Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
Good CGI that is inventive and not used to obfuscate the lack of story/character/ideas... is good. But that bear transformation in the preview? That's uninspired twaddle and looks like every other lazy CGI transformation scene. Same with the swooping dragon, might as well be a giant pidgeon.Ugh, I’ll take Harryhausen any day over CGI.
I think it looks okay, but it is a bit flat by today’s standards.Good CGI that is inventive and not used to obfuscate the lack of story/character/ideas... is good. But that bear transformation in the preview? That's uninspired twaddle and looks like every other lazy CGI transformation scene. Same with the swooping dragon, might as well be a giant pidgeon.
I'm less about the technical quality than how it is used... like, a high quality dragon that looks just like every other CGI dragon... vs. something... different... moves different... does something different.So yeah it does feel like a bit of a step back in that respect.
Yes more Michael Hutchence looking Dwarves needed to steal away Elven maidens heh hehNot every fantasy movie can be a masterpiece like The Hobbit films.
I thought the boiling tar vomit was pretty different.I'm less about the technical quality than how it is used... like, a high quality dragon that looks just like every other CGI dragon... vs. something... different... moves different... does something different.
Yes, that was definitely referencing D&D dragons. I liked it too.I thought the boiling tar vomit was pretty different.
It's a black dragon. Their breath weapon is acid. I thought that was actually a pretty good attempt to realistically represent acid breath.I thought the boiling tar vomit was pretty different.
Pffft.... should've asked me after visiting one Croatian and one Greek restaurant in the same day.It's a black dragon. Their breath weapon is acid. I thought that was actually a pretty good attempt to realistically represent acid breath.
Hugh Grant is the villain right? While Rogues make a crucial part of D&D parties, Middle-Aged Caucasian British man is intrinsically Hollywood villain material.
Thieves not Rogues (That minor change warmed my cold heart although it might just be a fake out and they call them rogues in the movie)Hugh Grant is the villain right? While Rogues make a crucial part of D&D parties, Middle-Aged Caucasian British man is intrinsically Hollywood villain material.
Ok seriously, what would make you hopeful for a D&D movie? What do you want to see?
I never cared for Grant as a lead in romcoms but he plays slimy pricks really well.
And then there's this -
Yes, that really is Hugh Grant. See also: Peter Capaldi and Amanda Donohoe.
In Paddington 2 he is just golden.I never cared for Grant as a lead in romcoms but he plays slimy pricks really well.
I never cared for Grant as a lead in romcoms but he plays slimy pricks really well.
OO-AAAH!Yes. I want Kender in the movie and I want Al Pacino to play the Kender.
OO-AAAH!
Is that still true? I mean not sure 15-25 yr old males are still the largest segment of the moving going audience. Pay per view, generational demographics and streaming seem to all be factors shifting the absolute truism of 15-25 yr old males being the largest movie segment.So one thing to point out. Unless you are a 15-25 year old male. You are basically never the target audience of Hollywood.
Is that still true? I mean not sure 15-25 yr old males are still the largest segment of the moving going audience. Pay per view, generational demographics and streaming seem to all be factors shifting the absolute truism of 15-25 yr old males being the largest movie segment.
This article at https://movio.co/blog/how-moviegoer-data-benchmarks-and-targeting-has-shifted-for-2022/ says the pre-pandemic majority demographic was Males 25-54 and now its Males 15-34. Not sure how legit the link is. They are advertising their analytics services. The Top Gun sequel is likely an anomaly. It's got action movie chops, 80's nostalgia, A high likelihood of scantily clad men, and veterans and Active duty military. It's got a very unique type of broad appeal and was more of a cultural event for a lot of different groups of people.When it comes to theatres, the major studios are definitely focused on that demo still, non-blockbuster film genres are strictly for streaming and the shrinking arthouse circuit.
The Top Gun sequel did gangbusters and appealed to a wider than usual demo but I doubt the studios will bother to learn anything from that.
And the older demographic no longer keep up with new movies because they've learnt they so rarely appeal to them.This article at https://movio.co/blog/how-moviegoer-data-benchmarks-and-targeting-has-shifted-for-2022/ says the pre-pandemic majority demographic was Males 25-54 and now its Males 15-34. Not sure how legit the link is. They are advertising their analytics services. The Top Gun sequel is likely an anomaly. It's got action movie chops, 80's nostalgia, A high likelihood of scantily clad men, and veterans and Active duty military. It's got a very unique type of broad appeal and was more of a cultural event for a lot of different groups of people.
My uneducated guess is that there are 2 things contributing to the younger age demographic. 1) It's illegal to just be a teenager in public, So you and your friends go and see a movie together to get out of the house that you were trapped in for 2 years. 2) The older demographic invested in their home entertainment systems, have newborns, and more movies are releasing direct to streaming, making that home system even more valuable.
I mean there is no question the community is it’s own worst enemy
I would say more of a positive feedback loop rather than self-fulfilling prophecy. The movies aiming a little bit younger are doing better, so more resources are poured into those versus the ones aimed at an older demographic. Also, the younger demographic is more likely to spend money on merchandising (Where the real money for the movie comes from). They are more likely to buy t-shirts, posters, and lumps of plastic in volumes that matter.And the older demographic no longer keep up with new movies because they've learnt they so rarely appeal to them.
There's an element of self-fulfilling prophecy to all of this.
"What will the target audience think?'
And rightly so gamers are not only a small piece of the audience but likely to be critical no matter what."What will the target audience think?'
Does anything think that gamers are the target audience for this? I'm not saying gamers won't like it, but let's be real. Hollywood is targeting people that have heard about D&D on Stranger Things and The Big Bang Theory more than people that play the game.
And that's OK, because one thing I have learned from RPG forums over the past decade is that too many gamers are asocial fuckwits (present company excluded)." Hollywood is targeting people that have heard about D&D on Stranger Things and The Big Bang Theory more than people that play the game.
This is a fan movie though. They're not targetting gamers they're targetting D&D fans.And rightly so gamers are not only a small piece of the audience but likely to be critical no matter what.
I think in particular the crowd that are regular D&D Beyond users who follow Critical Role etc that's probably the main target audience here, as well as the crowd that wants to see more things like MCU/Guardians/Thor etc (they're not mutually exclusive)This is a fan movie though. They're not targetting gamers they're targetting D&D fans.
D&D fans don't tend to be particulaly critical, the fandom is still too new (or at least the current wave, which is what counts - just go have a look at Enworld).
The more recent Hollywood strategy seems to be one of trying to appeal to fans in order to create buzz around a movie in the hope that this helps them appeal to non-fans too (in contrast to the old strategy of guttng fan works in the hope of mass apeal and generating big fan backlash).