Lets say it would be a live-action movie, and the budget would be on the level of lord of the rings. The movie would star The Iconic heroes.
Who you think would be a good actor for the individual iconics?
What could the movie be about?
Would you go watch it? Cuz I surely would!
|
A fun topic that's been covered a few times.
I'd like to see Gary Oldman and Jennifer Jason Leigh type actors over the top A-listers.
I'd prefer if the film was more about pulp adventure based around the pathfinder society than use an adventure path.
There is a good chance I'd watch it no matter how it turns out, but would probably hate it if JJ Abrhams was the director (I dislike his style)
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
You'll take JJ Abrhams and you'll like it or else you get Michael bay!
I think they should cast unknown actors as the iconics, as these roles could turn these unknowns into stars. I would use existing stars for the villains or featured non-iconics since it might be tough to get most stars to agree to a multiple movie contract.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
There has yet to be a game based movie... especially a movie incorprating the title of a game, that did not suck.
Sadly I agree with Moonrunner, but like the dream of flight, you cannot succeed without a few crashes.
My knowledge of actors is dismal at best, and I'd be hesitent to have it follow an adventure path (movie should have "Spoilers" written on the poster if they do). But if they do, they should make the first movie based off an adventure path whose beginning can stand alone without a sequel and then create the rest of the movies depending on how well it does. Sadly, not many have this beginning element.
As a followup question, where in Golarion would be the best place(s) for the film to be based on? What nation or territory is interesting enough to stand out but familiar enough to relate to larger audiences? Personaly I'd say Cheliax or Varisia, as Absolom would involve too much CGI cityscape (or outrageous sets).
Also which Iconics? The usual lineup for the comics could work well, but maybe the movies will follow an entirely different lineup of Iconics. Either way, I'd limit the number to 6 or so as to not crowd up the screen or story with names and subplots.
There has yet to be a game based movie... especially a movie incorprating the title of a game, that did not suck.
Mortal Kombat was hardly high art but it was fun to watch while incorporating familiar elements of the game which is about all you would expect from a game based movie.
But yes, for the most part most game based movies were not worth the time spent watching and actually charging people money for the privilege is salt in the wound.
I think Pathfinder might have a better chance than most other game systems of creating a game based movie that does not suck. They have already shown that they can create high quality fiction (up to and including novel series) in the setting, so they have more to work with than most games do.
The only question is whether they are better off using a large ensemble cast of iconics or a smaller cast with better established backgrounds (such as Varian and Radovan, for example). I think the latter would probably work better.
There has yet to be a game based movie... especially a movie incorprating the title of a game, that did not suck.Clue.
Probably because Clue follows many successful movie tropes, and the huge band of A List talent they roped into it. (Having multiple endings was the big plus)
|
Probably because Clue follows many successful movie tropes, and the huge band of A List talent they roped into it. (Having multiple endings was the big plus)There has yet to be a game based movie... especially a movie incorprating the title of a game, that did not suck.Clue.
Oh, absolutely. Just wanted to point it out.
You'll take JJ Abrhams and you'll like it or else you get Michael bay!
No, Uwe Boll!
There has yet to be a game based movie... especially a movie incorprating the title of a game, that did not suck.
Well for RPG's, they only have Dungeons and Dragons, and that mess is all due to Courtney Solomon.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
There has yet to be a game based movie... especially a movie incorprating the title of a game, that did not suck.Clue.
Silent Hill, too.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The novels line would be a good series to make movies, especialy Varian and Radovan. They could also do TV shorts between. Movies based on their apperances in the AP stories. Looking back at the comics line, condensing those into a movie can work well too, although I feel like alot would end up being cut or rushed through. If they do end up doing the pulp pathfinder feel as mentioned by Pan above, I think that Eando Kline's adventures would work the best as many of his adventures had definate beginnings, middles, and ends while he went for a bigger goal. Although TV would be ideal for that too.
I think that a TV series would be better for Pathfinder in general, but that's not this forum, just my 2 coppers.
I think that a TV series would be better for Pathfinder in general, but that's not this forum, just my 2 coppers.
Netflix series
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Not me. I'd rather they showcase Golarion in a series than the zero to hero to god D&D thing. Its a gamey concept that makes sense in a TTRPG, but is not great for the film medium, IMO of course. The PFS would make a perfect reason to tell a new story in some other part of Golarion each week with Absolom as a home base(no idea why it would require CGI either?). The showrunners/writers wouldn't be tied to the same batch of characters freeing up some exposition and plot framing. The episodes could tie into a converging plot for a season finale.
Ah, I seemed to have derailed a thread again (Puts on a construction Workers hat, an train engineer's overalls, and holds a directors scene-take-clip-thingy) Alright people, back on topic, we're making movies here. save the small screen for Game of Thrones people!
As for why I tossed in that Absolom would be CGI. The premise for the city, as understood by a DM whose players really only visit it to shop for magic items, is that it is a great clash of culture, which is an awesome concept! However, to conserve on costs or to add a feeling of depth and realism, I have found that real environments and sets usually do a better job (hardily a film buff, mind ye). As such, with Varisia's and Cheliax's big cities having a spanish/italian vibe to them, it would be easier to find real locations period accurate enough that, with a bit of camera work and editing it can be made to feel like part of Golarion. Absolom, meanwhile, would be much more difficult to portray, as there are much fewer places that mix up as many elements, without resorting to filming exclusively indoor scenes or narrow/slum scenes in environments you can easily control.
Or I could just be talking out of my Wayfinder and have no idea what I'm talking about.
They would need a better plot than just "It's a Pathfinder Movie"
Several of the existing AP's have excellent plots and enough story to spread out over several TV seasons or three movies.
I'm perfectly OK with a Galavant level budget with a little CGI tossed in for spells.
Hell, with a decent plot and good actors I'd even go for a budget on the same level as The Gamers
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'm not sure i'd want the Iconic Characters in the movie... Do you really want to hear 2 hours of everyone complaining about why the Ranger insists on using a Crossbow with none of the skills needed to make a crossbow work? Or a rogue that lies as well as Pinochio?
|
You'll take JJ Abrhams and you'll like it or else you get Michael bay!No, Uwe Boll!
There has yet to be a game based movie... especially a movie incorprating the title of a game, that did not suck.Well for RPG's, they only have Dungeons and Dragons, and that mess is all due to Courtney Solomon.
Mazes and Monsters(not pro RPG... but it still exists), Dungeons and Dragons and its sequel, Dragonlance: Dragons of Autumn Twilight(an animated movie), the Dungeons and Dragons cartoon.
If you believe the lawyers(and it's a good argument), the Underworld franchise either is, or might as well be, from the World of Darkness setting.So, really, there are more than just the one movie. I'm sure there are even more to be found but it is 5 in the morning.
Silent Hill, too.There has yet to be a game based movie... especially a movie incorprating the title of a game, that did not suck.Clue.
Yep, did not suck. No siree. not a single one.
You'll take JJ Abrhams and you'll like it or else you get Michael bay!
Peter Jackson or the movie doesn't get made
I think Pathfinder might have a better chance than most other game systems of creating a game based movie that does not suck. They have already shown that they can create high quality fiction (up to and including novel series) in the setting, so they have more to work with than most games do.
The only question is whether they are better off using a large ensemble cast of iconics or a smaller cast with better established backgrounds (such as Varian and Radovan, for example). I think the latter would probably work better.
Given the works of salvatore and the two d&d movies, PF could hardly do worse. Unless the movie is made by Uwe Boll, of course
You'll take JJ Abrhams and you'll like it or else you get Michael bay!Peter Jackson or the movie doesn't get made
Welp, looks like no movie then.....
I'm not sure i'd want the Iconic Characters in the movie... Do you really want to hear 2 hours of everyone complaining about why the Ranger insists on using a Crossbow with none of the skills needed to make a crossbow work? Or a rogue that lies as well as Pinochio?
the rogue may be a poor liar, but watching her climb all over a troll or giant on a ladder of knives might be awesome...
but yeah, my problem is, what iconics, and what scenario to put them through, I don't think they all belong to one great party, so you'd have to choose a group the actually adventure together... and choose an AP like scenario for them, though watching them go from rank beginners to high level terrors might require several movies.
Welp, looks like no movie then.....You'll take JJ Abrhams and you'll like it or else you get Michael bay!Peter Jackson or the movie doesn't get made
Better no movie than one made by abrams or bay.
Yep, did not suck. No siree. not a single one.Silent Hill, too.There has yet to be a game based movie... especially a movie incorprating the title of a game, that did not suck.Clue.
Not sure if sarcasm. Needs [/sarcasm] tag for clarification. Anyway...
Well, in that same vein of genres, there's also the Resident Evil movie series, but let's be realistic; after the first one (which was really well done as a "spin-off" of the original games), it just went downhill from there when it tried to be more of a Matrix knockoff than a series of survival horror films, and then incorporated the characters from the original series in a horrible fashion instead of keeping with original characters. (Ironically enough, it just finally hit the bottom of the mountain that it stood on top of with the release of the final movie.)
In my opinion though, the problem that the Resident Evil movie series had stems from the movie niche it was trying to fill in relation to creating sequels for said movie title. Resident Evil, as a game, was Survival Horror when it came out, and it was extremely successful. Problem is, most horror (or even survival) films don't work too well past the first (or maybe second) installment, simply because the horror and survival elements are usually trivialized towards the end of a given installment. That problem wasn't the case with the games, though when the original creators left, and the replacement was an Action-game junkie, the same issues that plagued the movie series began to plague the sequels to the original game (most notably in 4 and 5).
It's a good thing that Pathfinder isn't in the Survival Horror genre, because it would suffer from the same deficiencies as Resident Evil and several other films of the same genre. Of course, that isn't to say that whatever other genres that Pathfinder would fall into, wouldn't have identical (or perhaps different) issues, though those are more easily taken care of with proper writing and a coherent storyline.
As for which adventure arc, I'd go Rise of the Runelords. It has a solid plot, great special effects potential, greatest framework and detail, and most importantly it introduces Varisia which would be a good stable location to have the first few movies in since there is more lorework and design there than anywhere else.
Guillermo Del Torro.
Seconded.
I would like to see a steam punk style setting with relativity unknown actors and diverse accents to represent the different countries.
It's a movie with a ragtag band of superhuman people are tasked with protecting their city/country/world, and throughout a series of interpersonal conflicts the team is broken and beaten. Then, in the last minute, the death of an NPC cherished by the party pulls them together, and they narrowly manage to save the day with the promise of future team-ups in store.
So it's basically Avengers.
I wanna see the script of the movie be made into an adventure path afterwards.
As an added bonus, a post-credits scene teases the main villain of an adventure path for a future sequel.
In all seriousness, I think Wrath of the Righteous is just the right type of cinematic adventure for this sort of movie. The opening scene is cinematic as heck, the AP features a diverse cast of characters, it's over-the-top in all the right ways, and thanks to the nature of the AP you could cast both Good and Evil iconic in one party, forced together by circumstance. It could make for a very satisfying redemption arc too.
Guillermo Del Torro.Seconded.
[...]
You do want the movie to get made, do you?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
"Pathfinder" isn't a story. It's a game. It's the same problem D&D movies have always had: If you make an good movie, then it isn't in any meaningful sense a "D&D movie." It's just a fantasy movie.
The only feasible approach I've seen is to make the movie that is at least partly about the shared experience of the game, which gives us stuff like The Gamers (which is great in its own right, but probably not what the OP had in mind).
I'd like a Curse of the Crimson Throne movie...
With all due respect to the Pathfinder Iconics and the game's basic design, I'd go with none of them- rather, I'd build Korvosan protagonists to help click into the setting, and characters like Blackjack and Cressida Croft would move closer to center stage- while still not being the primary protagonists.
Some of the plot would have to be chopped down, and I'd rearrange some stuff in the name of "movie, not six months worth of published adventures," but it's one of the tighter AP stories set in Golarion, and it has some great visual set pieces, potential for intrigue, lots of interpersonal dynamics to play with...
You do want the movie to get made, do you?Guillermo Del Torro.Seconded.
[...]
Fair point!
The movie will need to be financed by a no nonsense businessman to stay on track.
Silent Hill, too.There has yet to be a game based movie... especially a movie incorprating the title of a game, that did not suck.Clue.
The Phoenix Wright movie was fairly good as well and very true to the material.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
"Pathfinder" isn't a story. It's a game. It's the same problem D&D movies have always had: If you make an good movie, then it isn't in any meaningful sense a "D&D movie." It's just a fantasy movie.
The only feasible approach I've seen is to make the movie that is at least partly about the shared experience of the game, which gives us stuff like The Gamers (which is great in its own right, but probably not what the OP had in mind).
Well, there is the Golarion setting. It could end up being a lot like the Pathfinder Tales series, where a large part of the "Pathfinder" could be the setting. Then, they would apply some tropes and other elements reminiscent of the system to add on.
I think that if there was a Pathfinder movie/series/etc. I wouldn't want it based around an adventure path, or for an adventure path to be based around it. It would just have too many spoilers, and if you've played through the path or seen the movie, you'll already know what happens, and the other becomes less enjoyable. Plus, they would probably need to choose a "canon" series of choices throughout, which I believe detracts from the actual adventures. I believe this would be best handled in a fashion similar to Pathfinder Tales.