Overexploited Fantasy IP (Shannara, Dragonlance, Sword of Truth, Drizzt, Elric of Melnibone, and Fafhrd and the Gray Mouser)

The phenomena of overexploiting an IP is common enough (from the comic book boom of the 1990s to the Dune books to the Die Hard sequels). What I wanted to focus on here is fantasy book series--IP that used to be popular, but has gradually fallen out of public awareness due to overexploitation (ergo, the material is still around, but fewer and fewer are aware of it). In all the cases that follow I've dipped my toe into the source material (mostly when I was younger). As we watch Game of Thrones knocking on the door of that oblivion with House of the Dragon, let's tackle them one at a time.

Dragonlance

I wanted to start with Dragonlance because it could theoretically get a shot in the arm from the upcoming 5e D&D book along with the first novel based in the setting in roughly a decade. How likely is this to kickstart interest? The odds are low--5e did nothing to lift Eberron out of the cult status when it's 5e iteration came out in 2019 (as evidenced by the limited number of related products that followed and its low level of play on platforms like Roll20--granted, Keith Baker's insistence on never evolving the setting is a major problem for it), while writers Weis and Hickman have long been in decline as authors (as evidenced by virtually disappearing from bookstore shelves).

The franchise began with the original trilogy in 1983-85, which was followed by multiple books a year (from a variety of authors) through 2009; then just two in 2010 and one in 2011 (there's close to 200 books for the IP when including other authors). In the midst of the lengthy hiatus there was a lawsuit between the authors and WOTC (settled quietly). D&D-related RPG products had ended in 1993, but products in other RPG systems run until 2008. That year, 2008, also saw a direct-to-video animated film released via Paramount (which I've seen and it's quite awful; Kiefer Sutherland's Raistlin is the only occasional good part).

My personal experience with the franchise consists of the original trilogy, the Time of the Twins trilogy, Kaz the Minotaur, and Weasel's Luck; I read the books in my early teens, re-reading the original in my mid-20s. I don't recall what directed me to the series, but most likely its connection to D&D. Re-reading it as an adult was mostly painful, as other than the opening chapters of Dragons of Autumn Twilight, the series is lacking. I recall as a kid being vaguely disappointed in the follow-up series, while only reading Kaz because it had minotaurs and Weasel Luck's because I liked Sturm Brightblade (I have not attempted to re-read either, but at the time both were disappointing).

Summarizing the entirety of Dragonlance isn't my intent, but the basic story that made it famous is quite simple. In the world of Krynn a plucky group of adventurers get caught up in a war whose fate they ultimately decide. The world of Krynn, at least in the early days of its conception, is interesting and despite our heroes being a mixed bag, has distinct enough elements to be engaging. The execution of the story, particularly as it goes on, is not great, but broad strokes there's potential and that's what kept the IP going all this time. Granted, the iconic characters are 'problematically' white and mostly male, a sentiment their creators now agree with, so any adaptation would go down the road of The Witcher, The Wheel of Time, Rings of Power, and so on.

There remains some value in the IP (in many ways Dragons of Autumn Twilight is the quintessential D&D story, a bit like how Critical Role campaign one is), even as it has slid into obscurity. Its flaws as literature don't necessarily impair it from success. If detached from modern political derangement the original trilogy has the potential to be a good story.

Drizzt

R. A. Salvatore's famous Drow hero (a Drow is a Dark Elf in D&D--originally an evil race of Elves) is something of an enigma. Unlike Dragonlance above, the author has consistently pumped out novels to solid (if diminishing) sales (39 books!), but can't get beyond niche popularity (current 35th anniversary efforts notwithstanding).

The original trilogy that introduced him arrived in 1989-90 and Salvatore has, with very few pauses,  continued it well beyond the point of inanity. The character has had sporadic appearances in games, but never a starring role.

My personal experience was similar to Dragonlance above: I read both early trilogies roughly when they came out, along with The Legacy and Starless Night (mid to late teens; I re-read the bulk of the first two trilogies in 2016). I was drawn to them both because of the D&D connection and because I liked Drow--I actually read the original trilogies in reverse publication order (so The Dark Elf Trilogy first). I remember being disappointed with the later additions (which is why I went no further than Starless Night). In re-reading the trilogies as an adult I found The Icewind Dale trilogy too poor to finish, while The Dark Elf trilogy had enough interesting elements that I was able to slog through it, even if it was ultimately underwhelming.

Drizzt is firmly set in the Forgotten Realms, Ed Greenwood's tedious setting that has been the default world for 5e D&D. That world is a crowded, inchoate mess and when looked at as a whole makes no sense whatsoever. The more restricted origin story of The Dark Elf Trilogy or Icewind Dale could work in an adaptation, although their tones and cast are vastly different. I think how Salvatore handles the intricacies of the former is mostly poor, but I think there's potential in it.

Just like with Dragonlance, I don't think the lack of literary punch matters--there could be some value in adapting the IP, but Salvatore's issue is that his cast is largely white and his Drow matriarchy is evil, two things the industry can't handle right now. If it was ever adapted, The Dark Elf series has the most potential. Is there a market for the IP? Not right now, although a good writer/director could make it work, but that would be more on them than the source material.

Shannara

The fantasy series widely believed to be deliberate pastiche of The Lord of the Rings by Terry Brooks (growing up I'd read he was contracted to write it as such, but that story has never been confirmed). Much like Salvatore above, nothing has stopped the Shannara train from running, even if (in the same vein) the return has eroded away (there are 43 books).

The original trilogy came out from 1977 to 1985 and, after a pause, endless production ever since, with the latest effort in 2020. Brooks has, I think, realized this is his bread and butter and he can't abandon it (a problem Salvatore and Goodkind both share). He is trapped by his own creation, which is one reason why he's fiddled with it so much.

My personal experience with it was reading the original trilogy as an early teen (I believe via my brother who read them first), along with the follow-up four books dubbed The Heritage of Shannara as a teen--I recall being thoroughly unimpressed with the latter (along with the former when I re-read them at the time).

In the beginning Brooks' world was heavily dependent on Middle-earth and his story is so point-by-point The Lord of the Rings that it makes your eyes bleed. There's virtually nothing in those early conceptions that's distinctive (ideas or characters), such that you'd have to press on to his less popular science fiction inserts to make it standout.

Brooks is not a very good writer (I tried his Magic Kingdom series and couldn't get through the second book). That's no inhibitor to adaptation and he was able to get the IP onto TV (MTV then Spike TV), with two seasons of the unwatchable The Shannara Chronicles (2016-17). Despite having people like Jon Favreau involved, the show made no impact at all (the Wheel of Time of that era). Part of the problem with the IP is how similar it is to The Lord of the Rings (risking getting sued). Could anything be done with it now? It's possible I suppose, but as something inherently derivative, I think there's more bang for your buck in making something original.

Elric of Melnibone

Creator Michael Moorcock is still with us and I can only imagine the ignorance of not just his character but himself has to sting, as he used to be considered a top fantasy author. It's difficult, now, to understand how big this guy was in the 1970s.

Elric first appeared in Science Fantasy magazine in 1961 and 1962. After that came sporadic publication until the present (there are 11 novels with another coming), but in other media the IP is more or less dead (an RPG in 2007, a film effort that never went into production, and an announced TV series for New Republic that's not on their slate of releases through 2025). I think the days of subverting expectations has come and gone and Moorcock won't be around to see that trend return (when popcorn films like The Last Jedi are doing it, it's reached the bottom of the barrel).

My personal experience with the IP is limited, as other than the Elric at the End of Time graphic novel (read when I was young, where it did not impress), I've no other experience with it. I recall thinking the story was as a bit self-important and obvious. As I grew older and learned the thrust of what Moorcock was attempting, I lost interest.

Moorcock's universe isn't particularly interesting (thus failing to work as a game), so the only avenue into the IP is through its lead (the common trend in modern fantasy as well). I suspect Elric is, in part, an inspiration for Patrick Rothfuss' Kvothe from the Kingkiller series.

A sidenote: I think we can blame Moorcock for the (apparently) unavoidable 'subversive' approach to Elves that's ubiquitous throughout fantasy (indeed, doing the opposite would be subversive at this point, but writing Tolkien-styled Elves is much more challenging, so authors don't do it).

Fafhrd and the Gray Mouser

This is the most arguable inclusion on this list, but I included it because I think the characters are just as iconic as the rest, even if they have ceased to be part of the mental furniture of fantasy fandom.

They first appeared in print in 1939, with the bulk of collections appearing in the 1970s and the final addition in 1988. Other than a continued (if marginal) existence in RPG form, the IP is completely dead. Leiber collectively wrote less about his characters than the rest of the authors here, but I'd still argue he wrote more than he needed to and arguably kept writing them because there was profit in it (it tallies 7 collections/novels).

My personal experience is limited, as I've only read the Swords and Deviltry collection (in my mid-20s), diving into it due to Leiber and the series' reputation. I was broadly unimpressed (I saw the potential, but only the potential), so I never pursued it further. Despite my impression, overall this is the best of the various books I've read among these authors.

The world of Lankhmar is somewhat interesting and distinct (which is probably the only reason the IP is still floating around). I think the characters themselves are (now) far too generic to resonate, but it's a classic duo who aren't truly heroes, but not evil either, with a heavy splash of comedy and sex. The Gray Mouser clearly inspired Gary Gygax's Gord the Rogue (among others; arguably the Wulfgar/Drizzt combo in Salvatore's first series).

I think you could use the raw ingredients of the IP for a show or film, perhaps first showing the viability via a video game about Lankhmar, but the cache is so limited I fear it's destined to simply become a footnote in fantasy history.

The Sword of Truth

I didn't realize Terry Goodkind was still grinding out this series (22 books!) until I started doing research. The first book was published in 1994 and Goodkind has pumped out sequels continually (either every year or every other year), with the most recent in 2020.

My personal experience was trying to read Wizard's First Rule when the book came out in my late teens, but I couldn't get through it as I found it poorly written and boring.

I'm not an expert on the world or characters of the series, but my exposure to it made virtually no impression and at the time it was almost unheard of me to stop reading a book just because I wasn't enjoying it. The lead is meant to carry the interest on his broad shoulders (very much the standard in most modern fantasy writing) and he seemed like a riff on the Conan archetype in the most simplistic way imaginable.

Astonishingly there was a TV adaptation via Disney in 2008 (something I was completely unaware of) and, like Shannara above, it lasted two seasons before oblivion. Also like that show, it had a 'name' attached, in this case Sam Raimi. I highly doubt anyone else will tackle the IP, as Goodkind's series (more than the other authors here) is 'problematic' by today's standards.

Conclusion

If I've missed other book fantasy IP let me know (or if you can think of exceptions). In general an IP cannot thrive if its creator/s overexploit the same characters--the quality of the material wears down, gets tired, and gets old, and I think it's demonstrable that restraint ultimately pays more dividends (expanding to other formats--games etc--is fine, of course). We're also in an unfortunate era where adaptations make no effort to faithfully follow what made their source material popular, instead giving us generic shows dressed-up like fantasy.

This article was written by Peter Levi

Fantasy and Science Fiction TV/Movie News Commentary

Amazon has been busy attempting spin for The Rings of Power, whose positive market penetration has been underwhelming (see below). In the early days, the show's advertising heavily suggested adherence to the source material and Peter Jackson's approach (something that continued even after Tolkien scholar Tom Shippey's firing, as reflected in my original coverage). Once marketing began (February), however, we got the generic messaging that the story needs to be "updated" to address modern issues (Tolkien's tackling universal issues was, apparently, of lesser value). This updated message was consistent for months (all the way through SDCC). Amazon clearly thought this approach would work, as it has to some degree for Star Wars and the MCU (with Paramount's Star Trek and the WB's DCEU following suit without success)--in essence, Tolkien was just another brand they could use that approach with.

Tolkien fans aren't like everyone else, being more numerous than the other brands and existing longer--everyone, from book purists to Jackson fans, hated the generic commercial direction. Because of that, now the showrunners are sending the opposite message (contradicting things said earlier ala their Entertainment Weekly exclusive). They claim the show won't be impacted by modern issues. This sudden shift is so out of sync the actors have continued with their talking points (British actress Sophia Nomvete's unending rambling comments along these lines have turned her into a meme). Clearly someone at Amazon told the showrunners the usual approach was not working (when Stephen Colbert can accidentally expose you in a puff interview, you have problems), so asked them to change course. Thus far, none of the marketing has worked, as can be seen by the trends here and here and here and here). Given how close it is to release (September 2nd), it seems unlikely they can overcome the indifference of the normies, who are the only audience left for it (even commentators who go with the flow are starting to hesitate). Stores like this (whose substance is less salacious than the headline), are signs that the industry is cutting bait as they see which way the wind blows.

If the first season is catastrophic, I can't help but wonder if Amazon will cut bait, paying off what's owed to the lunatics now running the Tolkien Estate. While I think a second season is inevitable, we may be saved from five seasons of this nonsense. The plot established in the first season (yes it has leaked) is so poorly constructed and ruins so many iconic characters that there's no way to write their way out of trouble. It will be interesting to see what happens, as The Witcher is also a poorly written enterprise, but worked (for a time) with the normies (it's comeuppance is season three I believe).

As part of Discovery's reshuffling of WB, the Batgirl movie (nearly complete) has been permanently shelved. Rumour has it that it has been deleted because of how poorly it tested (the spin after that is that it's part of a re-branding plan, but I don't believe a 100-million film that's essentially finished would be shelved just for that reason). I wonder if part of why it's being cancelled is because DC is switching from Michael Keaton as Old Man Batman to Ben Affleck (a switch that seems confirmed by the latter's upcoming appearance in Aquaman 2, where he's replacing Keaton's scenes--undoubtedly Zaslav understands Keaton could only done the cowl so many more times). This, perhaps, lays the groundwork for shelving The Flash (where both Keaton and this version of Batgirl appear), but more about that below.

It's assumed the yet-to-be-produced Supergirl has also been cancelled, meaning there's a chance we could get a comic-accurate version of her and Barbara Gordon (unless DC erases yet another redhead). DC has a golden opportunity to do what the MCU has stopped doing--write good stories that are faithful to the source material. The old WB regime (headed by Ann Sarnoff) were playing the same identity politics game that Disney and others are, such that nothing differentiated the two brands (that's one plus for the Snyderverse: while Snyder's films are terrible, the tone & look are distinct). Could we could see DC flip the switch and turn themselves into Phase One Marvel and find success? It seems unlikely, but it is at least a possibility.

It's worth pointing out--and I haven't seen anyone tackle the why of this yet--that Zaslav has hired former Disney chairman Alan Horn to help with DC. This is the same Horn who infamously fired James Gunn from Disney--Gunn, who was scooped up by the prior DC regime, cannot be pleased to see him back. The Horn-Gunn dynamic is unlikely to impact Peacemaker, but it suggests to me that Gunn may not feel as comfortable as he once did at WB (I can't imagine Zaslav is happy that The Suicide Squad bombed, so I don't think he'll get carte blanch ever again on a film again).

Let's briefly look at the relative success of the DCEU regimes to this point (box office noted in millions):

Snyderverse

Man of Steel (2013) - 668

Batman v Superman (2016) - 873

Suicide Squad (2016) - 746

Snyder Cut (2021) - HBO Max

Cyborg (cancelled)

Harley Quinn vs the Joker (cancelled)

The Batman (cancelled)

Hybrid (Snyder/Johns+Berg )

Wonder Woman (2017) - 822

Justice League (2017) - 657

Johns+Berg (May/16)

Aquaman (2018) - 1.148

Shazam! (2019) - 366

Joker (cancelled)

Deathstroke (cancelled)

Hamada (Jan/18; Johns was there until June, but had been moved out of film)

Joker (2019) - 1.074

Birds of Prey (2020) - 205

New Gods (cancelled)

Black Manta film (cancelled)

Sarnoff (June/19; Hamada there, but with less control)

Wonder Woman 1984 (2020) - 169

The Suicide Squad (2021) - 168

The Batman (2022) - 770

Black Adam (2022)

Shazam 2 (2022)

Blue Beetle (2023)

Batgirl (cancelled)

The Wonder Twins (cancelled) 

Supergirl (believed to be cancelled, eg)

Hybrid (Sarnoff/Zaslav)

Aquaman 2 (2023)

The Flash (2023)

Zaslav

Joker 2 (TBD)

The Batman 2 (TBD)

Zaslav is not a creative person, so outside of big 'yes/no' decisions won't be in charge of trying to right the ship (which is why he hired Horn). I don't think the movies set to be released (Black Adam etc) are going to wow anyone (other than The Flash they apparently tested even poorer than Batgirl), nor do I think Matt Reeves is going to fix Pattinson's Batman, but maybe we can get a good film in 2024 or 2025.

You can't speak about DC without discussing Ezra Miller, so let's quickly go over that (see Business Insider for a fairly comprehensive look at the actor and Vulture's timeline). The primary news, outside of Miller's arrest (on a minor burglary charge) was Zaslav saying he was committed to The Flash. As many have pointed out, he did not say he was committed to Ezra Miller and it's difficult to see how the film can be released with Ezra in it. What may happen are extensive reshoots to remove Ezra from the film (which, at least according to the trades, tested well before his Hawaii incidents and other news came out). The other possibility would be Ezra hitting rehab, vaguely admitting to poor judgement, and then going on an apology tour--is their an appetite for that? It's not clear to me. 

It's shocking to me that Thor 4 has actually bombed, just squeaking past 700. This amount is more than The Eternals, Shang-Chi, or Black Widow, but an IP like this should easily make a billion (especially given how well Ragnarok was received). While Doctor Strange 2 had its own issues (and whose impact likely hurt Thor 4), it came close enough to a billion for Marvel to ignore its problems. What should be clear to Feige is that DS2 (and Spider-Man 3) were propped up by memberberries (and, in the latter case, a safe, hero-friendly story). Thor 4 rested only on the popularity of the hero and a trendy director, but the story is pure Phase Four and fans have heartily rejected that. This mass repulsion of the Phase seems to have triggered Feige into summarily ending it with Wakanda Forever and announcing the next two Phases--Avengers anchoring its end (but who the cares about Kang or wants to see the Phase Four heroes as the Avengers?). I suspect Feige is going to pay the original Avengers a fortune to appear in those films to get memberberry returns. There's nothing inherently interesting on the slate for Phase Five and for Phase Six there's simply hope for The Fantastic Four--thankfully the X-Men are off the slate, providing time for sanity to return to the company.

The MCU's battered reputation is hurting all their IPs. Marvel used to rely on the fans seeing all the films to understand what's happening, but now people are skipping many films/shows, making interconnections fail. Ms. Marvel was the worst ratings disaster on Disney+ thus far, as the endlessly terrible shows encourage fewer and fewer people to try them. I see no hope for Marvel to pull its head out of its ass and fix things without external pressure. The brand needs a complete reset, but far too much is already invested and on track for that to happen soon. No one is excited about an X-Men film called The Mutants, nor do they want to see Victoria Alonso's iteration of The Fantastic Four. There aren't a lot of IP bullets left in the Marvel gun and if Phase Five is as bad as Four, the executives responsible for this mess will have to go.

Back in September, 2021, the CW (ergo WB) announced a Babylon 5 reboot. The original series (1993-98) is, in my opinion, the best science fiction show ever, even if creator J. Michael Stracyznski devalued the brand with middling B5-related productions like Crusade afterwards. The CW gave the keys of the IP back to JMS and, despite the purchase of WB by Discovery, the reboot is apparently still on-track (with important caveats--the series has not yet been given a production order).

I think rebooting the franchise is the correct decision, as the various sequels JMS attempted (including the unexpected fifth season of the original show) simply were not as good. What will a new version be like? I haven't the faintest idea. All the themes Babylon 5 dealt with are still worth exploring and I have no idea how he'll handle or change what he did previously. What little we know has the same basic premise (John Sheridan takes command of Babylon 5), but absent Jeffrey Sinclair (whose departure was unplanned) and presumably keeping the proper five-season arc rather than the compressed fourth season. I'm sure feedback over the last few decades has had an impact on JMS, but how much the insane political climate has impacted him I can't guess. Seeing progressives embrace authoritarianism likely surprised him (give up freedoms and privacy for safety), but whether that impacts how he depicts Night Watch and other fascistic elements in the show I can't guess.

In a rare moment of clarity and honesty (or just a desperate attempt to revive his career), Tim Miller admitted Terminator: Dark Fate was a mistake. The director, who happily fought with fans about the film prior to and during release (claiming those not going/enjoying were misogynists), is now admitting what everyone thought about that film--it's a poorly written mess. His comments are not a sop to the fans, but rather a plea to the industry to give him another chance. The Terminator film was put out by Paramount and he had a fairly public falling out with Ryan Reynolds (now Disney, then Fox), so presumably it will be elsewhere he'll have to look.

This is just online drama (and very 'inside baseball'), but with my prior association I thought it worth mentioning. Former (?) Mikey Sutton acolyte Matt Jarbo apparently turned against him (saying he's less interested in truth than appealing to fans). In fairness to Mikey, I think Jarbo is batting 1.000 in fighting people he's been friends with. In looking into this I was told by someone who knows both that they've since patched things up, so why mention it at all? Because this kind of story isn't new for either personality (the substance or the incident). Broadly I think one of the issues with Mikey is he has a unique meaning when he talks about bringing back the Snyderverse--he doesn't mean a return to Snyder running the DCEU, but instead a limited continuance of (some) of his characters and completing his Justice League trilogy. As for me, the contention that made Mikey upset with me was my feeling that some of his scoops were influenced by wish fulfillment--that what he wanted to happen coloured his interpretation of what he was told (just look at how the end of this article is framed; Sutton told me that the Victoria Alonso regime wanted a faithful adaptation of Wolverine and the X-Men--it's hard to credit that). Sutton went nuclear at my suggestion and fair enough, as Mikey suffers from a great deal of online criticism and undoubtedly has a persecution complex. Do I think he has genuine sources and scoops? Absolutely. That fact was never a reason for my (and presumably Jarbo's) reservations.

This article was written by Peter Levi