Talk:Dungeons & Dragons (film)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is part of WikiProject Films, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to films and film characters on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
Start
This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale.
Unknown
This article has not been rated on the importance assessment scale.

"...starting a renaissance in role-playing games which as of this writing (early 2006) has not ended."

I struck this line. It is debatable as to whether or not the "renaissance" in role playing games has ended, or whether it has now suffered a glut identical to the conditions which created the opportunity for Wizards to launch a new edition of the game with streamlined supplements in the first place.

Regardless, the point of a renaissance in RPG games was certainly not caused by the film, and any debate on that point would be better served in an entry on role-playing games, or in Dungeons and Dragons the game.

[edit] Was it based on Dungeons and Dragons?

The movie was NOT based on Dungeons and Dragons, at least, not any more than any other swords and sorcery fare - and as the entry indicates - this was part of the problem.

In addition to the game, there are well known settings and characters within the game, proper, as well as literally shelves of novels following the adventures of characters within them. None of these were referenced within the film. Moreover, director Courtney Solomon says on the DVD commentary that he specifically avoided mentioning known Dungeons and Dragons content (on Gary Gygax's advice).

Is there a way to introduce the film, acknowledging that it was "intended" to be based on Dungeons and Dragons, without actually indicating that they were successful in this endeavor?

67.69.15.154 18:39, 24 January 2006 (UTC)Nephandus

  • If they didn't even try to base it on D&D, then the correct way to introduce it would be as an appalling script for a generic fantasy movie that was rubberstamped with a big name. --Agamemnon2 06:13, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
I hadn't seen this comment at the time, but that's exactly what I did in early May. It would be nice to add some sort of source, though I think I can get away with the wording I chose - I think a "reasonable adult without specialized knowledge", or however the standard in the verifiability policy is worded, would come to the conclusion I wrote into the article if they saw the movie and compared it to the core rulebooks. PurplePlatypus 09:22, 9 June 2006 (UTC)