VeteranLight I don't have all the words right now but this film is a work of art.

Tedfoldol everything you have heard about this movie is true.

ChicRawIdol A brilliant film that helped define a genre

Baseshment I like movies that are aware of what they are selling... without [any] greater aspirations than to make people laugh and that's it.

lluewhyn My wife and I were over at a friend's house and found out that he had obtained a copy of this movie and asked if we wanted to watch it. We ended up being tortured for nearly two hours.We all really liked the first Gamers movie. Despite its very cheap budget, it was fairly well done and focused. Although some jokes at random gamer culture were tossed around (such as the one college gamer with a girlfriend who ditches the game to go out on an actual date), the humor was primarily about one thing: how ludicrous the story would actually look based upon the actions, rules and die rolls of the game. Although the gamers were all typically dorks, you could laugh at the portrayal and see the various ways that we all have acted like that in the past. For the most part, a lot of the scenes actually came off as actual videotapes from a game.The second one had a higher production budget but was a lot more scattershot in its targets. Although there was a little bit of odd humor in the way the game would play out based upon player actions, there was also jokes about ineffective character classes, a complete novice somehow combining obscure feats and traits to make an OP character, a male player playing a female character completely wrong, and random gaming references like light-sabers and cards from Munchkin. There were still plenty of jokes that hit the mark, despite them being all over the place.One other noticeable change is that the characters were a lot less sympathetic. The DM was a rail-roader, but an otherwise nice guy, and his new girlfriend was also a positively portrayed dork. However, the three main players consisted of two obnoxious jerks and one guy who was creepy and apparently mentally ill. These were the kind of players that you would quit games if they joined.Which brings us to this third movie.The entire movie focuses on one of the aforementioned jerks attempting to win a Gen Con card game that's like Magic combined with a campaign story. The card game isn't something that we can relate to because it's not similar to anything currently on the market. Therefore, the scenes from what's taking place have no basis of comparison to anything the audience has experienced. They are all awfully rendered with horrendous computer backdrops as opposed to actual scenes on location like the previous movies. There's also an overall narrative about the characters realizing that they're just pawns in a card game (hence the title) that goes basically nowhere.Oh, and did I mention that the reason that the aforementioned jerk is playing a card game at this convention just so he can try to get into a girl's pants? I don't just mean end up dating her, he's literally serious about using this opportunity to try to have sex with her. Plenty of other obnoxious and misogynous comments are dropped all over the place as well, making gamer culture look absolutely repulsive. Although there is definitely sexism in gaming, the behavior of these players (including the protagonist) would likely result in a fight. (My wife said she'd knock the teeth in if other players made the kind of suggestive comments that these were making to her face).Virtually every portrayal of a gamer is negative in some way. They're either abusive, clueless, completely absorbed in their own reality or all of the above. Even Lodge and Joanna having a healthy relationship and mutual love of gaming are picked on for having almost no sex together.Gary, the slightly creepy player from the last movie goes full on creepy and psycho for laughs. There's a subplot about him having a hate-filled anger towards a cartoon character that caused his favorite television show to be cancelled, and taking it out on the actual hired mascot playing that character at the convention. He's shown physically assaulting this poor schmuck numerous times, and at one point kidnaps him and covers him in gasoline as revenge. Yep, we're supposed to be laughing at one of the main characters attempting to burn an innocent man to death because his favorite television show was cancelled.So, in summary, the plot of the story revolves around a despicable character playing a game neither he nor we care about in hopes of having sex with a woman who finds him repulsive. The "money shots" of seeing the game played in real action looks horrendous with poor special effects and drags on with little point. Finally, almost all other portrayals of characters other than the main protagonist are used to negatively portray gamers as anti-social psychos who have too much time and money on their hands.I'll give it two stars because despite all of the dreck there were actually a couple of jokes that were actually funny (the scene where the protagonist is confronted by the Legacy in the hallway was clever), and the movie finally comes to some kind of competently written climax in the final card match. The rest was just unbearable to watch.

John Cathcart One of the things that made the first two movies in this series great was that I could identify with the characters in the movie. I saw bits of myself and other gamers I've known in those characters. I also understood the game and the rules the movie was based around (Dungeons and Dragons) which only further pulled me into the story.When I originally heard that there was to be a third movie in the series, I, and my entire gaming group were immensely excited about it. We couldn't wait to see where they took their characters next or what kinds of ridiculous things might happen... then we all saw it and a resounding sense of disappointment set in.Now the movie wasn't about a group of gamers playing a game that we recognized or understood with characters we could identify with. It was about a single gamer playing a fictitious game that no one could ever really identify with on the same level as the other movies because no one has ever played that game. Even if we have played other card based games like it, we haven't played THAT game and have no understanding of the rules or reasoning behind it.There was no roleplaying, no game to recognize and laugh about or think that the players were using a clever twist on the rules, and no connection to the story. Ultimately, while it had better production value than the previous movies, I never connected with the movie in any kind of meaningful way and generally which left me feeling disappointed.I'm not saying it's a bad movie, because it isn't a bad movie. It just was just missing everything that I found fantastic about the first two movies.

sethmd73 I am one of the 4,311 people who helped make (at the time) The Gamers: Hands of Fate the largest crowdfunded movie via Kickstarter. As a fan and follower of Dead Gentlemen Productions and Zombie Orpheus Entertainment, I knew going in that this was going to be a very different story than its predecessors: The Gamers (2002) and The Gamers: Dorkness Rising (2008). That said, you know I've got both rose colored glasses as a fan, and a critical eye as someone who threw money at this to get it made.There are several stories intertwined here: Cass (Brian Lewis) trying to win a date with Natalie (Trin Miller); Joanna (Carol Roscoe) dealing with an anticipated marriage proposal from Lodge (Nathan Rice); Gary (Christian Doyle) confronting Chibichan, the dreaded destroyer of his favorite T.V. show; and the card game characters Myriad (Samara Lerman) and Dundareel (Jesse Lee Keeter) having to deal with the fate that has been handed to them; just to name a few. The story weaves very well from beat to beat and it is easy to follow the flow.Overall, I was not disappointed with my investment, writer Matt Vancil does a fantastic job setting pieces in motion and the entire ensemble steps up and delivers. Every actor, especially the supporting actors, have some great moments to shine. It is not a cheeky gamer comedy, but an enjoyable drama. I agree with other reviewers that Gary's story starts out funny and the denouement is also good, but gets a bit too dark. Finally, kudos to Steven Wolbrecht who pieced together a very nice score and some memorable songs. I look forward to backing the next one.

fettguy1138 As a fan of all works by Dead Gentlemen Productions and Zombie Orpheus Entertainment, I was unsure of what to expect with this movie. At a convention panel earlier this year, ZOE showed the first 5 minutes of the film. They also let us know that they would be doing something different with this one. Previous movies have followed a singular storyline, with different plot points along the way. In this installment, characters each kind of follow their own story lines, each to be explored individually. The movie centers around Cass: an "I'm better than these dorks" kind of gamer who breaks most of the stereotypes. He learns to play a CCG (or TCG, depending on your lexicon) to impress a girl. His adventure takes him through character development and growth, and he is a little less douchy for it.Lodge, Joanna, Gary and Leo are all there in some capacity, but much less than in other films. Their story lines are going to be explored in a number of ways by ZOE in the future. Gary provides a good amount of comic relief, but shows a more sensitive side during this film.When I first watched this movie, I appreciated what ZOE did with their budget. Seeing truly creative people get some serious funding allows them to show what they can do. True, this movie wasn't as funny as other Gamers movies, but it was more whole. It showed that even the most elite Gamer can grow, and that forgiveness can be found in the most unlikely of places. Overall, this movie was a better movie than any previous Gamers flick. I can't wait to see the stories that surround the rest of the gang's GenCon experience.Worth the time? Absolutely Worth the money? Definitely