Dungeons & Dragons

Rating:
Summary: Hilariously bad
Review: This is easily one of the worst movies ever made. Unlike "Battlefield Earth," which was just bad, "Dungeons and Dragons" is hilariously bad. Best watched in the presence of friends or family members who can appreciate terrible movies, this will have you rolling in laughter.

Nearly every scene in the movie is shamelessly ripped off from better movies such as the "Star Wars" and "Indiana Jones" series. Surprisingly, the pre-release buzz for this movie was quite good, but the inept directing and terrible acting destroyed any hope this movie may have had. It's not like the cast doesn't have talent. Justin Whalin is an Emmy winner, and Jeremy Irons is an Oscar winner. Ironically, those two end up chewing most of the scenery with their way-over-the-top acting (especially Irons), but Marlon Wayans is quite possibly the most annoying token comedic sidekick in movie history. (And no, I didn't forget about Jar Jar Binks!)

It's hard to believe this movie was ever made. It has Joel Silver as an executive producer, and it was shot in Prague with a $35 million budget. You'll laugh, you'll cry, you'll have to explain to your friends why you actually spent money on a movie this bad. And a good time will be had by all.

Rating:
Summary: 1 of the worse movies I have ever seen
Review: Horrible acting, ridiculous special effects, nuderdeveloped characters, and some of the most pathetic dialogue. Really this is a disgrace to anyone that plays D&D. I only say that because the one movie based on D&D is so incredibly retarded that it only furthers peoples beliefs on how retarded and nerdy people must be to play D&D. I could have wrote a better storyline at age 4 even if I could not direct it as well at that age. I don't think I've seen movies with worse acting except on the spanish channels and at least theirs are funny bad and not annoying bad. And another thing the dwarf is one of the taller characters in the movie. How is that right?

Rating:
Summary: Better then Lord of the Rings?
Review: Amazon.com reviewer Reijo Piippula said -- "Defintely better than 'Lord of the Rings'!"

Okay, I know EVERYONE is entitled to their own opinion, but I'm just curious if this person's head is screwed on correctly? I mean where do I start with this film?

The acting is either wooden and stilted(even by usually good actors Thora Birch) or extremely over the top(Jeremy Irons, but really that's not necassarily bad), The dialogue is horrible, the storyline of two theifs trying to get rich is tired and boring, the cliches of the theifs and nobles and mages, man is it really boring and yeah, and the special effects are pretty much horrible as well, especially considering that they take up a lot of the film.

The thing is, is that this film isn't even bad in a good way, its just plain bad. Normally I'm quite generous on stars, and actually I wanted to give 1, but felt bad, so there ya go 2.

I guess this film is worth seeing if you want a few laughs, but in all honesty if you want some REAL fantasy, with some realy brains& emotions, go see the LoTR movies, even if you hate them, their still infinitely better then this garbage. :p

*enjoy*

God Bless ~Amy

Rating:
Summary: "Better Version of "Lord of the Rings" "
Review: After seeing Lord of the Rings and giving to it three stars, I have to give to this movie four stars. There's two thiefs in this film who want to get rich (and keep it...) Well, there's also nobles, some of them want equality and some of them want the nobles rule. There's good female actors! Defintely better than "Lord of the Rings"!

Rating:
Summary: The funniest movie I've ever seen!
Review: This movie is wonderful in its stupidity. My favorite part of the movie was when Snails died. Was I really supposed to have had feelings for that character other than simply being irritated? He was like the annoying person that sits next to you on a four-hour plane ride. Also, did anyone else think it was strange that the dwarf was as tall as everyone else? I actually also took the time to listen to the director's commentary on the DVD. I couldn't help but feel sorry for the director as he talked about the next two movies in his amazing Dungeons & Dragons trilogy he has planned. I can't believe New Line funded ONE of these. Let alone three of them! That guy is retarded. I suggest you buy this DVD for someone as a gag gift for Christmas. However, I must warn you that buying this DVD, even as a joke, will only encourage more movies like this one to be made, so be careful.

Rating:
Summary: Enjoyable if taken for what it is
Review: OK, I'm an old time D&D player from back before there even *was* an AD&D... so I went to this movie expecting more "D&Disms"... However, once I realized that the elves weren't going to be like D&D elves and the world wasn't going to be quite D&Dish, I sat back and enjoyed a fairly good fantasy movie. The plot was very simple and predictable, but what Sword and Sworcery movie isn't? The DVD offers the "alternate" ending, which, while not as upbeat as the theatrical version, was a better one.

Rating:
Summary: and others dont like this..... why?
Review: This movie is hillarious, its got great special effects, and every one acts very well! What really sets it apart though is the plot, it blends things seamlessly together. Of course one thing we all remember though, is how Snails dies like a real person would. He doesnt jump in front of a crossbow bolt to save a little kid, he fights soemone to the death and dies. A villan actually kills him. This is the first time I saw that happen in a movie or TV instead of a corny hero blurb. It truely shwos the character realise how life works, and the world. Wonderfull movie!

Rating:
Summary: What Inexperienced Directing & Writing, & $35-million Create
Review: In December, 2000, two friends talked me into seeing what is probably one of the worst films that I have ever paid to watch in a theater: Courtney Solomon's abysmal directorial debut called "Dungeons & Dragons". With absolutely no previous directorial or acting experience in film or television, Courtney Solomon was hired to spend a $35-million budget and direct a film written by two nearly equally inexperienced writers, Topper Lilien and Carroll Cartwright. Topper Lilien and Carroll Cartwrights' only previous film writing experience was for the 2000 German production of "Where the Money Is". (Topper Lilien also wrote for the canceled, 1998, single-season TV series "Maximum Bob".) What was the management of the production company New Line Cinema thinking when they funded this trio to create a live-action film based upon the popular Dungeons & Dragons game created by E. Gary Gygax? Afterall, this is the same production company that superbly brought J.R.R. Tolkien's classic trilogy "The Lord of the Rings" to life on the big screen. Clearly, not much thought went into this box-office flop, but Courtney Solomon's ownership to the rights of the Dungeons & Dragons game was probably a pivotal factor.

The plot of "Dungeons & Dragons" can be summarized as follows: The Kingdom of Izmer is divided into the magic-wielding Mages and the poor commoners. Empress Savina (Thora Birch) wants to change the status quo by extending equality to the poor, but the evil mage Profion (Jeremy Irons) wants to depose her. After Profion takes a magic scepter that controls the golden dragons from Savina through political maneuvering, Savina must find the mythical Rod of Savrill, which controls the legendary red dragons. Drafted into helping her are the apprentice mage Marina Pretensa (Zoe McLellan), the two thieves Ridley (Justin Whalin) and Snails (Marlon Wayans). a dwarf named Elwood (Lee Arenberg) and the elf Norda (Kristen Wilson). Profion is assisted by the powerful soldier Damodar (Bruce Payne), who fights Savina's ragtag allies.

Sadly, mediocre computer-generated special effects could not transform this poorly scripted, dismally directed and inferiorly acted film into an entertaining and enjoyable experience. Instead, I felt like I had lost two hours of my life for nothing. Hence, the best rating that I can grant this film is 1 star. My advice to anyone who hasn't yet seen the film is not to waste any time watching it, but if you are genuinely interested, rent a copy first before buying it. Most of the actors who performed in "Dungeons and Dragons" have gone on to act in other films, but not surprisingly, neither Courtney Solomon nor the films two writers have done any work in film or television since.

If you want to see a better film featuring dragons, my suggestions include Matthew Robbins' 1981 film "Dragonslayer", Rob Cohen's 1996 film "Dragonheart" or even Rob Bowman's 2002 film "Reign of Fire". ("Reign of Fire" isn't as good as my first two suggestions, but is much better than "Dungeons & Dragons".)

Rating:
Summary: a flipping dissapointment
Review: I was expecting a whole lot better script and plot and it should of been real long. but this one blew the dust with its pointless characters and perdictable parts. nothing saves this one. hell, I play Dungeons and Dragons and all my friends says it sucks as well, but thats me, some people liked this movie, I thought it was a great, great , flopping movie. shame on Courtney Solomon for ruining something great. when Marlon Wayans dies I was thirlled with excitiment

Rating:
Summary: How could someone make a movie so terribly retched?
Review: I was highly mortified by the extremely horrifying display on my television set. If only i could go back in time and tell the 2 hour ago me not to watch this terrible excuse for a movie. While I was watching it I was thinking this movie's extremely bad, at least that funny black guys in it though. Then half way threw the movie funny black guy died, as did my thoughts of the movie being just extremely bad, it was more like terribly retched.