Chirphymium It's entirely possible that sending the audience out feeling lousy was intentional

Megamind To all those who have watched it: I hope you enjoyed it as much as I do.

Robert Joyner The plot isn't so bad, but the pace of storytelling is too slow which makes people bored. Certain moments are so obvious and unnecessary for the main plot. I would've fast-forwarded those moments if it was an online streaming. The ending looks like implying a sequel, not sure if this movie will get one

Mandeep Tyson The acting in this movie is really good.

pietroschek Dungeons & Dragons 3 – Book of Vile DarknessD&D has grown adult, and the third movie is finally mature and courageous enough to dare using protagonists who are antiheroes at best, or hellbent villains at their worst. Once again the lower- budget movies' value has to do with its authenticity to the roleplaying game it IS attached to. To give an example to readers:The wizard of the group, actually a wizard by base class and vermin lord by prestige class, is really inspired by a class which the supposedly evil Book of Vile Darkness allows roleplayers to create. Seemingly it is based on the outdated 3,5 or 4th edition of the game-books.The Shadakai Witch then, just to mention one special aspect, is able of healing magic, as is shown in the movie. This is crucial for a disciplined witch is much more subtle than another religious cleric all too eager to pester absolutely everyone with another sermon about why his or her deity is the best choice... My hint is comparing her to the main evil witch of 'Hansel & Gretel – Witchhunters', as that one was well-performed, and showing a veteran, no-nonsense wicked evil lady.Just as a paladin does not start all-flawless among the do-good- meddlers, so does evil not automatically mean perfection either. Roleplayers of D&D call it levels. Levels of Experience, which is in example earned by adventuring and vanquishing foes, means growing levels of competence. To give some well known examples: 1: Gandalf from Lord of the Rings was a wizard. Gandalf the Grey was a lower level than Gandalf the White ( or Black, if Evil), for the change of robes signaled it. 2: A boyscout age 12 could be considered a ranger level 1, but to form guys like Aragorn, Lord of the Rings, or Jon Snow,Game of Thrones, it would need a progressive development which roleplayers would consider the accumulation of advanced levels of experience in the ranger character class. 3: In real life a paramedic is a less competent healer than the accomplished doctors, still both could be considered to be of the healing class. The details then come due experience gain which is symbolizing the increasing of competences (and special effects for movies). This movie is mostly for adults. It gives hints at sex, murder for fun, personal gratification & profit, uses the concept of 'Liquid Pain' from the written Book of Vile Darkness, and uses monsters, like the Undead Child, to grow beyond & above the monster-slayer stereotype. Technically it remains a lower-budget work, still the actors are motivated, aware of what role they play and doing their best in a humorous yet darkly crueler way. It makes this movie outstanding among roleplayers, as 'good-guy charades' are considered a more proper, but actually only more stupid, moralist & hypocrite way to make use of Dungeons & Dragons. Context: A knight who was just a little bit befuddled by his supposed deity's reaction to his dedication awakes left for dead and has to face the selfish task of rescuing his father along with the chance to fight some real Evil. Contrary to dumbest and most crude approach he cannot just draw his sword and make all the bad guys jump into it. Henceforth he has to learn how to infiltrate a villainous group of evil adventurers, play along with their goals, and ultimately remember his real priorities. To the benefit of the audience this is achieved without making the other characters ill- portrayed or suppressed! A Non-Roleplayer can rightfully vote it 0 to 10 by taste. But as one of the movies blending acting and roleplaiyng into one the achievements, many unique and first time dared, should result in a rating of 6 to 10. My class-choice by book? Base Class: Wizard; Prestige Class: Diabolist or Disciple of Mephistopheles. ;-)

Anssi Vartiainen As someone who has played D&D for years, I can only marvel how this movie even manages to exist. It feels like someone literally took their campaign notes and used them as a script. It's not a movie inspired by roleplaying games, it's not based on any single campaign. It simply is a campaign, word for word.And for what it is, it's amazing. The world of Dungeons & Dragons is transferred to the silver screen in all of its geeky glory. Men of might and valor set worth from their rural origins to battle great evil. Necromancers openly walk the streets, mass murdering people left and right with their black magic. Because that's what you do when you're evil. Loot is gathered, and even sold in stores, using the geekiest names imaginable. Dragons are slain, forces vanquished and damsels saved. It's glorious.It's also stupid beyond all belief, don't get me wrong, but that's how we like it. The acting is surprisingly decent, given the budget, but it's still pretty terrible. The technical aspects show the lack of budget and the story... well, as stated, I think they simply used the campaign notes instead of writing an actual script.This movie has a lot of "so bad it's good" value to it, especially if you're a gamer. It's bad, it's oh so bad, but it's entertaining as well. Exercise caution and bring a bowl of popcorn.

TheLittleSongbird That is saying a lot though, because the first Dungeons & Dragons gets my vote as the worst fantasy film ever made and among the worst movies in general; the second is a little better but is rather mediocre. Dungeons & Dragons: The Book of Vile Darkness isn't great but compared to the previous movies it's certainly watchable. The ending is far too rushed and anti-climatic, also on the convoluted side. The dragon battle is also rather hastily paced and a little cheap-looking. The movie does drag a little at the beginning(the prologue maybe could have been trimmed a bit), there is the odd cheesy line and Jack Derges looks somewhat ill at ease as the hero. The cast mostly are very reasonable though, the best of the lot is Barry Aird as Bezz who is very menacing but in an understated way, thankfully a far cry from the chewing-the-scenery-to-pieces approach seen with Jeremy Irons in the first. Lex Daniel is an amusing and threatening assassin and Eleanor Gecks is sexy while not falling into the trap of being too vapid. There are definitely far cheaper-looking movies than Dungeons & Dragons: The Book of Vile Darkness, the costumes are decent enough and the scenery is great. The special effects aren't award-worthy with the dragon being a disappointment but they do look as though some effort was put into them. The undead mutant child is really creepy and in a good way. The make-up is good as well, especially for Bezz. The music is dynamic enough and at least has a pace to it, the characters have a likability generally(they're not too bland and none of them are anywhere near as irritating as the one played by Marlon Wayans in the first), and the dialogue while ropey at times is still an improvement over the script-writing of the previous two movies, being thought-out and cohesive and there is little misplaced humour or tedious melodrama. The story is fun, swiftly paced and with a welcome dark and gritty touch, thankfully not going the camp or melodramatic route which the first two did, and the action excepting the dragon battle is decently choreographed with some intensity and energy. What Dungeons and Dragons: The Book of Vile Darkness also has over its predecessors is that it is more loyal in spirit to what makes Dungeons & Dragons as an overall franchise work so well with the odd referencing, which the first two movies did not. Overall, the definitive Dungeons & Dragons is yet to be made and this movie doesn't really do the franchise justice, but it is not a bad movie at all and a significant improvement over the second and especially the first. 6/10 Bethany Cox

SnoopyStyle A young man tries to join The Knights of the New Sun. However it has been too peaceful for too long, and the knights have been corrupted. The Knights are massacred and only the young man survives. He and a band of morally questionable warriors must stop the reawakening of a great evil.The characters are actually quite compelling. Most of them live by the idea of survival of the fittest. They have no time for the weak. It makes for an interesting group of heroes. And the actors play their parts very well. The scale of production and the effects are on the small scale but that's not unexpected. The movie is going well, but the ending is too convoluted. The action and the storypoints become too confusing and random. It was at least 5/10 if not for the ending.