Dungeons and Dragons: Honor Among Thieves
Amazingly for this franchise, this movie is holding at 89% on Rotten Tomatoes, not that anyone should base their decision on whether to see a movie based on what critics think. Currently 92% audience score.
Wife and I saw Honor Among Thieves last night and we had a great time. The movie succeeded very strongly in making us care about the characters. We were certainly never got bored and were rooting for them. The spirit of the game was captured well although my wife who has no experience playing D&D stated she basically got the gist of everything that was going on regarding spells and such. The action and CGI were surprisingly good. The emotional impact at the end of the movie worked (for us).
I think the film might atguably have done a little better job at instilling a bit clearer sense of the setting. Faerun is just briming with nuance and detail. But it looks like this film will perform well enough that we’ll get a sequel to eventually get that. Dollars to donuts the next film will feature the city of Baldur’s Gate what with the BG3 game.
I‘ll add few more observations, I guess...
The movie’s sense of the setting does kind of reflect how the game is actually played. Ed Greenwood created Faerun's cities, forests, mountain ranges,etc., each to have their own unique fantasy realm identity within a world roughly inspired by medieval Europe. The communities have very distinct identities in order to give a sense of diversity within the setting so that you can go explore and adventure in them and have an interesting experience. So in that sense it’s not a culturally homogenous world—although by the same token, there are basic building blocks of the setting such as character classes, spells, religions, paladin orders, factions such as the Harpers and Red Wizards of Thay, etc., that remain constants.
Another thing I noticed is that the dialogue and humor reflect what happens when folks are enjoying the roleplaying during gameplay. By this I mean the story evolves through what players are imagining and it takes shape organically through interaction with the Dungeon Master. Players are actually routinely required to invent creative solutions extemporaneously during the game. And as they do this it can be rather amusing how players express themselves in character when they interact. It really is a blast, and is often absurd. But it is a game after all! As for the game’s on-the-fly creativity Chris Pine’s character, Edgin, a Bard, exemplifies that basic experience.
And finally there is a sense in which the movie starts out with you just having to react to an introduction, and it maybe even feels a bit choppy as it starts off, and the action is slow in the beginning as it establishes the backstory. But as it continues it begins to pick up momentum and coherence as the tale unfolds. This also reflects what playing the game is like! By the time you get to the end the characters have bonded and the emotional ending reflects how players feel about their characters and the sheer fun of playing the game with one another, as a shared experience.
The Sorcerer-Thief character Simon reflects a dynamic to the game regarding creativity and problem-solving that’s quite interesting. It reflects a psychological truth which arguably extends well beyond the game and taps into the realm of the archetypal. Similarly Edgin’s sacrifice at the end reflects the sort of lesson in real life that often takes place if we remain creatively open and receptive to life as it exists on its own terms versus how we wish or hope it to be, etc.
So the movie is indeed a faithful enactment of what it’s like to play a wonderful roleplaying fantasy game. And because the experience of playing the game is satisfying, the movie can be too—if you can open your mind to it. Same as if one is sitting at a table with other real live people playing the game.
And again, one need not have to have played the game in order for their psyche to instinctively pick up on these elements as one simply sits back and takes in the film. The directors, writers, and actors realized that surprisingly well. Imo for that alone the film deserves the praise it is getting.
Wife and I saw Honor Among Thieves last night and we had a great time. The movie succeeded very strongly in making us care about the characters. We were certainly never got bored and were rooting for them. The spirit of the game was captured well although my wife who has no experience playing D&D stated she basically got the gist of everything that was going on regarding spells and such. The action and CGI were surprisingly good. The emotional impact at the end of the movie worked (for us).
I think the film might atguably have done a little better job at instilling a bit clearer sense of the setting. Faerun is just briming with nuance and detail. But it looks like this film will perform well enough that we’ll get a sequel to eventually get that. Dollars to donuts the next film will feature the city of Baldur’s Gate what with the BG3 game.
I‘ll add few more observations, I guess...
The movie’s sense of the setting does kind of reflect how the game is actually played. Ed Greenwood created Faerun's cities, forests, mountain ranges,etc., each to have their own unique fantasy realm identity within a world roughly inspired by medieval Europe. The communities have very distinct identities in order to give a sense of diversity within the setting so that you can go explore and adventure in them and have an interesting experience. So in that sense it’s not a culturally homogenous world—although by the same token, there are basic building blocks of the setting such as character classes, spells, religions, paladin orders, factions such as the Harpers and Red Wizards of Thay, etc., that remain constants.
Another thing I noticed is that the dialogue and humor reflect what happens when folks are enjoying the roleplaying during gameplay. By this I mean the story evolves through what players are imagining and it takes shape organically through interaction with the Dungeon Master. Players are actually routinely required to invent creative solutions extemporaneously during the game. And as they do this it can be rather amusing how players express themselves in character when they interact. It really is a blast, and is often absurd. But it is a game after all! As for the game’s on-the-fly creativity Chris Pine’s character, Edgin, a Bard, exemplifies that basic experience.
And finally there is a sense in which the movie starts out with you just having to react to an introduction, and it maybe even feels a bit choppy as it starts off, and the action is slow in the beginning as it establishes the backstory. But as it continues it begins to pick up momentum and coherence as the tale unfolds. This also reflects what playing the game is like! By the time you get to the end the characters have bonded and the emotional ending reflects how players feel about their characters and the sheer fun of playing the game with one another, as a shared experience.
The Sorcerer-Thief character Simon reflects a dynamic to the game regarding creativity and problem-solving that’s quite interesting. It reflects a psychological truth which arguably extends well beyond the game and taps into the realm of the archetypal. Similarly Edgin’s sacrifice at the end reflects the sort of lesson in real life that often takes place if we remain creatively open and receptive to life as it exists on its own terms versus how we wish or hope it to be, etc.
So the movie is indeed a faithful enactment of what it’s like to play a wonderful roleplaying fantasy game. And because the experience of playing the game is satisfying, the movie can be too—if you can open your mind to it. Same as if one is sitting at a table with other real live people playing the game.
And again, one need not have to have played the game in order for their psyche to instinctively pick up on these elements as one simply sits back and takes in the film. The directors, writers, and actors realized that surprisingly well. Imo for that alone the film deserves the praise it is getting.
Post edited by Lemernis on
0
Comments
The overall mood, lots of silly comedy while fighting for one's life, is exactly like every game I ever played in. The paladin who's absolutely perfect except he has no sense of humor, was awesome! And of course, hilarious in his own way.
I loved that I could identify almost all the spells used! Sort of meta-humor.
There were some things I think I missed, largely because I haven't payed as much attention to things since 3E came along. I know most of the new races and classes but I'm not as sure how some things work. And Forgotten Realms has presumably moved along with the rules sets, like the Harpers being goody-goody. I thought they were a little more ambiguous, certainly wouldn't have expected a Paladin to belong.
The Bard being mostly useless surprised me a little too. Except maybe as part of the joke? I mean, 2E bards are jack-of-all-trades. Dabblers in everything masters of none. I mean I know everyone always complains about bards being useless, but they're really not!
Which all comes back to saying it really was a ton of fun. Maybe if I were 20 (or, errr 40) years younger I would have gotten more of the jokes. So even if all my gaming materials say "TSR" on the spine I got the fun part of it just fine.
A common bias I see among professional critics is a sense that, as a general rule, a film under the broad category of fantasy-adventure should be whimsical, comedic, lighthearted, and purely escapist in tone. By implication if it isn’t I guess it’s pretentious? (This certainly extends to superhero films.) There are of course notable exceptions such as Tolkien’s LotR And Martin’s GoT. (And Logan for the superhero genre.) But for the most part they seem to feel that the staple for the genre should be “fun” and “lighthearted.”
I would still love to see a D&D setting (Forgotten Realms) movie that takes the subject matter quite seriously overall. (The Baldur’s Gate saga for example could be handled this way.) But for now I will take this movie’s homage to the sheer fun of sitting down at a table with other players and having a grand goofy time that, by the end, becomes surprisingly meaningful as a shared experience.
Yeah, the movie is based on 5th edition I’m sure. That’s what WotC is promoting currently. I noticed that the sorcerer Simon seems to be a Sorcerer-Thief (it’s definitely implied) which if I understand correctly in 5e such multiclassing is allowable. And as we know in 2e AD&D it isn’t. Can’t remember the rules on that for 3e anymore, lol.
Yeah, I too was surprised that Edgin, the Bard, didn’t use magic, identify items due to lore knowledge, or pickpocket, etc. He did have high Cha and some (limited!) ability to persuade others via musical performance. But I think he was used by the writers to exemplify the creative problem-solving strategy aspect of the game. And to boost morale by encouraging, not giving up, and remaining flexible and adaptive. Like they used him as an exemplar of that.
I also love 2e Bards, and in fact generally like having one in the party. Well used in BG they can be a tremendous asset. And of course by BG2 with the kits you can have someone like Haer D’alis who is actually a badass. But I like vanilla Bards like Garrick and Eldoth! I give them all of the scrolls from loot drops, and wands. Sometimes it’s a blast to devise a battle plan using whateve magic items the Bard has at his disposal.
Oh I was also wondering, are the Red Wizards all undead now? Or was that made up for the movie?
This movie is surely based on 5e. And I’m honestly not up on what the 5e FRCS has done with the Red Wizards. But it seems in the movie that the faction is ruled by the lich Zsass Tam: https://forgottenrealms.fandom.com/wiki/Szass_Tam. He rules Thay and leads an undead army.