Another great choice would be "I, Strahd" (the first one).
If you could have any Ravenloft adventure or novel made into a movie which one would you choose?
I know that many will disagree with me but I would pick I, Strahd. Although I will admit that I would camp out if necessary to see Vampire of the Mists.
Though I also liked the one situated in kartakass (which futured the - in my opinion - marvelous Harkon Lukas).
But I'm also quite fascinated with the story of the carneval. Not as it is told in the novel (which name I don't remeber either) but the Puppet Master and L'Morai and also the resulting carneval as presented later in the games materials has many good shot's for a very gothic film.
I think it's quite a shame that they seem to produce always the wrong phantasy-backgrounds for such movies.
The film Van Richten was quite nice, but a real Ravenloft Film could be so much better.
PS: Why is the Forum of such a good game-world soo small??
Compared to Realms and others.
;)Plus we've seen enough vampire movies as it is. Let's see some wererat action!
I assume he means to say Van Helsing.
Yeah,
thanks for setting this right. Was a long day yesterday.
They should do Lord of the Necropolis
with someone like John Malcovich, Jeremy Irons, etc casts as Azalin, it would be great.
Azalin's many attemps of escape could make an excellent portrait of spiteful defiance vs failure
Omnipotence Vs Powerlessness. They could add all sorts ofn scenes that weren't in the book and still make it great
Azalin has a truly unique relationship with Ravenloft and the Dark Powers, worthy of a grand movie.
Picture it in the trailer. It opens on his fortress, a snot nosed goon comes running up dark castle stairs and stops before a towering shadow.
-Master! the Vistani, they come. They come for Hyskosa!
The shadow reveals the dark majesty of the Lich lord. You can almost see a smirk on the dead skulls face.
- Yes, it is as I have planned. My tormentors have sent their pawns to stop me. No matter they cannot stop me, they will never stop me. The best they can do is delay me.
The skull cackles.
- And time is one luxury i have an endless supply.
I see John De Lancie (Q from ST:TNG) as as Master Strahd, Gary Burghoff (Radar from M*A*S*H*) as Van Richten, Adriana Catano as Ireena/Tatyana... Not really devoting any further time to this, but I can see it.
Gary Burghoff (Radar from M*A*S*H*) as Van Richten...
...What?
Of course, if you're Hollywood you first make one of the other movies featuring Strahd as a secondary character and make him mysterious and intrigueing, then follow up with I, Stahd as the prequel so you can make more money. Can already imagine the preview: the mists rising in burts to reveal in large gothic letters "I am ancient", "I am the Land" followed by teaser shots of the appoach to Castle Ravenloft, Stahd writhing on the floor with his pact with death and the stormy duel on the rooftop, and then maybe Tatyana falling into the mists. Fun fun!
I think Vampire of the Mists or Knight of the Black Rose would make for better movies than I, Strahd, mostly because I think you would need a damn good director to be able to pull off the first person perspective which is what I think gives I, Strahd much of its appeal.
True. "I, Strahd" would be extremely difficult to pull off as a film, due to that first-person viewpoint. OTOH, it would surely make for an incredible graphic novel.
...What?
What, you don't like my casting idea? The good Dr. is intended to be a man of small stature and advanced years. The worries of multiple decades of breathing the air of death weighs heavily upon him. Remember that, just because actors have played slapstick-y roles doesn't mean that's all they can do.
True. "I, Strahd" would be extremely difficult to pull off as a film, due to that first-person viewpoint. OTOH, it would surely make for an incredible graphic novel.
Idunno, guys... I think it COULD be done, and done very well. A book written from a first-person perspective doesn't necessarily change the way the movie is shot; Strahd himself would simply be the protagonist (but with a narrator - Dr. Van Richten - who might dispute the veracity of some of the more outladish claims in the book) and main character. It's a good - no, really, a GREAT story. Compared to the pre-shrunk formulaic drivel we see 95% of the time in the theaters these days, "I: Strahd" has a LOT of potential.
(but with a narrator - Dr. Van Richten - who might dispute the veracity of some of the more outladish claims in the book).
I'd be suspiscious of that. A really easy way to ruin the mood in my opinion. If there were a narrator it would have to be Strahd. Maybe have Van Richten do a little intro blurb like Galariel in LOTR. At the end he could do a similar thing, mimicing the book. They way I, Strahd is written, it seems like it'd be fairly easy to remain reasonable true to the book.
Casting wise I can't really say, though I wouldn't want to see a "pretty" Strahd as is what seems to be happening in the books.
Casting wise I can't really say, though I wouldn't want to see a "pretty" Strahd as is what seems to be happening in the books.
That's why I like de Lancie... He's not a BAD looking guy, but his face has seen a few years. I can easily see him looking a little haggard and care-worn, but being able to spiff it up all noble-style when the occasion calls for it.
I think Pierce Brosnan would pull off Strahd way better. He's got the eloquence of Bond, can do action when needed, and has proven that he can pull off grizzled stoicism quite well.
As for what novel I'd like to see made into a movie? I'd go with Shadowborn. The Shadowborn family, their history and the many offshoots of the story would make for great films, in my opinion. Then you could get into the Knights of the Circle and proceed from there into the rest of Ravenloft.
Actually, it would probably make a better TV show.
No offence to John de Lancie, I worshipped Q, but Strahd should be a grizzled and battle-weary recluse, not an effeminate ponce with a whiny voice.
For the life of me I can't racall the guy.
I don't know about Brosnon either, but then I've only really seen him as Bond. I don't think his voice has enough presence to it. I see Strahd as the sort of guy who takes over a room when he walks into it.
No offence to John de Lancie, I worshipped Q, but Strahd should be a grizzled and battle-weary recluse, not an effeminate ponce with a whiny voice.
I think Pierce Brosnan would pull off Strahd way better. He's got the eloquence of Bond, can do action when needed, and has proven that he can pull off grizzled stoicism quite well.
I don't see de Lancie as effeminate or as having a whiny voice. Maybe Q was a bit soft, but I think de Lancie has more range than that character... much like my Gary Burghoff reference.
As for Pierce Brosnan, well... Vorcoth, I like you, but respectfully, I hope bad things happen to you for that. Pierce Brosnan is a pompous pretty boy. I hated him for Bond, and (since it's a safe bet anyway) I'd rather see no movie at all than see Strahd pretty-boy-ified.
For the life of me I can't racall the guy.
I don't know about Brosnon either, but then I've only really seen him as Bond. I don't think his voice has enough presence to it. I see Strahd as the sort of guy who takes over a room when he walks into it.
Perhaps a pic or 20 will help...
http://www.worc.u-net.com/alt.fan.q/jdlpictures.html
Pierce Brosnan is a pompous pretty boy. I hated him for Bond, and (since it's a safe bet anyway) I'd rather see no movie at all than see Strahd pretty-boy-ified.
I think everyone has their own Bond. I like Brosnan, while my brother is a Connery buff.
I agree with you on the Strahd thing. I like pretty, sure, when were talking Louis and the like, but Stahd isn't "pretty." I'd see him as more of the old style handsome patriarchal sort. He supposed to appear around 40 doesn't he?
Edit: Ah. That guy.
I think everyone has their own Bond. I like Brosnan, while my brother is a Connery buff.
I agree with you on the Strahd thing. I like pretty, sure, when were talking Louis and the like, but Stahd isn't "pretty." I'd see him as more of the old style handsome patriarchal sort. He supposed to appear around 40 doesn't he?
Edit: Ah. That guy.
Yeah, somewhere in that neighborhood. I would actually place him closer to around 50; he was already out campaigning with a personal force when Sergei was born if I recall properly, and Sergei was in his early 20's when he came to be with Strahd... I get the impression he had been with Strahd for a winter before he met (her), and they courted for a year prior to the wedding. 45-50 or so.
Yeah, somewhere in that neighborhood. I would actually place him closer to around 50; he was already out campaigning with a personal force when Sergei was born if I recall properly, and Sergei was in his early 20's when he came to be with Strahd... I get the impression he had been with Strahd for a winter before he met (her), and they courted for a year prior to the wedding. 45-50 or so.
When the book started he was 42, so yeah, around mid forties.