Dungeons & Dragons

Rating:
Summary: There Are 2 O's In POOR, But How Many Are in BOOOOO(etc.)!!?
Review: Just how sad can a movie based on a famous role playing game be? Sitting through this shameful excuse for an adventure/fantasy film was so sad, my eyes watered as if I was cutting onions for two hours straight. Dungeons & Dragons was such an embarrassment in so many different areas, I should have kept a tally on how many times my cheeks blushed bright red! The only enjoyment I endured while watching this eye sore came from my mouth as I endlessly commented put-down after put-down. Here's a short list of cons I thought might help your decision of whether to watch or buy (or neither)...please notice, not a single pro is too been seen:

1.) To Be Or Not To Be, It AIN'T: The acting in D&D is so horrible (which caused 75% of my blushing), it makes Xena, Hercules, and campy fantasy/adventure shows alike, look like Shakespeare classics. If you dare watch the film, take notice to endless mugshots and smirks while delivering the cheesiest and entirely unoriginal dialouge and one-liners. The body language they use while delivering such lines as, "Pick on somebody your own size!", urges you to yell at the screen, "OH MY GOD THAT WAS LAME!" with pride and not give a dang if you're once again yelling at the TV, like your grandmother, knowing the actors can't hear you.

2.) Can you believe Jeremy Irons actually has an Oscar?: What's this guy doing in this atrosity? Something I find quite humorous is the fact that Irons is taking this evil mage role to heart, speaking in an accurate accent and such, all the while the rest of the cast isn't at all playing off it. Their poor acting, without the slightest idea of what genre/style of film they are in, makes Irons look like a fool and comes off as over-acting.

3.) Wayans + girly screams + playing a kleptomaniac = What the heck? or possibly, "Barf bag anyone?": Another unwise casting decision at the least, which seems to be the film's weakest link. Marlon can be a funnyman...in comedy movies. D&D shouldn't need "comic relief", nor should it contain it. Plus the fact that theives are swift, intelligent, and commonly naive. Marlon has one right. But come on! He's clumbsy, sharp as a butterknife, and worst of all annoying in this role. Though the actual game's theives are most commonly elvenkind, that doesn't matter too much. What chaps my rear is the weapons at Marlon's disposal. A sword?! Give me a break. That clumbsy goof would cut his own head off...which doesn't sound too bad an idea.

4.) Plot? Really?! Where..?! Show me..!: I think that last sentence says it all. I got that notion in the first 10 minutes, and that's being generous considering 9 minutes was spent telling myself to not worry and that it could get better. That's the last time I listen to my Homer Simpson conscience.

5.) Special Defects: That's right. I swear they had something, then they lost it. Towards the end of the film Red Dragons are fighting the Gold Dragons up in the sky. The whole time I'm wondering why are they concentrating on the foreground where the actors are instead of the background where the main event is taking place..? Until...they show me why. A close up on the dragon's head lies the truth...which is: they surely didn't hire on the same dude who did the DRAGONHEART films. These dragons and special (ugh) effects are an additional 10% of forceful blushing. After seeing these "special effects" I'm sure you'll say the same thing I did..."I heard the movie only lasted in the theaters for about 4 weeks (give or take a week), which if you think about it, is 3 weeks more than what was spent on the "special effects"."

6.) The DVD will gross more than it did at the box office, but that isn't saying much: I'm sure the extras on the D&D DVD could sway somebody to buy it, plus hardcore D&D fans will probably faithfully stand by in it's defense no matter how bad they thought it truely was. I however, will deny/decline to anyone who asks me if I've seen it, want to see it, or want to watch it with them. Special Editions are becoming the ultimate excuse for many bad movies, which in fact is what NEW LINE does quite often. The special extras may be a treat, and yes, NEW LINE does make quite the DVD when it comes to "special editions", thus is where my 1 STAR rating comes into the picture. But after seeing this disaster, would you really want to watch the whole thing over just to hear a commentary? Then, since the DVD has two commentaries, would you really want to watch it again, just to hear the second commentary? If you did, I could guarantee this: Your eyes would burn, your ears would automatically go deaf 5 minutes into a commentary, your attention span would mimic that of an newborn kitten, and you will be staring at your own reflection in a puddle of your own (or someone else's, depending on how many people are watching with you) vomit that lays at your feet. Recommendation? Sure, I got one: Skip D&D and save yourself the cash it costs for eyedrops, hearing aids, uppers, and most importantly kaopektate. (NOTE: The remaining blushing (15%) was caused by waking up the day after viewing D&D, realizing it wasn't all just a horrendous nightmare.)

Rating:
Summary: Decent movie that could have been one of the best
Review: What can I say? This movie was mediocre. But still worth watching. The problem is, it had the script had the potential to be one of the greatest fantasy movies ever made. But it was plagued by little things. For instance: The bad guy. Oh may gosh. From what I understand, he's usually a good actor. Well, he musta had an off day. Horrible job there. Also, at the death of his friend, the main character screams and goes to his knees. In reality that would be an invitation for death, (and the act itsself was done badly at that.) The ending was, interesting, but could have been done better, and also, there are several scenes where changing just a single word, or no more than a few sentences would have made that particular scene much better. And after going through the deleted scenes a couple really should have been kept, they would have made the movie flow much easier.

You see? little things. It was just the little things that ruined the movie. I'm not too familiar with the director's history, but I'd chalk the mediocraty of the movie to thier... poor handling... of the movie. I hope that if a sequel is made, they make sure that the little things are in order, if so, the sequel could easily redeem the first movie.

All-in-all, the movie is worth watching, if only once, and if only because it had so much potential.

Rating:
Summary: Saving Throw vs. Horrible Movie Failed......
Review: I hate to say that this movie was a major disappointment. After all my years of growing up with Dungeons and Dragons and they throw this movie at me. Were the movie done right it could have been very magical, but it was utterly horrible. Lets examine some of the aspects that made this movie fail.

Marlon Wayans as Snails was a very funny character that was just played all wrong within the movie. The fact that they killed off his character to gain some emotion from the audience did not work, because it was not believable. His battle scene with Damodar was horrible to look at and I actually laughed at the death scence.

Justin Whalin as Ridley Freeborne was actually a good character to focus on the movie, but his part was written all wrong. And the fact that he basically saves the entire movie is just not believable. Were they trying to follow some aspects of D&D? A Theif/Master Swordsman played by a human? And then to wield a two-handed sword? Not likely...maybe a Half-Elf..

Zoe McLellan as Marina of Pretensa was frightfull to watch. She was way to overly dramatic throughtout the movie especially at the scene were she yells at Ridley telling him that the empress wishes to make everyone equal. Who is she trying to fool? She is pretty, but no actress. You best bet for future work is the become a maxim covergirl.

Lee Arenberg as Elwood (Dwarf Warrior)......I am not even going to go there. His part in the movie had no meaning and no purpose.

Thora Birch as Empress Savina was a bold move to spark interest in the movie seeing as she was part of the excellent movie, American Beauty. Thora's being in the movie did not even help the least bit. And then there is the fact that she was barely written into the movie....

Jeremy Irons as Profion was one of the worst parts to play. He played his character as a mad, insane cry-baby that did not want to share its candy with the rest of the people. Do he seriously think he could ever rebound from his role in Lolita?

Bruce Payne as Damodar was the greatest and funniest part of the movie! Talk about someone flunking evil character 101 class, he could not even get it right. Be sure and give a good laugh at the scene where he tells one of this warriors not to mess up in capturing Ridley in a bar or they will suffer a fate worse than that was bestowed on him.

I cannot believe they tried to milk the D&D genre with this movie. I am glad it bombed because it was a movie that was rushed, and not worthy making. If they make a sequel, it better be 100x better than this....that is all I have to say about it.

Rating:
Summary: Not as bad as some would like you to think...
Review: I went and saw this movie in the theater a couple of days after it came out and I was a bit nervous, since it had gotten such awful reviews. In fact, it ended up being a wonderful cinema experience. I've played D&D since I was 15 (now I'm 22) and the film really captures the experience of playing the game. There are so many in-jokes for gamers in this movie. For instance, the characters wear black hooded cloaks in the middle of the marketplace to disguise themselves from Damodar and his thugs, something that looks ridiculous but never fails to work in a D&D game. Also, I loved the part where Ridley and Snails laugh at Marina because she's a "low-level mage" and we all know that "low-level mages are practically useless." Ordinary folks should like this movie too. There is no moral relativism, so you can really root for the good guys and pick out the bad guys immediately. It's a fun popcorn flick and it doesn't pretend to be anything else. Some people are saying that the acting is bad. I would say that I was only disappointed by Thora Birch's acting, because she is very, very wooden, as if she doesn't know what she's doing in the movie. Jeremy Irons has a blast and hams it up, but then again, what would you expect to find from a megalomanical evil wizard? Marlon Wayans as Snails was a fun character and very heroic (as can be seen in his scenes with Damodar), definitely not a "Steppen Fetchit-like" character as some critics suggested (people are too sensitive.) I would have to say, however, that the script could have used a little more work. The characters of Norda the elf and Elwood the dwarf don't seem to have any purpose, even though the actors do the best they can with the roles. Also, there could have been more summary in the beginning of the film to help the uninitiated learn what are elves, dwarfs, mages, etc. Those changes are the only reason I did not give this film 5 stars.

Rating:
Summary: Stupid, stupid , stupid
Review: Stupid, stupid, stupid. Did I mention that this movie was stupid? If you are under 12 you will probably like this movie if not then forget it! Without a doubt this was one of the worst movies ever made (you can add Krull and Hercules to the list too). The acting (if you can call it that) was horrible and overplayed like I've never seen. The two main bad guys (Profion and blue lips) were way over dramatic with every sentence. It was horrible to watch and hear. The two main heroes (thief 1 and thief sidekick) were no better. Why did they have to act so silly the entire time, giggling and screaming like two little girls everytime they encountered problems. I was actually relieved when the sidekick thief got killed. The story made little sense and left many questions unanswered. Why did blue lips have blue lips? Why did blue lips take the mage-girl back to some castle somewhere instead of to Profion? If the princess was not going to surrender her scepter, then why did they need the 'rod of seville' or whatever it was called? And what was that crap at the end? Where did they go? Why? [...]

Rating:
Summary: Underbudgeted and rushed, but good
Review: Before watching the deleted scenes, I would have given this movie a 3 star rating at best. Many of the scenes that were cut were removed to reduce the running time or because there was insufficient time/funding to complete it. Unfortunately, these are the scenes that link the major events together. From a directorial view, the viewer can make assumptions that link these scenes together. However, when you are playing D&D, assumptions don't work; you can't say "I leave the sewer," especially after guards have just been assigned to watch the sewer exits--you actually have to find your way out and elude the guards. This is one such scene that was deleted. Many of the other deleted scenes provide useless information, but valuable character interactions. Had these scenes been included in the film, the thin plot could be overlooked a little becauase the caracters would have been more richly portrayed.

This is not a great action movie, and it is not a great D&D adventure. It treads on middle ground, and does a fair job of it. Having watched the deleted scenes, I do not feel that my money was wasted, but I do wish that the deleted scenes had been included (even the 5-6 minute scene that was cut from the beginning would have been welcome).

Rating:
Summary: Dungeon's and Dragons
Review: First of all, let me say, that contrary to popular opinion this is not a bad movie. This is an average movie with the budget constraints that the director had to work with. The studios estimated that in order to do movie the way the director would have liked, it would cost 125 millon dollars. If you watched the DVD commentary at all, you know that they were short of funds. Several of the scenes that they wanted to shoot they couldn't. As far as cheesy special effects, I admit that the foam rubber beholders were bad, but the director admits that also.

I won't go into the plot, you have probably heard about or read the bad reviews by now anyway. All I can say is that I didn't think the movie was bad. I just thought it was average based on the budget constraints, and the time frame that they had to work with. Bottom-line if you watch the DVD at all, this will be explained. If you like D&D or fantasy gaming at all, I think that you'll have a good chance of liking this movie. Whether or not, the planned sequels come out. This movie was designed as the start of a trilogy.

Rating:
Summary: the bomb
Review: the movie is about mages(rich and powerful people) waging war against two theives.One of them has the destiny to save the city Izmel from the evil sorcerer and his army of evil.

Rating:
Summary: Biggest piece of garbage I have seen in awhile
Review: I have to admit that my motivation for renting this movie was partially due to my old days playing the game, and partially to avoid a fight if I watched a "good" movie by myself. I knew going in that this would not be a stellar movie, but I at least hoped it would be good enough to captivate me for awhile.

To be fair, I figured I would divide it out into sections.

Good: 1. Some of the special effects

Bad: 1. Acting, especially the wooden Jeremy Irons and Thora Birch. Her acting makes the acting in Phantom Menace Academy Award caliber.

2. Some of the special effects. The dragons belong in Shrek instead of a live action movie.

3. Marlon Wayans. Other than a weak attempt at being comic relief, which fails miserably, this person has no role in this movie other than an attempt to make sure people from a variety of backgrounds and races see this trash. Having been a D&D player, I have never seen a thief dressed up like a ghetto rat in this supposed medieval society. Yuck!

4. The plot. An interesting premise gone to hell. So many of the plot elements are horribly contrived and way too convenient to catch my attention.

I did not mention the fact that this movie does not follow the D&D world at all, and adopts a politically correct stance, as I do not feel you should rate a movie on how true it stays to its subject. Movies are supposed to be entertaining and should be rated on entertainment value.

Final Analysis: Run away! Run away! (apologies to Monty Python for stealing the line)

Rating:
Summary: It is a critic for the movie, not the DVD
Review: Ok, let me begin (by the way, sorry for my english, Im latin guy): the movie is BAD. I don't care about special effects or rule violations, I don't mind if the evil guy is pathetic (incredible, how you can make of a good actor a pathetic character), but, for the sake of god, the very basics of ANY Dungeons & Dragons story is TEAM WORK!!!. And here you have a group of people that just follow Ridley (the hero) and don't do NOTHING. I mean NOTHING!!! The principal idea of the movie was not bad, but the sequence doesn't have any sense... The Izmar Queen is a bad copy of the Neverending History movie, Profion laght like a maniac ALL THE MOVIE... And, the final sword battle between Damodar and Ridley is so false... and is a copy of Starwars. I think that must exist more or less 25.356 D&D DM worlwide with a better story to tell. I give 2 stars and not 1 because some scenes were fun...Sorry guys, another deception for the D&D fans...