wayans gets on my damned nerves... you think i wanna sit through an hour and a half 1-800-callATT commercial with dragons?? man hell no...i dont like the trailer.. cause of the stupid CGI and the stupid ACTING.... im not gonna go see this and im gonna tel all my friends how stupid this shit looked.. can you deal with that... im not gonna pay 6 dollars to see this low standard industry garbage.. budget or not.... i dont care about the damned LOTR budget... i love the books... the BOOKS were phenominal...thats why i wanna see LOTR.. not cause of the stupid friggin budget. i could care less how much it costs.. i love the books and the teaser footage looks and sounds really col to me... IF IT LOOKS LIKE SHIT AND IT SOUNDS LIKE SHIT..............WELL THEN IT MUST BE SHIT...IMAGAIN THAT.
to HELL with the CGI by praetorian	Oct 26th, 2000 07:42:58 PM
the CGI looks like shit yes... but ill get past that for now.. ive had my rant about the CGI... screw it... and you know what else...screw the lame ass little scrawny dweeby dawson's creek looking nerd goober WEAKLING... that little pathetic swinging a sword was so laughable.... along with the insane stupid effects... the lines in the trailer from the hero and his trademark black sidekick... were so friggin stupid.... i dont care to go see this cause it all sounds so stupid.. marlon wayans gets on my damned nerves... you think i wanna sit through an hour and a half 1-800-callATT commercial with dragons?? man hell no...i dont like the trailer.. cause of the stupid CGI and the stupid ACTING.... im not gonna go see this and im gonna tel all my friends how stupid this shit looked.. can you deal with that... im not gonna pay 6 dollars to see this low standard industry garbage.. budget or not.... i dont care about the damned LOTR budget... i love the books... the BOOKS were phenominal...thats why i wanna see LOTR.. not cause of the stupid friggin budget. i could care less how much it costs.. i love the books and the teaser footage looks and sounds really col to me... IF IT LOOKS LIKE SHIT AND IT SOUNDS LIKE SHIT..............WELL THEN IT MUST BE SHIT...IMAGAIN THAT.
sorry bout the double post by praetorian	Oct 26th, 2000 07:45:37 PM
and the crappy spelling... this movie is gonna suck.... tey aint gettin my money. to hell with them.. HAHAAAAA wimpy hero dork with a nerdy annoying sidekick.... give me a huge brute muscleed barbarian that slices heads off with a broad axe... NOW THATS A MOVIE!!!!!!! lame weak ass shit.
Sigh, this aint no Dragonslayer. by Integra	Oct 26th, 2000 08:03:16 PM
Im so sick of "fun" fantasy movies. You need to take the material seriously, not wink at the audience. Look at what boorman did with Excalibur, he treated the material with respect, and it payed off (IMHO). This looks pretty bad. I used to play D&D alot, and what made it so fascinating and interesting was that I played with incredible Dungeon Masters who were great storytellers. The small details made it great. This seems to go for brute force. Ill stick to Dragonslayer. Great movie, incredible score by alex north. SFX that STILL look great. I want realism in my dragons. You cant tell me these look better then the one in dragonslayer did. Dragonslayer mixed humor with a serious theme extremely well. Anyone know anything about "Reign of Fire"? Its a disney movie about dragons. Rob bowman and christian bale i think.
WHAT A FANTASTIC LOOKING COMPUTER GAME!!!!! by wash	Oct 26th, 2000 08:19:02 PM
oh, it's a movie? Never mind.
whoa..... christian bale in a dragon movie? by praetorian	Oct 26th, 2000 08:22:02 PM
Chrisitn Bale.. the american psycho himself in a dragon flick. that sounds kind of interesting. "Do you like Huey Lewis and the news?"
The thing that insults me most about this trailer... (or, "I rea by LlGHTST0RMER	Oct 26th, 2000 09:09:55 PM
...is that the Hollywood honchos just can't seem to get it out of their collective (empty) head that if a movie is supposed to appeal to a young audience, it needs "representatives" of its demographic. Case in point: The two teenagers that get "warped" into this alternate dimension to obviously become the two great heros that save this world. "It'll be great! It'll be Bill and Ted meet Lord of the Rings!!" Well, FUCK THAT. How good would Star Wars be if Luke Skywalker was some 1977 beach dude who magically ended up in a galaxy far, far away? Shit. If you want to make a dungeons and dragons movie, make one. But keep in mind the thing that works BEST about fantasy movies is the FANTASY part. It's so less intellectually taxing to imagine for two hours that wondrous things are happening in another place in another dimension than believeing for one minute that two kids from Van Nuys or wherever the fuck can pool together all their resources and knowledge from a lifetime of playing video games, and save ANY world. PLEASE don't ruin any more possibly great movies by throwing in the MTV-executive-embraced theory that nobody under the age of 25 wants to see a film unless the protagonist is on loan from Dawson's Creek. I swear. Other than that, in my opinion, the trailer looks spectacular! I will see this movie --even though I have already built up this prejudice-- because I foolishly keep this silly hope that not EVERY special effects film is complete horseshit, even though nothing in this industry is more certain than that for every "Matrix," there are ten "Armageddon"s. For every ounce of "X-Men," there is a barrel of "Lost In Space". Every movie out of Hollywood could be good, but the vast majority gets fucked by the "brilliant, creative minds" in the studios. Guys, stick to your stocks. Leave the creative stuff to the guys with talent. Lightstormer OUT.
Comparisons by Eyegore	Oct 26th, 2000 09:35:02 PM
I really liked the trailer. I think this movie might compare to Conan the Barbarian like a pack of pokemon cards to a deck of many things. Remember that giant mechanical snake? You guys would have ripped on that movie unmercifully just for that, pronouncing it the worst peice of crap since Kull the Conquerer. You guys are just morons. Stick to reviewing gay porn flicks, which I'm sure most of you can appreciate.
I've Just watched the trailer a 2nd Time by FrogsFatA$$	Oct 26th, 2000 09:53:02 PM
And I noticed one thing. The two things that make this movie stink worse than a unkept case of horse vaginosis are the following: 1) Marlon Wayans: has he even made a movie since "'Mo Money"? 2) The Part where it shows some snake like protrusions coming out of 'ol Blue Lips' head If you watch the trailer closely, I honestly think you can see Marlon Wayans laughing at us: he knows he is fucking this movie up! And the CGI with blue lips' head...I think I could have rendered it better on my Commodore 64 back when I actually played D&D. And to address some earlier comments about "supporting the Genre by seeing the movie"....EAT SHIT! I am not going to pay a fucking dime for this ratty-ass, Harry Potter, fun bag-o-tricks rendition of a classic game. Instead of supporting a movie that stinks like a trucker's 'roid cushion, DONT FUCKING SEE IT. It makes me sick to see these stinkers make huge box office dollars (a la "Scary Movie"....did you fucking see that piece of shit!) Fuck saving the genre, see a movie if it is quality, and has some thought put into it. And one last note, why the fuck do people post in here telling people to "get a life" and stop flaming the movies....WHY ARE YOU EVEN READING/POSTING IN HERE THEN? Who has less of a life, the people who critique a movie to death or those that take the time to read it all and tell people to stop? BTW-That black chick near the end of the trailer is hot! Oh, and some one needs to stop Jeremy Irons and John Malkovich (yes I know he isn't in this, but his acting is exactly the same...overdone) from making movies.
The Princess Bride and fantasy movies by JMYoda	Oct 26th, 2000 10:47:16 PM
Has Harry been celebrating Halloween early by breaking into his stash of Monster hash? Comparing this DND movie to "The Princess Bride" is like comparing Power Rangers to Star Wars. As for Fantasy movies...There's been some great ones dating back to the 20s when Fritz Lang did those two awesome silent-sra "Nibelungen" movies based on German mythology. (The scene where Siegfried bathes in Dragon blood ALONE is worth the price of admission) Some of my favs are "Willow" "Labyrinth" "The Dark Crystal" and "Dragonheart" (but not the lousy made-for-video psudeo-sequel)... Not to mention Star Wars which is just Fantasy in a Sci-Fi setting. Sure all those films had huge budgets butr a lack of a huge budget is no defense for a movie being crap. I mean look back in the 50s when there where some GREAT B-movies... Like "Earth versus the Flying Saucers"... I movie doesn't need a huge budget to be good... It can even have killer effects... shit if you have great animators they could do awesome effects on a PC with 3D Studio. Plus acting, directing and storyline are what REALLY make a movie and none of those cost a lot of money, it just takes talent. Unfortunately these people say "ah crap it's low-budget so it doesn't hafta be good". When filmmakers of B movies AND A-movies return to storytelling then we'll see some good fantasy flicks again.. LOTR and Episode 2 may be the ones to show these lame no-talent filmakers how to make a kick-ass fantasy movie.
Dear God No by FrogsFatA$$	Oct 26th, 2000 11:33:51 PM
Please refrain from using words like "phat", "the bomb", "haters", "y'all" ... and especially "ch'all" in the talk back forums unless you are Eminem, Dr. Dre or are "Packing a Nine". You lose all credibility. BTW-Agree with JMYoda, the comparison to Princess Pride was inexcusable. Is Harry's weight creating a chemical imbalance in his head? Harry...lay off the cheap crack! This movie is going to smell worse than my hairy bean bag!
sucks my left nut by returntoOZ	Oct 26th, 2000 11:46:41 PM
ACK!!!!!!!!! Now i have to go kill myself after seeing that. ummm maybe not. Im going to go read some books for the next 1000 years since movies totaly suck now a days. Yes, back to the Darksword Trillogy and the Wheel of Time series. And yes the LOTR movies WILL SUCK!! and so will everything else coming out of hollywood until this sorry ass generation of movie makers burn in hell THIS IS TO THE PEOPLE THAT MADE THIS ATTROCIOUS MOVIE FUCK YOU!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
The movie will suck but what won't? by DeMoNiCMurray	Oct 27th, 2000 12:11:15 AM
Yes, I can tell the movie will suck. I think everyone has pointed that out, but are there any good movies that don't suck? They're either semi-good or suck. There are only a few exceptions like Magnolia, but many poeple thought that sucked even though they are wrong, and the movies nominated at the last Academy Awards. Lately I have no idea what is going on in the movie business. It just seems like everyone is just putting out this crap. Now, since the success of the X-Men movie they plan to make these other comic movies, and I bet you they will totally suck unless compitent people who know what the hell they are doing with the story and characters are involved. Lately, that's not happening. So sure the trailer sucks and the story looks like it's a crap/comedy/fantasy, but it's all about the money these days, right?
Praetorian - Reign of fire - dragon movie being made by Integra	Oct 27th, 2000 12:45:44 AM
http://us.imdb.com/Details?025 3556 I read a blurb somewhere talking about it have a budget of around 60 mil. If they treat the subject matter seriously, without chincy one liners maybe it will work.
I'm a bearded 19 year old with glasses too ! But does anyone giv by kojiro	Oct 27th, 2000 12:47:20 AM
I don't know. It didn't look too bad to me. Not good, but if you were expecting that then quite frankly you're a deluded little fool. It'll be entertaining at least. Two points in it's favor though: Thora Birch and Jeremy Irons. The /real/ beautiful one from American Beauty and the guy from Quest of the Delta Knights. Ahh, gods I loved MST3k. Oh, by the by, can we stop the stereotyping? Obviously DnD'ers get out of the basement, we've all seen them in their shops at the malls. Come on, a little objectivity is all I'm asking for here.
My 2 cents worth... by tedcwilliams	Oct 27th, 2000 01:05:03 AM
Ok, at first this film sounded like a good idea, for there hadn't been any real good fantacy/midevil films in quite some time. Then I saw the trailer, the first time without sound (the comp. had bad speakers). It looked nice, but the cast seemed quite young and quite contemparay. This scared me. Finally, I saw the trailer with the sound. Besides hearing "Carmen" in the background, I cringed with great distress. Wow, is the dialoge cliche riddled. Maybe the effects will over-ride the bad dialogue. Maybe Jeremy Irons will be able to salvage this film. I'm quite concerend, though, for this may be a disastorous film. Visit www.tedcwilliams.com
Okay, okay, I know...so Quest was actually David Warner by kojiro	Oct 27th, 2000 01:15:51 AM
But c'mon...in dim lighting...don't tell me you couldn't see it.
Go see D&D so Dragonlance gets made by -Jughead-	Oct 27th, 2000 02:56:45 AM
When I first heard that they were making a Dungeons and Dragons movie, I was quite excited. Then I heard a script for the Weis/Hickman Dragonlance trilogy (NY Times Bestsellers, among the most highly credited fantasy series ever, along with the likes of Tolkien and Robert Jordan) was finished was being proposed to several movie companies. I nearly gizzed. Now, after seeing this trailer (which, I might add, was a disappointment to me), I fear for Dragonlance. It is quite known that the making of Dragonlance is dependant upon the success of Dungeons & Dragons. If you are a fiction fan and haven't read the Dragonlance trilogy (Dragons of Autumn Twilight, Dragons of Winter Night, Dragons of Spring Dawning), I highly recommend them. And after reading them, you will be so drawn to support the making of a Dragonlance movie that you will do anything...even if it requires you to sit through 1.5 hours of below par CG and cheesy quips by Wayans, just so that movie-makers will see that there is an audience for Fantasy movies that needs to be tapped.
quotes from the talkback by sjmaatta	Oct 27th, 2000 03:43:23 AM
Man, talkbacker are a fun bunch. DND's so bad that... "Now I REALLY can't wait for the LEGEND Special Edition DVD to come out. Jeeez. ". It compares to... "Look at what boorman did with Excalibur, he treated the material with respect, and it payed off (IMHO)"; "Some of my favs are
demogoblin by kylerayner	Oct 27th, 2000 08:54:10 AM
Boy, that was a convincing, well thought-out argument, demo. You've convinced that I'm ridiculous. I will know change my ways.
demogoblin by kylerayner	Oct 27th, 2000 09:39:42 AM
Golly, Demo, that argument was very well reasoned and clearly thought out. Now I'm utterly convinced that I'm a ridiculous person and I am headed to the Mayo Clinic for a personality transplant. Ah, the error of my ways...
Correction to your Godzilla Point by FrogsFatA$$	Oct 27th, 2000 10:30:57 AM
I think someone needs to pay more attention in finance class. You claim Godzilla "netted" $200 Million....I am not even sure where you found that number. It "grossed" $136 Million, which, minus its operating budget of $125 Million, gives it a "net" of $11 Million. When you factor various other costs into this, the amount is a fucking FLOP of a summer blockbuster. If you are going to chime in on this forum with the rest of us geeks, get your figures and accounting straight!
Correction to your Godzilla Point by FrogsFatA$$	Oct 27th, 2000 10:32:00 AM
I think someone needs to pay more attention in finance class. You claim Godzilla "netted" $200 Million....I am not even sure where you found that number. It "grossed" $136 Million, which, minus its operating budget of $125 Million, gives it a "net" of $11 Million. When you factor various other costs into this, the amount is a fucking FLOP of a summer blockbuster. If you are going to chime in on this forum with the rest of us geeks, get your figures and accounting straight!
DnD Losers by Mowglikat	Oct 27th, 2000 12:02:59 PM
Just for the record, the people who grew up playing D & D are now (on the average) Computer geeks making large amounts of money...money that they are likely to spend on a D & D movie. Having been one of those geeks, and having some money to spend, I HAVE to support this movie, even if it sucks, because the movie company will not be listening to anything but my wallet. The group of people who played D&D back in the day, are now the voting consumer population. Deal with it. Get a Helmet.
Gimme a break, every genre fan will eventually see this film... by Fatal Discharge	Oct 27th, 2000 04:25:26 PM
...whether it's in theatres or on video or cable. Why do people insist on hoping that genre stuff fails because "it looks crappy" when the result of hi-profile genre failures makes the studios not want to make more of them. And people who keep making dumb statements without knowing the facts, but then this IS the internet, should just shut up. New Line was NOT behind the making of this film. It was independently funded and New Line bought the distribution rights for "something over $5 million" which means there is no way the studio will lose money on this. As for Marlon Wayans, he's gotten some good reviews for a more serious performance in Requiem For A Dream so don't just put down the guy as being a complete bozo without knowing everything he's done.
Go what myself? by Street2323	Oct 27th, 2000 04:58:20 PM
Ok so the trailer isnt that great. But the fact is you kids (and yes I'm talking about you, the one that lives at home with mommy and daddy, gets dropped off at the mall on saturday night, and runs home after the movie so he can post his thoughts for all his ignorant pre-pubescent friends to read how he thinks somehow he knows exactly what everyone in the country wants to see at the movies)you kids just want to bitch. Plain and simple. For the love of god you remind me of my wife! Just whine, whine, whine! I wish the CGI looked better, and yes I wish Marlon wasn't in it (although if you've ever played AD&D,which I doubt most of you have since it's probably to intricate for you dumbfucks to figure out, you'll realize that most thief characters are the "Comic relief" of the adventure parties)and yes I'm excited about LOTR. But does that mean I should trash this film 3 fucking months before it comes out? NO! Why? Because I'm not that stupid. The verdict is this, the trailer has high points and low points but thats why it's a trailer. As a true film & AD&D fan I'll reserve judgement until I see the movie. I mean I didn't trash the 3 Doors Down debut album until after it came out (well that really doesn't count because I'm from the same city as they are and I already knew they're music was weak) even though that CD turned out horrible. The fact is Studios know just like record companies know that if you package something with enough bows and ribbons it doesn't matter if the product content is crap, people will buy it. The success of the backstreet boys and Brittany Spears proves that point. So for one, realize that we live in a society where we are brainwashed from birth by T.V. and Big Business to want what they give us. My advice to you is to free your mind of the clutter and realize that you shouldn't judge a movie by the trailer released 3 months prior to opening night! After all, if you could direct half as good as you bitch you might get somewhere in life. As it stands now you'll end up spending your weekend evenings with Mary Palm and her five sisters. Oh and to the guy that said for us to all go "fuck ourselves" No Thanks my wife handles that fine. But seeing as how you'll never get a date much less a gratifying sexual encounter with another consenting human, you can take your own advice. .
It may be... by Lobanhaki	Oct 27th, 2000 09:18:21 PM
The trailer more than the movie. Or it maybe that Courtney Solomon is not as in-control of the art of fantasy filmmaking as he thought. All people free and equal is not that eloquent of a line- It's too easy and it kind of trips up the sense of parallel reality that is so essential to Sci-Fi and fantasy. That's not to say the sentiment shouldn't be put forward, but merely that it should wear the clothes of it's own world, and not be so simply stated. According to an accompanying document (the directors own explanation of the trailer on the same page) It was a line spoken in another scene. With that in mind, I would say that he should have left it there and used a line that hits it obliquely instead. Generally, I think the city shots are mostly swell, but the dragons need a more accurately scaled(as in size), less plastic appearance. My general impression is that this isn't going to be Arthur Miller meets Conan the Barbarian. I was hoping for better, but then we have Lord of the Rings for that. I'm not saying that this is going to be a bad film, but I hope Profion (Jeremy Irons) is not played constantly at the pitch he is in the preview, and I hope that the dialogue is not as hideous as some of the words I picked up in the movie. I also think having That Wayans guy around was not that smart, and that the other guy had better pull something out of his hat too. Still, I have seen movies that turned out to be better than their preceding trailers, and hopefully this is one of them. *******************Oh, off the subject, I suggest that everybody goes to see PAY IT FORWARD, and see it with an open mind. Harry, did you see this movie? I haven't seen your review.
Whiners, bashers and weenies by Reverendz	Oct 28th, 2000 12:05:23 AM
By many of ya'll standards of special f/x the Harryhausen movies would be utter shite, " I mean, come on, it's soooo obvious those skeletons are made of clay, and look at how fake that dragon moves,"etc..ad nauseum. Have you never heard of a B movie? I for one am thrilled that this movie was made and is actually getting released. Stuck up bunch of film snobs you can all yerselves. People act as if Hollywood owes us something and that every movie should be epic and meaningful or even just have a good story, or that the f/x must be amazing. What happened to "I want to watch an 80 foot octopus trash the golden gate bridge"? Monster movies and low budget fantasy, believe it or not, does have an audience. This'll be the type of film that some kid'll watch one saturday afternoon and decide "hey I wanna do that for a living". Look at what spielberg and lucas grew up watching: cheesy serials and sci-fi schlock. Look where they are now. Lighten up.
Here Here by Eyegore	Oct 28th, 2000 01:09:58 AM
You tell em Boufont.
Here Here by Eyegore	Oct 28th, 2000 01:10:13 AM
You tell em Boufont.
Ah... for christ's sake... by Wayward99	Oct 28th, 2000 01:49:06 AM
What the hell is this??? Alright, first off, why the hell does D&D HAVE to be cheesy? I mean, YOU are responsible for the friggin plot- so if it sucks, its YOUR fault. In this case its the directors fault. A good movie, no matter what genre has to take its subject matter seriously- if it doesn't who the hell will? I mean Ive made campaigns using the D&D system, and if I had mentioned anything even remotely sounding like "The Rod of Red Dragon Control", I would have been laughed at, and then found myself without any players. What an embarrasment.
Wonderful-It appears we will have some Dawson's Creek pretty-boy by ARCTURUS	Oct 28th, 2000 09:45:51 PM
I hope I'm wrong but this trailer is not a good sign. actually, this movie being in the can for awhile was a bad enough sign. Still, Harry, based on the trailer, how can you praise a movie like this. What a gross perversion of a name-brand with unlimited potential! Why do I get the feeling we will be seeing just another lame Sword-n-Sorcery flick with a popular monicker? This is horrible! A much better, and more satisfying movie could have been attempted. Why not have a story revolving around Warduke and Strongheart and all those classic characters from the 70's-80's D&D merchandising line? Or just as good, bring back those great characters from the 1980's animated series into a live-action movie! As to the comments in my subject line, am I right or am I right? I know my Wayans brothers comments may irritate some of you, but i think i'm right here. I'm sick of studios sticking in a soul-brother character to be the mentor to a bunch of clueless white folk, and comic relief for the audience. What's wrong with having a kick-butt Black dude in a villainous role ala Darth Vader here? Anything but the same old garbage stereotype. You'll no doubt agree with my analysis of the Dawson's Creek School of acting wanna be California pretty boy lead though. And as far as Jeremy Irons goes, he's a wonderful actor, but from the looks of it, he'll be WAY over the top in this movie. The CGI definitely could use some work...those dragons, with exceptions, look fake. AND those red dragons better be breathing fire only and be evil according to D&D tradition too.
It's a proven fact that people who feel a need to bash and insul by JMYoda	Oct 29th, 2000 01:03:02 AM
Hehehehehe
mmmm.. by Cremlian	Oct 29th, 2000 02:11:59 PM
Don't people watch movies to have fun anymore. The movie from the Trailer looks like it will be a fun movie. Why has everyone got so serious about entertianment. Army of Darkness wasn't serious and if you saw a trailer for that you would be saying how stupid that is. When I saw the trailer I though wow this is going to be a cool movie. Just to see some mage throw a fireball or a magic missile is enough for me to watch in in the theater two or three times and get the DVD.. Who cares if it has a Wayne brother or overacting. Since when did it matter. Sit down and become a kid again!

Talkbacks

Badass DUNGEONS AND DRAGONS Trailer Big Clear and Ready For You To Swallow!!!

User login

Quick Talkback

Talkbacks