Dungeons & Dragons Movie Reviews By You


After over a decade of anticipation, the Dungeons & Dragons movie is finally released nationwide today. I've not seen it yet, but I'm sure a lot of our readers certainly will, so let us know what you think by posting your reactions and reviews here.

Will I see the film this weekend? Perhaps, if only because I'll happen to be near a theatre on Saturday night and it might be convenient. Will I enjoy it? Probably not, but then I have high expectations about pics like this, and being a huge fan of the fantasy films of the 1980s, it'll be hard to live up to the hype.

But what did you think? Was it worth the $10 you spent for the ticket? Will there be a sequel? Will you simply try to forget it ever happened and pray for the Lord of the Rings trilogy to make its way into theatres as soon as possible? Let us know what you thought. Just try to keep the spoilers to a minimum, and if you must include them, drop a SPOILER WARNING in the text somewhere so those who feel the need to remain in the dark may do so.

SFGate review - strongly negative

Washington Post review - strongly negative

CNN review - "worst movie of 2000"

LA Times - negative

New York Post - "no stars"

Roger Ebert - 1/2 star

Chicago Tribune - "I can say nothing to recommend this film."

You forgot the Boston Herald. I think the name of the article says it all - "dung12082000.htm"


film.com called it "simply awful, laughable at worst, overrought at best". I haven't seen it yet and i'm not going ot either. Here's the link



Sure, Marlon Wayans is...well...Marlon "Jar-Jar" Wayans.

Sure, the plot is a cliche-ridden joke (more on this later).

Sure, whatever soap opera star played Profion did more "cow milking" than the combined casts of every high school production of Hamlet ever.

Sure, the dragon controlling staff looked more like The Club. This is so blatant that it provided fodder for several searing riffs that would have made the MST3k writers proud.

Sure, Marlon Wayans... *snap* Dear God....MARLON WAYANS! Why not just have the entire rest of the fucking cast replaced with only the most obnoxious Saturday Night Live vets?! WHY NOT THROW IN FUCKING CARROT TOP FOR GOOD MEASURE?!?!

BUT (yes, this has been going somewhere) even with all of it's flaws NOTHING stands out like the DIALOG! There are very few G.I. Joe cartoons with dialog this bad and none of them with voice actors who deliver it this poorly. I submit that good dialog would have gone a LONG way towards making this movie at least a LITTLE more acceptable.

Hopefully I have established my feelings on the lack of good dialog in this movie and the VITAL ROLE this lack played in making the movie MANY TIMES WORSE than necesary (even with the presense of MARLO---oh never mind). Now I will write about the second "most wanted feature" in this film: plot. This is one of the places where the director seemed to feel it was important to stick close to his subject matter because the plot is like the average plot of an average AD&D game. Unfortunately the average plot of an average AD&D game isn't worth writing down, let alone turning into a multi-million dollar special effects extravaganza.

Word in the interviews is that the director worked to get this film made for 10 years. We know that Star Wars Episode I was not even written for, well very nearly ALL of those years. So how is it that this film comes out with so many plot points IDENTICAL to SWE1? Could it be that this crap was tacked on at the last minute in a drunken bit of script editing that through some wacky sit-com-like series of coincidences managed to be entiredly filmed before the director knew what was happening?

Umm, no. Much like the Wayans conundrum, I have NO IDEA how this happened nor what the hell they were thinking.

There WERE a lot of cool sets and some of the CG was pretty cool (a few yummy dragon skirmishes towards the end, but not much else) however a certain amount of this was counteracted by the overuse of Tinkerbell chimes whenever any magic went off (including magic sword fighting).

I'd write more -- about how you should feel sorry for the director because his heart was in the right place but his head was out to lunch and his directing skills were nonexistant, but I'm way too tired right now.

Only a fool such as Joel Silver could possibly take a look at what has to be the worst script, worse even than Battlefield Mirth, and agree to put good money into such a pathetic excuse for a project. I assume the successful movies such as the Lethal Weapon franchise and great hits such as Die Hard have given Mr. Silver an excuse to eagerly pick movies that are bound to be trash. No, that's an insult to trash.

Normally, I hold off on commenting on the director until the end. Such cannot be the case here. I continue to hear how Courtney Solomon worked on this project for 10 years. 10! And this is what he finally came up with? This is the best he could figure out? The shots were poorly chosen, the cast was encouraged to overact to the degree of people actually booing.

The treatment writing of the movie was done by two relatively unknowns, two Germans by the names of Topper Lilien and Carroll Cartwright. I would recommend they not write again. The dialogue was trite and rather overly predictable. I sense a great deal was made up as it went, probably to fill in the gaping voids.

Now I must touch upon the actors. I almost feel ashamed in what I'm about to do to the likes of Jimmy Olson, Thora Birch and Jeremy Irons. Then I remember what they CHOSE to do and I want to slap them upside the head.

I can understand Marlon Wayans' performance as Snails. Marlon couldn't act his way out of a matchbox, let alone a dungeon. As the youngest of the more famous brothers, he is a disgrace. Shawn, Damon and Keenan, why didn't you lock him in a closet when you were children and leave him there? It would have been more humane.

We now see it obvious that the loveable Jimmy Olson, for his ignorant naivete personality, was obviously not an act. Justin Whalin really is that dense, that bad. By the time he got to his impression of Brando in Streetcar Named Desire, you knew it was time to shoot him.

All I have to say about Thora Birch is why? Yes, you needed a break from the depths of American Beauty, it's understandable, but don't you have better guidance. With a girl that does have great potential, if she is under the right kind of direction and guidance to develop, doing a movie like this is just plain suicide. She was completely flat, her lines were delivered in a paltry fashion. There was no glimmer or spark of life in her in the most passionate of her speeches. Next time you do a fantasy princess role, go rent Neverending Story. At least she, even dead, was less painful to watch.

Now we come to Jeremy Irons, the evil and dread Profion. He really was eating up being that bad on screen. I've seen interviews with Mr. Irons relating how proud he is of this role, thie flick. I couldn't figure out why, until I realized this is the same guy that gave us such trash as Dead Ringers. This guy can act, he just doesn't choose to half the time.

Zoe McLellan, playing the fledgling mage Marina, has the chance to become something. Not under direction such as Courtney Solomon of course, but I did see a glimmer in her performance. The question is will unforgiving Hollywood give her another chance.

Kristen Wilson has a great statuesque quality about her features, but she could have been a good deal better if she hadn't been constantly doing a Seven of Nine impersonation. Same with Tom Baker, playing the elf king, who was reduced to a jabbering fool. The rest, just don't get me started. And Bruce Payne, playing the evil henchman Damodar, was just the most unimpressive excuse for an arch evil warrior. Ooh, he has blue lipstick on! SAVE ME!!!

Let's talk art direction and effects. The elves, which by almost all mythologies have grace and intelligence, were reduced to babbling buffoons reminiscent of the brownies from Willow. The costume designs looked like they came from the worst Ren. Fest in the world. They were horribly constructed. The choice for a dwarf was about as tall as all the humans. Uhm, here's a hint Solomon, dwarves are short.

The only thing that was as bad as the acting, was the CGI. The dragons looked like unfinished models from a computer game that is 5 years old. They were so unbelievable in their movements and overall appearance that I laughed every time I saw one. The city views, were taken almost directly from a Squaresoft game, with swooping camera zooms at every shot. Only problem is, they weren't impressive. They seriously were worse effects than in Xena. I never thought it imaginable. I want to find the idiot that believes these effects are better than Dragonheart's and slap them about until they realize what an idiotic statement that is. Even Krull and Legend, fantasy movies from long long ago, were better in effects.

Graeme Crowther, stunt coordinator for the flick, needs to return to being just a stunt man. His fights sequences look more bad thumb war matches. Boring. Unoriginal. Unrealistic. Bad. Go back to getting slapped around, it's the only thing you're apparently good at.

I wonder how the folks over at Hasbro, owners of the proud TSR based Dungeons and Dragons subsidiary, feel about this? They must be humiliated. They must be shocked that their big chance has pushed them back to the ridicule they endured by overly zealous churches and idiots alike back at the beginning of the conception. I only hope this does not freeze up all hopes for future projects.

Throw this one back in the dungeon. It's rotten beyond salvation.

I am a big D+D fan, so I went to see the flick. The director Courtney Solomon had been trying to get this project going for nearly ten years. I can applaud his determination to see a dream project through to completion. How many of us have given up projects that were near and dear to us? Solomon made his dream happen. Congrats!

With that out of the way all I can say is that he should have worked on writing half as hard as he did on getting the movie made.

The movie was awful. It was really a big heap of crap, almost sucking as much as Battlefield Earth. The script was terrible. I really can't imagine anyone with intelligence reading it over and not seeing how bad it was.

I could go into specifics of how bad it was, but why bother. It would cost me time and energy that I could use doing something better. I really wish Solomon Courtney had taken the effort into producing a decent story with interesting characters. The movie seemed to have been written by a twelve year old gaming fanatic.

With all the material published on Dungeons and Dragons over the past 25 years I can't imagine how C. S. could have fumbled this project so badly. With all the modules, books, and spin off computer games to pick and choose from the movie could have/should have been much better.

I hope that the "Lord of the Rings" movie will be better. Fantasy Films have been almost non-existent over the past ten years, and this film will do nothing but hurt similar future films.

I wish I could have said something more positive, but my conscience won't let me.

You have been warned.

"May Cthulhu Eat You Last."

Wow, I didn't know that Roger Ebert was a regular visitor of this page. Amazing!

You can imagine that I feel a bit intimidated putting up my humble post, what with all the experienced critics at the top of the list, but I shall press on, regardless.

I...um...I actually rather liked the movie.

Shock! Horror!

And here's why:

I realized that it was not going to be a work of "art" or anything close, and I went in with that frame of mind. I mean, it's based on a game, for crying out loud, the oldest and best known but, in my mind, the most poorly designed fantasy RPG out there.

And I loved it, because it was just like a game. It was damn hysterical. Here's these two dumb thieves trying to scale a wall and they whip out these three foot grapling hooks and fifty feet of rope. After the movie, someone demanded to know where the hell they were carrying all that equipment, to which I responded, "You fool! No one plays with the encumbrance rules anymore!"

Yes, there were parts of the movie that were unbearably bad. I couldn't even watch the "dialogue" between Ridley and Marina in the elf city. Norda's BREASTplate made me snicker everytime I saw it, and Elwood the dwarf was every stereotype of dwarves that I have ever encountered.

But considering the art of Elmore, Easley, and all those other TSR/Fantasy artists that drew these skinny little elf chicks with massive, levitating breasts and scruffy, dirty dwarves with axes and horned helmets, it's not surprising.

And yes, I was rather unimpressed with the roles for women in this movie. The Empress was a weenie, Marina was pathetic (when Damodar hauls her off, I expected Burning Hands, Shocking Grasp, Chill Touch, but not little girly tears and a pathetic wimper. Come on, you can cast Dimenson Door! You're eighth level at least! Nuke the bum!)

And the costumes, some were good, some were bad, but I've played lots of Fantasy LARPS and I know cheesy costumes. But oy!

But still, it was great. You have the bad guy (Profion) who is so very, very bad, who says all the dumb bad guy things and who has long expository scenes. You have Damodar, his intimidating, brainless henchman. You've got the two thieves who are idiots and their posse of demihumans, magic swords, magic wands, undead, force fields, beholders, woo!

And they do all the dumb stuff that players have been doing for twenty-five years or more. "We walk around in broad daylight, wearing our black cloaks, and hope that no one notices us." Or, "I've still got 15 HP, I attack him with my dagger." Or, "Um...we can't fight the Beholder. I throw a rock at it."

I loved the Thieves' Guild maze. That was great. And the dragon battle at the end. (Despite even the most sophisticated CGI techniques (Phantom Menace), I can still tell which characters are real and which are animated. The dragons are fake? Well, duh. But they looked damn cool flying around and breathing crimson death on the Empire. Woo!)

Storywise, it was so-so, but I could at least follow the plot, mostly, unlike the horribly overcut Legend, which I have seen several times and still have no idea what the heck is going on. And yes, the acting was also so-so, but considering Mark Singer in Beastmaster and Arnold in Conan, they're at least on a par with most of the other fantasy movies.

And, for all those people who seem to think that Courtney Solomon ripped off Star Wars...well, he didn't. The plot of Star Wars is a very simple, very basic plot that has been with humanity since the dawn of time. Unlikely hero goes against impossible odds and defeats evil, gets the girl, becomes a knight/king, saves the day. We've been telling that story since we could communicate with one another. Beowulf? The Odyssey?

And, for those of you who have been long-time visitors to this site, you may have read Aeon's listing of the fantasy movies of the 80's. Note how they all follow the same basic plot idea. So does Star Wars. So does this movie.

Ah, now if they had only gotten a 10 foot pole in there somehow. ;)

Geoff, did we watch the same movie? The Dungeons & Dragons movie that contained many scenes ripped still pulsating from the torso of Star Wars Episode I? Are you sure you weren't asleep during the "princess addressing the senate" scenes? To flatly deny that this movie ripped off SW is ridiculous.

You say that the acting was "so-so" and then back this up by listing TWO actors from TWO different movies. Both of those movies contain better acting "overall" than this one, yet you think these examples justify D&D. I won't say anything else about this because I was so offended by the awful dialog that I had a hard time paying attention to the acting.

It IS possible to make a better movie using fantasy stereotypes -- see Willow. It IS possible to make a better movie that's based on a game -- see Clue (I'm told). The only valid excuse for the D&D movie being a pile of shit is the fact that it was the director's first time directing ANYTHING.

Aye, this movie did have many problems, i did have problems with marlyn wayans, but the dialogue was the worst for me, followed by aspects of the story. When the 'hero' spoke he usually said something dumb or ruined the mood. "What would you know about living on the street MAAAAAGGGGGGGEEEEEEEEEE!!!?!??!" Every time someone mentioned that word they sounded like a dumbass, and the ending sucked, they wisked away to see the dead snails, who should have stayed dead, and i dont even understand why he came back, and where they wisked away to when he was supposed to be knighted. And overall the Absolutely AWESOME squaresoft preview before the movie made loose some interest in the D&D movie

I thought the Wayan brother was OK, no problems with him. The main bad guy flat out sucked, Towards the end I was wishing him dead for fear of seeing him in "AD&D the movie" I had no more expectations from this movie than from watching the D&D cartoon wich reminds me too much of scooby doo. Sadly I missed the end becouse my focus was on some dumb guy making some dumb noises throughout the movie and I was planning to bump into him really hard when the movie was over, sadly he took the exit in front of the theater instead of the back.

Dungeons and Dragons the movie was the biggest disappointment of the millenium. I was an avid player of D&D and AD&D and so I looked forward to a movie that could help capture on the screen some of the things that made the D&D games such fun to play. But alas, this movie was the worst fantasy movie I've ever seen. Bad acting, bad dialogue, and an even worse plot (did I say plot? Sorry, there wasn't any). And whose bright idea was it to cast Damon Wayans?!!! PLEASE! The high point of the movie was when his character was killed...it was such a relief...

The evil henchman was ridiculous (here's a man who can't talk well and who can't be struck by weapons a handy combination) and his boss was just plain stupid ("I am evil. Boy, am I evil. Did I tell you I am evil? Well, I am you know. I do evil things all the time...Real evil things. Name one? Well, I've done so many I can't remember..." Give me a break!), the princess was a wimp (Why didn't she just call her dragons and get rid of Profion and his supporters when he first threatened her? She is a powerful wizardess or isn't she?), and the remaining characters were just awful. The characters were not developed well...what was the dwarf's name, eh? And those we did hear from would have been better off keeping their mouths shut.

All in all, Dungeons and Dragons has done more damage to the game of the same name than TSR has ever been accused of having done. This movie could have helped revive D&D for a whole new generation of players, instead it probably scared them away or put them to sleep...

The dialogue sucked. The story sucked. The magic coming in little bags sucked. I find it curious that they even bothered to include most of the party members, especially the dwarf and the elf, as they never really did anything. Also, were they afraid that Damodan would hurt himself if his special weapon even LOOKED sharp?

Most of my friends managed to enjoy it in the manner prescribed by Geoff, acepting it as a depiction of the flaws in the genre. I, unfortunately, am cursed with optimism and therefore was cruelly, brutally disapointed.

I do, however, have one special complaint that hasn't been mentioned yet: how this movie was bitten by the democracy bug.

I reserve in my heart a special venom for unrealistic projections of modern Western values into inappropriate situations and, even worse, when those values are transformed into nothing but the worst cartoon bufoonery.

Ah, if only it was all as easy as seizing absolute power and then declaring that 'everyone is equal.' That doesn't work even in our world, much less a world where some people can vaporize you where you stand while others can't. At least in our world, we are all equal in our ability to kill if need be.

I can see it all now:

"You are all... EQUAL! YAY!"

"Does that mean that you are also equal?"

"Well, sure."

"So who will protect us from someone who manages to become unequal by magic, treachery, or good business sense?"

"Hmm. I guess I'll have to keep MY power and strike everyone else down to the level of the mob. Good idea."

You can see what I mean, I'm sure. Maybe the simplistic political insights of a teenager isn't quite what a medieval empire needs to reliably and realistically move forward. Heck, I bet she gets knifed by some opportunistic guard captain at the first possible moment.

Anyway, don't go watch this movie unless:

A) You are a masochist

B) You are a parent that is looking for proof of Satanism in DnD (this'll fix ya)

C) You understand that it is going to suck and, Tyler Durdenishly, accept and embrace this death spiral of a movie

Love n Flushes

Actually, I left the theatre with a very positive feeling. As an aspiring screenwriter/playwright, it always does my ego good to see something and know I could have written it better even if I had the right hemisphere of my brain removed. The writers who vomited forth this pile of garbage should cut off their writing hands and go join a holy order or something.

All right, I'll be the first one to admit that the movie could have been MUCH better, but who actually went in there expecting to see the best movie ever?

I feel that there were too many characters to be developed in the minimal amount of time they had. I would have been much more pleased if the dwarf had been given more development, but then again I love dwarves (I was pleased that he was the only one to knock the big bad evil henchman on his ass though.) :)

There is no denying it the most of the acting and all of the dialouge did suck. Period. But it's a fantasy movie, most fantasy movies in genreal have bad dialouge. Unfortunately it's usually part of the package.

I was also irritated at the "only the hero goes in" all the time. For the thief maze, it makes sense, that was fine, but I don't see why all of the heroes couldn't have gone into the cave to get the Dragon Wand. You know, fought some monsters or undead to get to the main room, and then only Ridly could touch the wand and when he did the skeleton warned him. It would have been much better.

As for Marlon Waynes: I admit, when I frist heard he was cast, I wondered who was going to get fired for that blunder. BUT he didn't do as bad as I had expected from him. His character was to be the incompetent thief along for comic relief. Hell, I've got characters like that in the D&D game I run. I kept turing to my friend who plays in the campaign saying "look, it's Russel!" (his character) and he would only smile and say "I know, that's great."

Magic in little bags: Crap! It blew, if they had been staunch on components, I would have accepted it, it would have allowed the mage in the group to be at least a little useful (there are a few spells that don't require components, after all.)

And the ending did, indeed, blow, no getting around that. Where did they go, to see Snails in the after life, were they transported to another realm so it could be left open for a sequel? What the hell?

And, as Joel McNally stated above, I too dispise the western world ideals being put in situation where they never would have been applicable. Maybe it's because I'm a historian and I know that historically it's a joke, but it also bugs me becuse it takes something away from the essence of the setting.

Now, all that being said, what the hell did you expect? As far as a movie, it blew. As far as a movie based of a game, it wasn't all that bad.

After I saw X-Men someone asked me what I thought. My reply was "For a comic book movie it wasn't bad. But as a movie, it sucked."

Hollywood RARELY makes good movies anymore. Maybe they've just run out of ideas (if D&D, X-Men, Charlies Angels and all that recycled crap proves anything it's that there aren't any more original ideas.)

When I see a movie I have a realistic expectation of what I'm going to see. I don't expect Shakespeare from a lot of movies today and that's why I don't watch them very often. I think a lot of people are upset over the D&D movie because of overexpectation.

I expected the movie to blow, and as a movie it did. No suprise there, but as a movie based of something so one demensionsal as an RPG, it was about what I expected.

"It can't be good because it's based on a game" is an utter cop-out. Raymond E. Feist based "Magician" on a D&D game. This novel didn't win any awards but it's good solid fantasy and even the Cliff Notes version run through Babblefish a few times would slaughter the writing that went into the D&D movie.

I think my main problem with this movie is that I think (way too much) about how easy it would have been to make it watchable. It could never be a good movie (the changes required would essentially make it a different film) but even with just a different script it could at least have had a shot at the term "cult classic".

I think you may have missed my point slightly. I'm not saying that no movie ever based off a game can't be good, but that it isn't likely to be good with the current (extreamly low) standards in Hollywood today, and you have to reasonably expect that when going to see ANY movie that is based off anything.

Could the D&D movie have been better: Yes, Should it have been: Yes, did it have a chance in hell considering the faceless, souless corprate robots that run Hollywood: No.

Considering said faceless robots in Hollywood, I'm quite glad that Lucas chooses not to associate with them. Wayans in a fantasy movie? That's like... putting Will Smith in a western. Oh, wait, duh....

Now you know why the director took 10 years to get this movie made.. He couldn't get any backing!

It seems we won't get this 'movie' into european cinemas hm ? That's sad...I liked the game.

During the whole thing I just couldn't get comfortable enough to sleep. I wanted to die. I was depressed for the rest of the day(and I don't even play D&D), and I kept wondering how many other souls that movie had claimed. To see that movie again someone would have to buy my ticket and pay me no less than 10 dollars. D&D has been chalked up on my worst movie ever list under Fantasy/Adventure

My others include:

Horror: The Killer Eye

Comedy: Dude Where's My Car

Saw it, loathed it, not seeing it again.

Simple question remains in my head: why on earth did they have to create such a shoddy storyline when so much was open to them?

Consider some of the classic stories available which would have translated well to screen: Time of Troubles or Curse of the Azure Bonds from Forgotten Realms, The Cataclsym or the Twins Saga from Dragonlance. The number of novels and game supplements that have been released surely provided enough source information for even the most demented simpleton (or Dungeon Master!!!) to write a better script. Consider what the movie would have been like if it had featured the feared Black Network, Lords of Waterdeep, Elminster and Myth Drannor. (Yes, I'm a die-hard Forgotten Realms player so apologies for the bias!)

Even without these, it strikes me that the movie was also fairly inaccurate in the sense that although their attention to Dragons was fairly substantial, there were no Dungeons. Considering that the game is all about cooperation and the interaction between different characters leading to eventual success the movie seemed to prefer separating the party more times than it actually performed as a whole.

Like so many films of this genre where the door is left open at the end for a sequel it seems to me that it would have been far better to construct a storyline that was actually conducive to possible further movies.

Finally, Dungeons and Dragons was first released in the late 70s. Surely then it would have been better to write a script that appealed to adults (who in my experience comprise the majority of players) rather than the childish dialogue that patronised my intelligence. If I had taken part in an adventure that followed the storyline of the movie, I would have immediately moved a motion of no confidence in the abilities of my Dungeon Master!


I think marlyn is sweet,cute and funny. Don't ever change =) your #1 fan Michelle

As a UK resident, I went to see the film just yesterday when it came into the cinemas befor I went to my Roleplaying society (of which I am the co-founder!). Hmmmmmm. Well..They tried hard...ish. The CG was good..and..uhhh..the....elf was quite nice and....ummmmm......

Oh Forget it! This Film SUCKED!! Big Time!!

Its tragic but if this was a roleplaying plot line I would tear up the script and throttle the DM!

I won't bother repeating what others have said, because I agree with all of it!! If anyone is thinking of wating the £4.00 entry fee to see this lame assed excuse for a feeble market tie in then don't. Dig out you old first ed D&D book and go hack a few orcs! I guarentee you,ll have more fun!!

PS: Did anyone notice the similarities between the empress and Captain Kirk? Yeppers!! Stilted...line...delivery....anyone???

I'm confused this took 10 years to make? I mean 10 years is a very long time. Also, in 10 years they couldn't make the movie longer and stick with an actual story line? I'm so confused. I mean I could sort of see where he was trying to put elements of the actual game into it, but then he drops them just as quickly and deteriorate what was left of the story line. Sort of reminds me of godzilla, cool graphics no story. Even then, the graphics weren't that amazing, although 10 years ago it'd be pretty cool.

I watched the movie the first weekend it came out. Reason: I love rpg, whether on Pen&Paper, or computer, like Baldurs Gate...i'm sure a lot of people who watched it also like these pc games...and movie was worse. The main story, the fact that the wizard wanted the throne wasn't even developed. Sure, the princess wanted to be a queen, but only so that she could help the people..dwarf and elf never got into a fight...the funny guy dies a hero's death...the list goes on and on..and as if not enough people said it already, wtf happened to simple character interactions, such as dialogue? no clue...but if you're a fan of dnd you gotta watch this movie. there's no way escaping this unless you want to give up on the whole thing. Why? i don't know. i guess its an experience you just have to have

Okay, so it wasn't a great movie. It wasn't even really that good, but give the actors a break. With lines like that, you have to over-act. Snails was one of the only decent characters, so please lay off Marlon Wayans, he played it perfectly.

And its been said before, but the greatest part was being able to say, "Woah! Check it out, Ridley and Snails are totally Gabe and Lex(a bumbling duo a friend and I play).

Truth is, the movie sucked if you don't play D&D.

When I came out of the movie theater after viewing the D&D movie, I had mixed feelings. While seeing my favorite RPG up on the screen for the whole world to see is not a cause for despair, and it was a fairly entertaining movie (in a MST3K kind of way), I just got the feeling that it wasn't Dungeons and Dragons. I got a much more Magic: The Gathering feeling out of it. The way the dragons just kind of APPEARED when the rods were activated just smacks of "summon creature." Profion could've been searching for a Red Mana Battery instead of a Rod of Red Dragon control and the movie would've remained identical. I'm sure many non-gamers who saw the movie now believe D&D to be the same as Magic (if they didn't before). Also, the way the movie treated monsters was simply unthinkable. They had the protagonists fighting guards at every turn. If you look through the movie, you will find not one monster, evil creature, or mythological beast is killed specifically by the "PCs". In fact, the movie was surprisingly skimpy in the whole monster department. While there were a whole lot of pretty CG dragons, they were not very true to the game (being seen as nothing more then angry beasts, with no apparent intelligence, and there didn't seem to be much of a difference in temperment or alignment between the gold and red dragons). There was a weird looking "orc" wandering around the tavern like some Mos Eisley reject, and a strange horned purple man who perhaps is some Magic card creature, but is unregonizable in D&D. Finally, there were beholders. They looked cool, I mean, holy smokes there were BEHOLDERS up there in a movie! Wow, look, beholders! However, after the novelty of seeing moving beholders wore off, it left me wondering how a group of seemingly low level guards could control a group of beings as powerful and xenophobic as beholders. And they didn't even use them. They just kind of flew away. Probably had something to with production costs, but, c'mon, could'nt they have given them just a little more of a role. The imp and the illusionary bone thing were neat, but didn't really do much in the movie either. Finally, the end was really screwed up. I thought, "Wow, are they going to bring back Snails like every gamer who loses a companion does in D&D? No, they all disappeared. What the &*#$! My friend believes that it was some sort of suicide pact, but no one really knows. While the movie wasn't as godawful as some make it out to be, it could certainly have improved by about 60%. Still, I'll probably buy it when it comes to video just to add it to my gamer movie collection.

I'd like to get a copy of the script so I can wipe my ass with it! This was, hands down, the worst fantasy movie I've ever seen! I don't even know where to start in my criticism! I mean, the script was so bad, I don't even think it'd be good enough for a Xena episode! I guess I'll start with the actors. Jeremy Irons is a good actor. Unfortunately, he had amnesia or something during the filming of this movie. He brought to mind an evil Capt. Kirk on crack and a pot of strong coffee. Wayans, though he sucked, was actually one of the better performers in the movie. Thora Birch is good, but she was flat and stiff in this movie. I hope this doesn't damage her young career. It was a good move to cast relative unknowns in the other parts. I'm not so sure if it was that they can't act, or that the script was just THAT BAD. I'd like to believe it was the scripting that ruined the potential for decent acting. Aaaaaggghh!!!(There, I just had to do that) Some people like to point out that this was based on a game to justify a poor movie. I say hogwash! I expected a decent fantasy movie. The fact that it is based on Dungeons & Dragons just raises the expectations. Face it, this was a BAD movie no matter what they called it. I have been playing D & D for 20 years! I know firsthand the type of disrespect that D & D gets from non-players. This movie will only add fuel to that fire. D & D, indeed, the whole fantasy genre needs to earn some respect, at least to the level of Sci-Fi. Instead, we get stuck with TV crap like Hercules and Xena. I almost expected to hear "hip-hop" dialogue in this movie! Either way, the dialogue, script, plot(or lack thereof), sucked bigtime! I just can't believe that with the wealth of great stories and source material for D & D that is available, the producers of this movie came up with this piece of trash! Now to some specifics. The dwarf was too tall!!! In Lord of the Rings, they are shrinking down the actors to portray Dwarves and Hobbits. The same should have been done here. Otherwise, the Dwarf was unneccesary. The Elf Ranger -- let's see, a Ranger wearing a shiny metal breastplate while tracking and sneaking around in the forest -- yeah, right! Could have been done better. The elves themselves -- they looked stupid, to put it plainly. And how about that old fat guy that played the Elf King? Aren't elves supposed to be graceful and beautiful? The Orc-like thing in the tavern -- it looked very fake and very stupid. The beholders -- they were useless to the movie. Obviously, the director wanted to include them as a classic D & D creature, but they didn't do anything! How can a couple of common guards control beholders?!?! I'd like to see a beholder actually do something, like use it's eyestalks, maybe. There went overkill on the dragons, and they didn't even look that good! The thieves guild was OK, but the maze scene seemed too much like a gameshow(now there's a good idea!) -- "pass the maze, you win the prize!", or something like that! Damodar, the warrior with blue lipstick -- give me a break! And what's all this about everyone being equal? What was the Empress doing, debating the merits of the Declaration of Independence? Since when does that type of philosophy belong in a medieval fantasy setting? She's supposed to be a monarch, for crying out loud! Of course, she may care about the well-being of her people and all that good stuff, but this equality thing should not even be thought of in a world where dragons are flying around, heroic warriors are saving the day, and wizards can disintegrate the guy standing next to them! I guess I was expecting more of a grand quest style plot, instead of a campy children's movie. Most D & D players nowadays are adults. The game has been around for almost 30 years. Even the 12 year olds who play this game will have their intelligence insulted by this movie. Sorry if you actually enjoyed this movie, it's your opinion, but I think the concensus shows that you are in a very small minority. I know this sounds like an incoherent rant, but hopefully it makes more sense than the movie's plot. This being said, I do hope they make another go at it and actually do a good job next time. Or maybe a TV series that is serious dramatic fantasy, not the cheesy style seen in Hercules and Xena(I have no idea why those shows are so popular, they suck!) Also, to those of you also despised this movie, I agree with all of your reasons. Hopefully, someone involved with the movie will read all of our comments and learn from them. I'm out!

I just rented the D&D movie and lemme tell you. I am sooooooooo glad that I didn't fork out any more than three dollars for this piece of crap movie. All the bad stuff said above... I agree with. All the good stuff said above, I DON'T agree with. This movie sucked to the billionth power. Bad acting, no character development, bad effects, bad costumes, bad everything. I'm not even that big of a D&D fan, and I still didn't like the way a lot of situations were handled. The movie was so bad... or so I thought. Then the mysterious ending happened and I was sure that Satan himself had written this plot just to torment mankind even further. Can ANYONE tell me what the ending meant? This drives me crazy! If you are gonna make a movie open for interpretation, at least keep the cool stuff like D&D out of it and leave it movies like Schindlers list or something dramatic like that.

"What doesn't kill us only makes us stronger" So I guess that I must be really strong now, because this movie almost killed me from boredom!!!

I know what you're thinking. You're thinking,
"I like Dungeons and Dragons, I might like this
movie despite all the bad reviews." Or you're
thinking, "Most mainstream critics can't review
fantasy/SF movies, so who cares if their reviews
are bad." This is what I was thinking before
renting this movie.

Oh my God.

This movie is painfully bad.

My wife asked at one point during the movie,
"don't they hire actual writers -- I mean, people
who can write -- to write movies?" I just
laughed and laughed.

Do not see this movie.
Do not see this movie.
Do not see this movie.
Do not see this movie even if you love Dungeons
and Dragons and someone else is paying for you
to see it.
Do not see this movie even if seeing it is
necessary to impress someone you are madly in
love with -- trust me, this person is not worth
This movie sucked over and over.
If God comes to you into a dream and tells you
to see this movie, please seriously reconsider
your religious beliefs before doing so.
What sort of people were *turned down* after
offering to write this movie?

This movie was so bad that I have paraphrased
all of the most critical comments that people
have made about movies from my quotes file and
inserted them above.

This movie is so bad that I am desperate for
The Phantom to return to movie reviewing (see
just to see him tear it apart. He would call
it more than "a film unforgettable in its badness
by the very few people who have seen it". He
would say more than "[I] should have known
better, much as the two people who walked out on
the film midway through obviously did."

In closing, do not see this film. Do not think,
"Oh, I'll see it anyway." Do not see this film.
Do not see this film. Do not do not do not do
not do not do not do not do not see this film.
I am so desperate for you, a person I have never
met, to not see this film, that I am typing every
single one of these "do not"'s by hand. Do not
do not do not do not do not do not do not do not
do not do not do not do not do not do not see
this film. It is just bad. Bad bad bad bad bad
bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad bad.


It started off pretty good.

Then it got bad.

Then they tried to make Queen Amidala from Star Wars: TPM, and they did a bad job.

Wayans was kind of funny.

Then it got worse.

Then it got uninteresting.

Then I fell asleep, but then I woke up....but then I fell back asleep.

Then I woke up and the elf-chick was wearing less, +1 credit for the movie.

Then they gave the main bad guy (that wizard guy) dialogue.....BIG mistake.

Then there was the whole mysterious ending thing, which I would like to say was bad, but the movie ended, so I guess it wasn't really that bad.

Do you want to see this movie? Of course you do. But don't...no no, just don't. Wouldn't you just rather see Matrix? Bah, you won't listen to me anyway.

My next review: A Knight's Tale

why r u all love this movie. i play rpg 14 years ago and the movie has many mistakes.xmmmmm... tsr and ad&d make this movie so quick. the only good is the last battle between dragons... (1 rod to control them all????????) good moovie but we the rpg players waited something better. so long. george from greece

I'm also a D&D fan *the RPG for claritys sake*
the movie was awfull. I've never seen so much overacting in my life. Justin Whalin was just plain awful. that he had his big liped goofy looking grin on for the bulk of his over acted scenes made my blood boil with loathing. Thora Birch needs acting lessons, NOW!!! and, pleese, try, not, to, accentuate, every, word! Marlon Wayans I actualy liked as he provided good comic relief. when his charicter died I had to stop the DVD and come back over 4 more tortureous times just to finish the movie since the only good reason for watching it was over. The dragons were quite corny and not at all along the standards set in D&D of how dragons go.
The plot line was so steriotypical it wasnt funny. nothing more on that needs to be said.

an interesting thing I noticed. Zoe McLellans deep red lipstick never comes off or smudges. be it squirming on the floor during a bar fight or kissing that looser Whalin. it never smudges!
other the laughing at Wayans, Gazeing at McLellans lips is about the only thing that kept me watching this flic.

Well it looks like the reviews are picking up now that the movie is out on video. I have been playing D&D and other RPG's since the early 80's, so I greatly anticipated this "10 years in the making" movie. I did, however, expect to be disappointed since the trailers made it look like a kiddie flick instead of a serious treatment of the genre. Many of my complaints (lack of plot, poor acting, etc.) have been covered so I won't re-hash those. However, I will say that IF you are a die-hard D&D fan (like I am), you might want to consider this movie as a rental, though heaven help those who shelled out $ to see it in the theater.

My complaints are not so much with the plot and acting (which have been amply covered elsewhere), but with the treatment of the game/genre itself. Let's see... starting with a gold/silver dragon which acts like it has the intelligence of an orc... don't those things cast spells or at least speak? Then there's the Politically Correct black elf... where I come from them's called DROW, pilgrim. Toss in an inexplicable blue guy (my wife, also a player but of less experience said "honey, I don't remember any blue people in the game," to which I replied "That's because they MADE IT UP!!!")... and you have a recipe for a giant pot of CRAP. Come on, an aprentice that casts dimension door but doesn't know magic missile? Beholders acting as brainless guards? A 1st level thief that, when given a +5 Defender, suddenly becomes a high-level fighter? Goblins/orcs, dwarves and elves all drinking in a tavern in perfect harmony? Burning water? Ridiculously powerful artifacts guarded by parlor tricks and whimpified monsters? Bags 'o magic? A "summon entangling rope" spell? Dimension doors that stay open long enough for other people to follow you through? Swarms of dragons appearing from the ether, mysteriously working in perfect harmony against a common (??) cause? "Elves *ARE* magic?" WTF!!!!!!! ARGHH!!! I can forgive this movie's many faults. But for god's sake, can't someone give us something a little more true-to-form. There are so many great books/modules/etc. out there. I'm just hoping that the Harry Potter movie will be as good as the trailer looks. It's apples and oranges, but at least Ms. Rowling knows enough to demand her expectations be followed to the "T". Anyone see that piece of CRAP adaptation called "Starship Troopers" after reading the book? I rest my case....

::honey, I don't remember any blue people in the game

Incorrect! Xvarts, page 96, Fiend Folio. Blue skin, orange hair.

i'm sorry but i'm not agree with all of you.
I saw the moovie two times, and I think that I'll see at least another two times, that's all, it be just what I want to see (and expect from it)no lee and no more.


Lord of the Rings movie news
'Dungeons and Dragons' -- Don't let the naysayers cheat you

December 08, 2000 at 12:50:21

Have all the negative non-reviews led you to decide NOT to see this movie? Think again. Here's what someone who saw the movie has to say....

"Dungeons and Dragons" has probably gotten the biggest pre-release thumbs-down from critics and Internet know-it-alls of all time. Why? Who knows? They clearly have no idea of what the movie is about.

Is this supposed to be the be-all, end-all fantasy movie? Absolutely not. It's a movie based on a role-playing game system. And anyone who has invested months or years in RPGs knows that the game time can be long, tedious, argumentative, and exciting. What makes a good game really depends on what people hope to get out of it. Some gamers are silly and goofy. Some gamers are serious and dedicated. Some gamers just show up to socialize and may remember to throw the dice when they are supposed to.

Anyone who is going to write a story or tell a story set in the "Dungeons and Dragons" (tm) universe needs to understand what that universe is all about. And that doesn't mean just any gamer will get it. But once you point out the obvious, people eyes' light up and they go, "Oh, yeah!"

So, what's it all about? Character. Yeah, that imaginary person whose life you role-play. To anyone who's nursed a character through several campaigns, it's more than just a few sheets of papers filled with facts and lists of items and goods. That character becomes a part of you. That character represents memories. Maybe the memories aren't always so good. Maybe you're still irked that Rainbo the Magnificent almost got everyone killed two years ago. Maybe you regret sneaking into that wizard's fortress and losing all your magic gear.

Hey, that's what makes the gaming so interesting. You can learn from your mistakes and develop some goals that (in real life) hurt no one and give you a chance to engage in some mental exercise. Some people like to play evil or mischeivous characters. Some people want to be that knight in shining armor (or magic chain mail), running around the landscape challenging monsters, saving damsels, getting a hero's welcome (and reward). Some people like to accumulate stuff: magical weapons, potions, gold, jewels, armor, retainers, castles, ship, land.

Of course that's just the fun side of the game from the player's perspective. On the other side of the table is the dungeon master, the game referee, the guy (or girl) who is there to make sure the world looks real, runs right, and tries to do your characters in at almost every turn. The dungeon master has the thankless task of dreaming up all the wacky adventures your characters get to go on. And nothing is more frustrating than when you spend a couple of weeks working up a nice murderous dungeon only to have all the players decide it's time to find a safe haven, tally up their experience points, and start bumping up their skills.

The dungeon master has to make the bad guys challenging and as unapproachable as possible without making them godlike. No one really wants to be able to lop off heads at the table of the high council of mages unless they've spent a year of their life getting to their point where their characters are powerful enough to do that. You want to swap tales with the other players, especially when new people come into the group. You want to reminisce about all those lucky die throws (and everyone knows some of them were fudged). And you want to recall the characters that you lost, all the great plans you had for them.

I remember one game where I brought in two guys. One was a fighter the other wasn't. I had big plans for that fighter. Unfortunately, he got nailed by a crossbow in the first melee. He never got up again. C'est la vie (or, "Say, la vee" as we used to say in my old gaming group). Oh, yeah. The other guy? The one I thought was expendable? Mr. Meat? He went on to achieve some pretty neat things over the years. No matter how many times I put him in danger, he somehow pulled through (no fudged die rolls as I recall, but then, I wasn't rolling for the DM).

So, what does all this have to do with the movie? Everything. How many times have we sat around the table second-guessing the Dungeon Master? Countless times. Is he right, is he wrong to do it this way? And is it really necessary to go down that road and enter that fortress?

If you want a taste of life as a player you can go see this movie. Ridley and Snails, the two thieves who move the story along, are your average, typical, low-level gamers. That's right, gamers. One wants to go do all these neat things, the other just wants to play it safe. I can't begin to count the number of times I have watched these two archetypes played out among fellow players.

Something I haven't seen in any review of the movie (and most of the ones I've read were written by people who hadn't actually watched the movie) is an acknowledgement of the fact that this movie has a plot, it has characters with motivations, and it is extremely faithful to the core genre.

Sure, DnDmovie.com has been trying to spread the word, but a lot of other sites have been downlaying this movie. Apparently the fact that a lot of dragons will be seen in the movie's climactic battle (and it's not a short battle by any means) has overwhelmed the imaginations of people who think they know better.

The skies are filled with dragons. It's an incredible scene, and the magicians who seem to be so powerful in the previews aren't. They need the Rod of Savrin if they are going to pull off their revolution. But what they haven't stopped to consider is the true price of that revolution.

And here is where the real story-telling kicks in. When the movie begins everything looks like a simple power-play by your average megalomaniacal mage (Jeremy Irons). He's a pretty mean and potent magician. The special effects are only half the portrayal. Irons hams it up but he drives the point home that his character (Profion) is evil and powerful and ambitious. More importanty, Profion is not just a randomly die-roll driven character. His methods are consistent with how any experienced gamer would play that kind of character. He's always got a backup plan. He didn't get to be the biggest, meanest mucketymuck by inheritance: he got there by whalloping the tar out of his competition.

The magicians are capable of subtlety and they produce a few surprises. In fact, the surprises can be a bit unnerving. Marina shows us quickly that she is capable of tossing around some magic, but when she comes up against a more powerful magician she doesn't hang around to trade cantrips for fireball spells. She gets the heck out of there and tears through the city in a classic "We're meat! We're meat!" panic. I remember a few of those chases.

So does Marina ever use her magic against other magicians? Yes and no. Maybe. Absolutely. I'm not going to tell you. But when you see her take action, suddenly a lot of things fall into place. Magic in this system works because it has a method to it. And that method is classic AD&D "you gotta have the right ingredients".

Well, at least until you get to the Elves. AD&D Elves and Dwarves have never really impressed me. I like Tolkien Elves and Dwarves, but if you're going to play the game you have to live with the system as it was designed. The movie lives up to the system's expectations. You get real AD&D Elves and Dwarves. And Tom Baker as the king of the Elves is a very, very good choice.

Baker's character has to awaken Ridley (Justin Whalin) to the fact that there is a LOT MORE going on than just a game of politics. It's not even about the young empress' altruism. A great deal is at stake. The stakes are high for a world built on magic, and if there is any weakness at all in this part of the story it is that they didn't have the wherewithal to get us into Ridley's mind and show us what he sees.

Marina shows some compassion and strength as she and Ridley slowly break down the social barriers which lie between them, but the real show-stealer has got to be Marlon Wayans. Never in a million years would I have anticipated what he pulls off. All I heard about his character (Snails) all year long were whiny "Why is this comedian in the movie?" complaints. It turns out he is perfect for the role, and for the choices that Snails ends up making. Snails starts out as a classic comedic sidekick, but he pulls off a Sam Gamgee maneuver that left the audience I was sitting with stunned.

There was growth in this character. Heck, there is growth in all three of the major characters. Even one of the villains goes through a little personal growth.

Thora Birch as the young empress is the one person in the ensemble who has the least material to work with. She's got her definite assets, and I'm sure the young male (heck, the old male) audience will appreciate a couple of her scenes just for aesthetic reasons. But if there is a reason to be disappointed in the movie's story-telling then it must lie with the failure to open up the empress' motivations to audience scrutiny. We are told what her goals are early on, and she never diverges from that path.

The one scene where Birch gets to come out of the imperial shell occurs in the climactic battle. Suddenly, a lot of what Profion has said about her is proven true. She is a child who is out of her league. And she realizes that very quickly. It's a redemptive moment which prevents the empress from being a simple cardboard cutout, but one can only hope they'll give her more time to wallow in her flaws in the next film.

Notice that I've said very little about the special effects. Given how much nonsense has been made out of the special effects by people one would expect to know better, I don't see the point in talking about them. They're good. You won't be disappointed. But this isn't a special effects movie. It's a character movie. It's about two characters, really: Ridley and Marina. Marina is a little underdeveloped but when it's time for her to let the shades down and unload on Ridley, Zoe McClellan pulls out all the stops.

There is a lot going on in this movie. Not as much as in "The Phantom Menace" (most people really missed what was going on in that movie because it was so complex), but there are certainly things you have to keep an eye out for if you want to understand everything that is going on. It's definitely the kind of movie you should see at least twice.

If you're looking for (demanding) academy award performances you're not going to find them. But the acting is pretty solid, even if some of the lines the actors have to give are cheesy. There have been far worse movies to hit the wide screen: "Clash of the Titans", "Excalibur", "First Knight". And there have been the real dregs that only a producer's mother could love: "Ironmaster", "Yor: Hunter of the Future", "Warrior Queen", "Gor", "Superman III".

One recent non-reviewer feared that "Dungeons and Dragons" might start a genre of movies. Hey, we could do worse. We could get stuck with SciFi's "Dune".

Fantasy fans have been whining all year long about who is being so unfaithful to the original source. Look, here is something that is not only faithful to its source, it's good. That makes it worth seeing. It would be a shame if all the nay-sayers succeeded in killing this movie. Because when you finally get to see it on video or DvD, you're going to wish you had seen it on the big screen.

--Michael Martinez


I don't know if the movie was written and made by people who have played the game. (I find it hard to believe that that is the case). But if anyone on this project did, then they were playing a different game, or some cheap copy... just like the pirated Video CD I watched it on... heheheheh... the producers will never get my money. Thank you Jeremy Irons, for reserving the most disgraceful performance of your acting career for a movie that maybe could have reignited interest in a flailing genre. No wonder you couldn't get the Lord of the Rings gig... serves you right.

Mr. Twisted Menace, you are on crack. There is no possible way the words "plot" or "character development" can be used in association with this piece of tripe.

I also think your claim that "Clash of the Titans", "Excalibur" and "First Knight" were worse movies is laughable. Clash of the Titans certainly lacked in the special effects department, and there was that annoying owl, but overall it was a solid romp through mythology. First Knight sucked, I'll agree, but at least it had Sean Connery. And to slam Excalibur is almost sinful. It's a gorgeous movie, and if you're looking for good wizardly role-models in a film, that's the one to look at. None of this reaching into little dice bags for handfuls of magic fairy dust.

Anyone that says this movie was true to the game needs to get a new DM. The high point of the movie for me was when the party formed outside of the mouth of the dungeon and was getting their nerve together to enter and what happens? I find the low spot in the movie. Only one guy can go in! Is this how your group plays? Do you take turns so that each of your character plays for a while as the rest just sit outside and polish their armor? When I DM I don't let any of my players get bored. You want to see a good D movie check out the comic. Each party member had a purpose, friendships are developed and secrets are being revealed. Read the rulebooks, the players should work together to accomplish their goals. Why have different classes if the rogue can complete the whole adventure by himself? Individually I did see how the characters might have been from a game or two, but as NPCs. I fell asleep during the big dragon fight scene. I saw it already in Jurassic Park so no loss. When that dragon came storming out from the locked room and was not yelling, "Fools! I will destory you!" I knew all the bad stuff I had heard was right.

Mr Twisted Menace, if you ever get to Kansas, let me DM for you. I will show you what the movie should have been like.

Umm.. aren't elves with black skin, Drow?

I can't say much because i have only been playing D&D for 2 years, and i am still learning how to DM.. but now.. to the movie.

My DM (matt} rented this movie before we played "The return to the temple of elemental evil " i watched it.. and i got a few laughs out of snails (marllyn waynes) and then i kinda laughed at the part where a kid controlling G dragons... now i mean C'MON!

i expected the movie to be atleast as long as titanic since it took 10 years to make.. i seriously didn't like the fact where in that bar there were creatures with white faces that kinda looked like a Mr.Miagee now some one tell me what that is.. i have alot of D&D books and i checked in both Monsterous Manual and Monster manual 3rd Edition and i didnt see it in there.. there for its made up.. i didn't like the fact where there Damadar... i seriously dont know what class he is.. and those guards.... looks like they tamed the beholders.. now.. would a thief take on 4-6 guards at once? nah uh i dont think so.. you would probably have to be Tyranny to do that.I am very disapointed in this film and in the future i hope they make a better , LONGER one that actually makes sense.. *cough cough* like the part where that girl mage (i forgot her name) opens a portal and its long enough duration for all the guards and Damadar to come through.. but then when snails gets killed by Damadar and all the crap happens she makes a portal and the duration of it closes right after they go through... it doesn't make sense... and what did that evil mage cast on Damadar when he had those things comming out of his ears.. a Mind Flayer? Some made up Psyonic creature? anyways i reallllly hope they make another D&D movie. oh and by the way i need some DM tips please e-mail me at access_illusionist@hotmail.com

The Thieves Maze: Why is it linear? Maybe "maze" means something different in German.

The Dwarf: Why the hell does he tag along, and why would they let a dwarf who was previously living in a garbage heap to tag along anyway? And why do they never ask him his name the entire time they're together?

The Elf: This is not supposed to be taken as a racial statement, merely one commenting on D&D dynamics - is she supposed to be a Drow? Even Dark Sun elves, who live entirely under the gaze of a burning desert sun, are pale skinned.

The Princess: Why does she attack her own city with Dragons? Profion wants the Rod, she says no. Err... shouldn't that be it?
"I want the rod"
"You can't have it"
"The council will be upset and tell you to give it to me"
"You still can't have it"

Marlon Wayans: How the hell did he ever live as long as he did, as a THIEF? He is the most incompetant rogue I've ever come across.

The Ending: WTF? What the hell was that? And why does the damn dwarf tag along AGAIN? Please please please don't make it mean there's going to be a sequel.

This is the only movie I've ever watched which actually caused me to angrily stand up and shout obscenities at the screen.

After reading through many intelligent and hilarious reviews above, i know that my contribution will in no way be anything to write home about. Quite a few of you should seriously consider reviewing movies professionally (the twisted menace, Lord Banyan, Joel Mcnally, Dark Master, and more), i was very entertained.

But as for my paltry two cents, this movie is about a "C-". The acting, well, they act like all the players in all the games I've ever played in. The dialogue? How many thought provoking monologues do any of you D&D players remember hearing from characters during a game? But they did aptly display a group of new characters in their first real adventure. (Unfortunately their DM was apparently new, too.)

True, the elf was too damn tall and spent a lot of time feeling his head, but his attitudes and beliefs were right on. True, a black elf, no matter HOW damnably attractive, is a drow, and trackers avoid shiny armor. And the fact that Ridley did everything alone bit & chewed ass. And the ending.... ech. But i watched the deleted scenes on DVD, and had they had the money to finish them, it would have made the plot much better.

But Empress Sorvina looked like she was reading off cue cards, each card with apparently only one word, and she seemed unsure of how to say all those big words (words like "deserve). And she showed about as much emotion as someone in a coma. And she had idiotically idealistice views. Hell, whoever let her performance through needs to be shot. And Jeremy Irons needs to try decaf. But for the other characters, they were pretty well acted. Justin Whalin looked perfect as he was about to go insane during the final battle. Marina does a pretentious bitch smacked hard in the crotch by real life. Snails was a good, funny klepto. And so on.

Again, all points good and bad as stated in the above reviews are true, but all in all i had fun. And even through all the flaws i can see what was trying to be done. I think with better writers, a bit more $$$, and more attention to the details of the game itself (dragons DO talk, beholders would've shredded the guards just for shits and giggles, the whole party must be involved, etc.) the impending sequel will be much better.

Then again, i also liked "The Adventures of Baron Munchausen", so mebbe i'm just nutz... oh well...

I usually like movies like D&D, with a minor difference......I prefer it if they have plot and some intelligent dialogue. Five minutes into the movie I was wondering weather the writers were three little kids and a monkey. (I think I might have been right) What bothered me about the movie most of all was the ending. Does anyone get it? I certainly don't. And I usually don't trash on movies but this one is two plots short of a comic. I really wouldn't recommend this movie...unless if you really like fantasy films of the sort. (and I mean REALLY like)

Oh my god!

I just read that someone compared D&D to Excalibur? What the F are you on man! Excalibur was done 20 YEARS AGO!!! Before Ladyhawk, the Conan Movies, Labirinth, Indiana Jones, Willow and Dark Cristal and it managed to be one of the best fantasy movies ever. OK the plot was already writen (the Arthurian Legend being part of western culture for a while), but at least there was drama, there were believable action scenes, the ambiance worked and there weren't too many plot flaws.

Now D&D, they had lotsa a good movies to emulate and even more bad ones from which to learn and avoid making mistakes. At best this movie is comparable to "The Magic Sword" a really bad movie from the… 60's I think. I mean come on, the story unfolds like a gaming session where everyone is either drunk or not listening to the DM because she is also drunk and has a hard time reading the module one of her friends wrote on napkins during a beer bash. Come on, I've improvised better stories on the fly when I had a cold (THESE GUYS HAD YEARS!!!) which Excalibur didn't.

So OK the effects were… nevermind. But clearly the entire staff associated with this piece of green slime knew as much about D&D as a troll knows about personal hygiene. Come on, red and gold dragons that are just big fire breathing lizards? Ok it fits better into the legends of our world. But Beholders??? I mean they only exist in D&D (If you don't take into account Big Trouble in Little China, which is a better movie by far). So if you take Beholders, you kinda have to use them as they are right? I mean when… that Jimmy Olsen guy throws the rock, the Beholders (being paranoid, killing powerhouses) should have blasted in all directions and… OH I get it.
Profusion (or whatever half ass name Jeremy Irons had in this movie), well he came up with a ritual that makes Beholders sane!! The same ritual that transforms all dragons into big stupid lizards, elves into vulcans and dwarves into… Gamorians with hair.

And Oh the final insult… Damodar… and that tentacled thing he got infected with… it hurt and it was killing him but he could controle it and it fed him the thoughts of others OK, I'll buy that. BUT HE HAD BLUE LIPS!!!! How scary is that?

I won't even start on Wayans who is an insult to acting (stick to the Scary Movie genre man). Man the only good thing he manages during the movie is a "noble sacrifice" and they cheapened it by hinting at a sequel where they are to get him back. Can you say the Search for Spock anyone? (Although it was a much better movie than D&D)

And don't even try to compare it to Lord of the Rings. At least the story will be better (and it was writen 50 years ago and Tolkien DIDN'T TAKE 10 YEARS TO WRITE IT). I've see the previews they look better than those of D&D. The Dwarves and Elves look like they are supposed to. The goblins and orcs too.
OK, the trolls look like grey Shreks without the antenae (from what I've seen) but at least they still manage to look impressive from their movement (not clumbsy automatons like the Dragons of D&D).

So who ever dared compare Excalibur to D&D consider yourself slapped in the face, I challenge thee to a duel (chose the weapons and the arena) you have insulted my honor and that of every gamer by daring to compare these movies, I demand satisfaction you son of an incestuous goat (sorry I watched 3 Amigos last week, and even that sorry movie was better than D&D)

Cofee break is over, must get back to work and wipe the foam off the corner of my mouth.


Hey Folks,
the buzz on some of the net and in the media is that LOTR is amazing.
It gives me hope that when I see it next thursday I won't come out of the theater pissed off that I could have bought a 6 pack instead of going to the movies.

Well only time will tell if I'm wrong in hoping it will be a gezillion times better than the D&D movie... please let it be so.

Oh by the way, I've heard that there are projects for D&D 2 and 3... yipee! Maybe they can make them worst and worst like they did for all the Highlander Sequels!!!

-"There should only have been one!"


A little late for this, probably, but I just recently found this site. I saw DnD on DVD months ago. Not the worst movie I've ever seen, but it's probably on my list of "bottom ten." I could reiterate all the negative comments stated here already, but it's not worth it. The movie is terrible. But it didn't have to be this bad; it could have gotten a D instead of the very solid F that it currently holds. Like I said, I watched it on DVD and I took a look at the deleted scenes. Whoever edited this movie destroyed any semblance of a story that it had! All the transitional scenes (how did they find the theives' guild? why are they involved in this at all? what happened in the map?) were removed. Completely. This leaves little more than the standard "OK, you're in a tavern..." type of scenario. I don't remember the details, as time has graciously blurred my memory of this tripe, but to anyone who hasn't seen it yet and is feeling overly masochistic, try the DVD and watch the special features afterwards. There once was a little bit of a plot behind this movie. Not much of one, but something.


I thought this was interesting. Found it while surfing around. It's from the following transcript:


WEIS: [laughter] Strange! To put it briefly, when TSR was under its mismanagement, they sold the rights to the quote AD&D MOVIE unquote for a very low sum to this sort of shady character who had five years to do something with it. Well, the five years were almost up, and Wizard was on the horizon, and he suddenly realized he had to do something with it, or he was going to lose it. What we understand, and this all strictly rumor and innuendo, is that he is making a very "schlocky" low budget AD&D movie. That it's being filmed in Yugoslavia or something, just in order to keep the rights. And so, that was in fact one of the reasons they put Dragonlance into the SAGA system. They hoped that by doing that they could get out from, since Dragonlance wouldn't be AD&D it wouldn't fall under this legal constraint. Well, of course, now they are taking him to court, he is taking them to court. It's all a big mess.

so yeah, most people would say this movie was bad (and of course i never got around to seeing it in theatres, it wasn't until about a month ago that i actually saw it lol, oh how life goes, but any ways, i loved it, this movie i thought, was inovative, and interesting, I often found my self working for content on my campaign, drawing out dungeons, and writting up magic item descriptions as this movie was playing. I enjoyed it, despite the fact that scores of people didn't enjoy it, of course i guess in some ways it was better than Super Mario Brothers Movie lol

I didn't bother reading all these responses because they all say the same thing, pretty much. There was one subset of things I liked. The blood coming out of Snails' body, tapestry showing dragons raining fiery death on each other...if it involved death and didn't really directly involve any of the actors, it was cool. The dragon skeleton in the library. The pool of spreading blood. If there were explosions, I liked them. The pool of spreading blood...you get the idea.

Dungeons and Dragons was the most painful movie I've ever watched. I wanted to scream.
The actors NEVER used contractions. Not even in situations where they'd be acceptable- even in medieval based society.
There was no plot. There was a random string of events tied together by the fact that the same characters participated in them.
The Half-Drow (or full Drow) Elf Ranger was trying too hard to be Vulcan. Her armor was also insulting.
The Dwarf had the best line in the whole movie "You need to get a Dwarf woman with some facial hair you can really grab on to" or some such. That was funny- but the character was tedious.
The dragons should have eaten everyone.
I have seen B grade fantasy flicks that are better than this mess. I have written scenarios as DM that are ten times better than this. My Players are more literate and better actors than most of the cast. As a movie goer and a gamer I am insulted that this even has the title "Dungeons and Dragons" attached to it.

Watch it and then tell me I'm wrong.

I saw the movie when It came to theaters a few years back. LOTR has been cool. Matrix movies are cool. However I must say that I have written better short stories than D&D the movie on a school computer in a church-school than I saw in this movie. I don't blame the actors. There was no way they could've done this well. I don't know why they took the script, though. I wouldn't have for a million bucks. Seriously I probably wouldn't have. Now I had trouble figure out that that chap was a dwarf. This was because he was bigger than marlon waynes, who would have been great comic relief if he had some good lines. In truth, I only blame the actors for actually choosing the script. The "writers" (read infinite number of monkeys on infintie number of typewriters)and "director" (read man with broken vision) are the ones to blame. Of course even they are not truly at fault. The morons in the suits at whichever studio did this are the real problem. Most of the badness was their idea. They go on surveys that don't work and claim they're giving the people what they want. This should have been an independent film. It would've been a cult classic at least then. that's my two cents worth.
Neurotically yours, Theo

Hellooooo??!! What is wrong with you people? Do you expect to have this life/thought changing process when you go to see a *fantasy* movie? No, of course not, that's why it's called fantasy. Who cares if it's not like Star Wars or LOTR? Good for you Courtney. The movie was just plain fun unless you go in with some profound expectations of a first time director and not too well known actors/actresses. Enough of your so called better writing skills, get over it people. It's a movie. And a darn good one at that.

This movie was the worst movie I've seen in a decade. I know there are loads more lame movies made this year (like : how to get rid of a guy in 10 days) but this was nevertheless too bad for words.
It allready looked bad since "Gargamel of the smurfs" appeared in the beginning of the movie. It has really low intellectual components , what I DID expect from a movie called that. I guess if movies keep getting more brainless, they should just play oldskool sf/fantasy movies in theaters again. I also wonder what the director/script writer was thinking when making up that irritating thief character. Wasn't it obvious, that would be the WORST component of the entire film??

"And a darn good one at that."

WTF are you on NoMovieCritic?

What was good in this movie?

While I agree with you that one shouldn't expect fantasy and action movies to be life changing events, there is a limit to the lameness one can expect from them without feeling like puking.

Sure there have been and will be worst movies. None the less, It has been the worst movie I have seen since. Even that lemon of a movie "Blade II" was better for crying out loud!

As for writing skills, while I wouldn't dare write a movie, I know I have writtent better plots and more coherent stories that that which was found in this book.

But NoMovieCritic, this should be good news for you. WoC has announced a sequel, yup, you heard me another lemon is on the rise.

I only have two words for anyone who is thinking of watching this movie:

Thora Birch

Now THAT is enough said.

I've seen "My Demon Lover" and ALL the sequels to "Psycho." That said, "Dungeons & Dragons" was the worst movie I've ever seen.

However, watching this movie, I laughed all the way through it.

Everything about this movie reminded me of a D&D session gone awry. One of those sessions where half the players don't show up, half of those that do are drunk, and the rest realize they're in a ridiculous situation where nothing epic will happen, so they just go ahead and play as loonie and corny as they feel like. Bad stereotypes? Sure! PCs/NPCs that shouldn't be possible? You bet! Monsters that do the direct opposite of what they should? Why not?

I love epic, challenging, years-spanning games that stretch the limits of my wit, intellect and stamina. In taking the games so seriously though, it's easy to loose track of what brought everyone together in the first place - to have fun. Sometimes a group NEEDS a session that leaves everyone puzzled and then going off like hyenas on nitrous oxide at the sheer cheesy stupidity of it. This movie brought those lunatic pressure-valve sessions back to the forefront of my memory.

As a movie, this sucked. As an example of the cerebral pleasures of D&D, it failed miserably. But for blowing off steam with an utterly ridiculous story that nobody in their right mind would take seriously, I find no better choice.

ok, the movie D&D surely wasnt one of the best movies made. so i just want to know if "you, the movie viewing public" were to make a movie on lets say, D&D, Forgotten Realms, or whatever fantasy role playing game that it may be, what would you like to see happen on the big screen. heck i say lets all come together as one with a plot, story line, charicters and so on and so on then submit our idea to whomever it may take to see if we can get such a movie made. after all who knows better what the public wants to see than the public itself. its just a thought.

My friends and I saw this and watched in slack jawed amazement, literally slumping down in our seats in the near empty theater from embarassment, even as we tittered in hilarity at what we saw onscreen.

It was as if a highschool play was given a movie budget and Jeremy Irons. I don't just mean it sucked - I mean it sucked in ways that were specific to amateur storytellers and movie makers. It was very much what I imagine would happen if someone handed a few million bucks to the average game-store geek and told him to film his own campaign. The acting - quite literally - was on par with a mediocre highschool play - and I mean mediocre - I've seen better performances by 16 year old thespians, trained by English teachers. You think I'm exagerrating to be colorful, don't you?

The reviews themselves - which I'l post if I get some time, are as entertaining- and the movie WAS entertaining, though not as intended. We had a great time watching it. But more than that - you MUST get the DVD and listen to the director and the lead actor talking in the VO, as if they made Citizen Kane, chortling about each other's brilliance in various scenes and shots. To hear these people rationalizing the choices they made, while completely missing on eggregious mistakes is priceless entertainment in itself, as are the many reviews of this movie.

"heck i say lets all come together as one with a plot, story line, charicters and so on and so on then submit our idea to whomever it may take to see if we can get such a movie made. after all who knows better what the public wants to see than the public itself. its just a thought."

I don't mean to be rude, but this is what Neil Gaiman calls the myth of the Big Idea. The perception is that the hard part of writing anything is having the Big Idea, which you can then hand gift-wrapped to some writer for the "simple" task of development. I think most writers would tell you that it is far harder to develop a good-sounding idea than it is to have the idea itself--which often comes unbidden anyway. The hard part of writing is the discipline and the courage to persevere through the mediocre parts of one's own pages of script to create something that is salvageable--and hopefully, entertaining--in the end.

Also, I have some experience with the attempt to create a plot in a web-based group setting, and I can assure you that you are unlikely to get anything better by this method than the regrettable movie about which this thread was started.

Richard O'Brien saves this movie. He was tragically underrated. He's great.

To be honest, this movie has few saving graces, and as much as I tried to love it, it quickly dawned on me that it were crap. But Marina was fit though, wasn't she?

Wasn't she?


Oh, never mind.

[Sings to himself] Lovely Marina, have you seen her, drinking Ribena, in the cantina, I've never been keener, to show her my weiner, it's never been cleaner...

No takers on the Marina thing?


More for me, then! See yez, I'm going courting. If you need me, I'll be at Miss McLellan's house.

[Sings] Lovely Marina, have you seen her, drinking Ribena...

(Exits, dressed in his best cravat, carrying a bouqet of flowers, all Pride & Predjudice-like)

Did you know the book is out? Yeah they actually printed the book.

So it's called "D&D the Movie, The book."? At least you can make the acting good when you imagine it. The story will still suck though.

Hope it's got lots of lovely pictures of Marina in it. I shall laminate them and use them for my own foul purposes...

Stating the same thing over and over again can make enemies too.

Marina was indeed fit, but we did not get to see any of her skin. Even so, she looked more like my drama-school girlfriend at a Halloween party.

My god - DO RENT the DVD and LISTEN to the commentary. It is truly spectacular to listen to these gamestore geeks patting each other on the back for their "brilliance".

Actually Neph that is a great way to spend an evening. Get a few beers, listen the the commentaries and then play munchkin or pictionnary or Once Upon a Time.

Thanks, I'll keep you posted on how it turns out.

Is it just me or is Marina actually kinda scary looking?

Oooh, you shouldn't have said that...

(Ignites double-edged lightsaber)

I was wondering what that ghoul was doing there. Is she supposed to be the romantic lead or something? She needs to cut down on the carrion.

She does look rater skeletal, doesn't she?

Activates the bad-ass purple lightsaber.
Darth Maul was a pussy.

Mace Windu: "Take my lightsaber out of the bag and give it back to me."
Genosian: "How do I know which one is yours?"
Mace Windu: "Mine's the one that says 'Bad Mother Fucker' on the side."

She does look a bit like some of my university girlfriends who weren't Goth themselves, but who searched their wardrobes for clothes to wear out to Goth clubs with me.

Ooooh, you shouldn't have said that...

(Ignites OTHER double-edged lightsaber)

HA HA HA! That's right, I am a grand master of that most elusive of arts, Form XIII Lightsaber Combat. Combat involving four blades! Mwa ha ha! FOUR AGAINST ONE! Mwa Ha Ha!

I'm starting a pool on how long it takes Olly to decapitate himself with these weapons. I say he kills himself in less than 5 movements.

Ever see the Star Wars Kid Olly?

I was trained in the Sith arts since I was born, Sam, (apart from a five year stint at RADA!) I think I know what I'm doing.

(Trips over cape. Picks himself up and brushes himself off)

I meant to do that. Come on, Eater, I'm gonna get twentieth-century on your ass.

I laughed so hard about the Mace Windu pulp finction gag (thanks) it would make a great cartoon strip.

Oh speaking of movies that don't suck. Saw Return of the King, last night.
AMAZING! I gotta tell ya, if Sean Astin doesn't at leaast get nominated for an Oscar this year, the Academy is filled with inbred cretins.
See this is what Revolutions should have been like, not the insipid piece of shit they threw at us while making it a planetary event.
Of course mr Jackson had agreat story to start with, so he had a solid foundation for his movie.
Still the storytelling skills this man shows in the making of this trilogy are unsurpassed. The movie had everything: Emotion, drama, action, humour, suspense (even if I had read the books 5 times), closure. Wow, I can't wait for the extended version so we can waste away long weekends doing LOTR marathons.
And Olly, after seeing Sam deal with Shelob and the orcs holding Frodo, you'll never say that hobbit is a wuss.

I didn't say he was a wuss, Sam, I just said he was ever so slightly gay...

"Oh, Mr. Frodo, let me take your ring!"
"That's not my finger, Mr. Frodo."

Hum... should have figured.

Won't take the bait though.

My money is on the overly dramatic opening move. A billowing cape and flashing red lightsabes. Fog flowing around our feet. Then, pop! Olly's head is on the ground.

::puts away unopened can of whoopass::

And has anyone seen the Jack Black/Sarah Michelle Gellar LotR gag from the MTV Movie Awards?

My money's on my overly dramatic opening move, even better than Eater's. I leap upwards, blades whining like angry mosquitoes, in a whirling storm of white-hot energy. Then FZZZT...

I've smudged Eater's black lipstick! Eater collapses in shame as his goth mates arrive on the scene and mock him. I grin. The phone rings, and it's Peter Jackson, saying he wants to reshoot the trilogy, considering his original version to be crap, and has recast me for Legolas. I agree, on the condition that I punch Orlando Bloom repeatedly in the face whenever I feel like it. He agrees. I hang up the phone, but at this moment, Allyson Hannigan, Tina Barrett, Sophie Ellis Bextor, Patricia Valasquez, Christina Ricci and Zoe McLellan arrive on the scene, and perform lewd sexual acts which would make even the most experienced pornstars wince, with me and one another...

...And then I wake up, my lower torso covered in a sticky fluid.

That was a dream Olly. You're getting it confused with what happened after you chopped your own head off. Allyson Hannigan, Tina Barrett, Sophie Ellis Bextor, Patricia Valasquez, Christina Ricci and Zoe McLellan all arrived on the scene and performed the lewd sexual acts with me and Thora Birch was the other, oh and my lipstick was smudged on their breasts.

I can see how you'd get that confused though, there was alot of undulating flesh.

Sorry, Eater. I do get so confused when my head is severed.

Although, I must admit, the guy they were performing on wasn't a lanky streak of Goth piss like yourself, he was more of a short fella, with curly blonde hair and big, gross, hairy feet, and he wasn't performing with several lovely ladies at all.

In fact, he was being sodomised by another short fella, with curly dark hair and big, gross, hairy feet, and there was some horrible, emaciated, snivelling creature video taping it and talking to himself...

...Saying something like "Clever Smeagol video Master and the fat hobbit playing bumming then sell it on the Internet"...

... Come to think about it... his name was...


No, sorry Olly you were watching the "Sam And Frodo Go To Canada" video not the "Several Goregeous Ladies And A Lanky Streak Of Goth Manliness" video that I was refering to. It was aired right after the "Star Wars Kid Episode II: Ghyslain And Olly Strike Back" on BBC2.

And how many BBCs do you people have now? Why don't you just go with satelite feeds and have like 500 chanels? I'll never understand you Brits.

We're having a big thing over here with these marvellous new inventions called 'Telling bones'.

You dial a number, and then you say "Ahoy, Ahoy!" and then you hear a voice speaking to you, it's brilliant. But it'll never catch on.

My folks had a Brit friend when I was a kid and whenever he talked on the phone he said 'ta-ta'.

That'd be great.

That'd be great.