Dungeons & Dragons: The Book of Vile Darkness

It is a surprise to find a decent, alluring story within this series of films, though I didn't find the 2nd film as bad as others say. I did see a bad trailer for this latest edition, so I wasn't expecting much at all. The production team here found a winning combination mixing more macabre, darker sensibilities with the fantasy, finally,(!) for this seems a better understanding of how it would be. Acknowledging that this entry is of a modest budget, I did find it to be more compelling than the other entries. My only real criteria, is that the ending appeared to be rather hasty, and also, I found the casting the knights father flawed in that he didn't appear old enough.

It is a shame that market constraints for this kind of film are so limited, I would love to see this at a longer running time, and explore these themes as novels are able to do, but given the constraints this production does create an intriguing moral predicament for this knight, and maintains an interesting atmosphere that adds much resonance to the story. Also the acting and the CGI effects are decent, the dragon in particular was surprisingly well done. Here's to a new direction in this series, I hope the creators can explore more fully.

Although not an immediate favorite as far as made-for-video flicks go, I will admit this has gained a small spot in my viewing collection. Likely would not spend money on the DVD unless I just wanted to have a reference so as pen a sequel based off events from this third adventure. With the wonder of YouTube posting, anybody can watch this online for free basically. The movie has its pros and cons like any other feature. I appreciated the diversity in characters in the main group, although typical of classes: barbarian, thief, spell-caster and knight. The "knight" of the group, Grayson I could not truly get behind due to his immaturity throughout most of the quest (nothing personal against the actor himself, his character was just simply annoying). I might have appreciated Grayson more if he had a shred of cunning and direction in his personal mission to save his father, but seeming painfully too green to take seriously as a growing hero. The others in the party, were decent in their roles. Misses with this one would be the back-and-forth direction of attitudes among the party members, particularly between Grayson and Akordia (whom I know every male viewer absolutely could not get enough of. And I'm not saying I could deny the appeal either). Her character struck as being almost bipolar as one minute she's darkly-sweet, the next she turns on her own allies, including lover boy Grayson. This brings me up to my next point of the alleged love story. It too had a bipolar feel to it I could not (imo) get behind. And in the end, it ultimately did not amount to anything. Action quality was spotty, with perhaps the best improvement being the town fight, special effects were hits and misses, presenting blatantly C-quality CG imagery on the screen that nods obviously to the budget parameters. The ending indeed as one reviewer stated appeared rushed and that ma also attest to the budget of the film, being unable to produce a more elaborate ending that truly tied events together. I won't go as far to say this film outshines the previous sequel or the first film as being the very best, but it has its place. As far as features shown on the SyFy channel this might actually be one of the better ones. Comparing sequels, this shared some lack of development particularly with characters, yet that is expected with lower-budgeted projects. This has been described as being darker than the first two predecessors, hailed as being a refreshing change (perhaps only complemented for the film's graphic violence and sexual indulgences). The climax was lackluster as its rushed outcome suggested either a self-conscientious mind for the budget, or a mind for on-air television scheduling as though it had only two minutes before an important commercial was to play. Overall, The Book of Vile Darkness has seemingly pleased most D&D fans with its effort to return to the essence of the D&D world and all its game-play and story-telling elements. Fans of fantasy and adventure movies may well enjoy watching this every now and then for a change of pace.

I went into this film expecting it to be awful. I hated the first two films in the franchise - unlike many here, I thought the 2nd film was far worse than the 1st, and the 1st one was bad. I was pleasantly surprised by this one (the 3rd).

Sure, it is cheesy at times. Some of the dialog is stilted, and the acting is spotty in places (like the shopkeeper, for example). The first battle sequence was worrisomely bad (as in, oh no. . .), but mercifully short. However, the rest of the fights scenes were well done. The CGI was much better than the first two films. While it was still obviously low budget, I have seen worse in theatrical movies. So, it was money well spent.

Remember how embarrassed Jeremy Irons looked in the first movie? There's none of that here. The actors try, and for the most part succeed, in playing their parts well. Some of them were quite good, others are amateurish in parts, but over all they were good.

The story was decent. The script could have used some improvements. Without spoiling anything, the end felt rushed and forced. The tone was a much darker take than previous entries in the serious, and that turns out to be a vast improvement.

I am puzzled by a lot of online reviews / summaries of this film, which describe the plot inaccurately, and even list characters and actors that are not in the movie. Even IMDb lists Meagan Good in the cast, when she's not in it. Clearly, these reviewers have not bothered to watch.

In conclusion, I would watch this for free on cable or Netflix, but it might not be worth paying to see. If you are a fan of D&D, RPGs in general, or S&S films, give it a shot, and you may just like it.If you're not a fan of any of the above, I can't relate to you, so this review may not apply. :-)

Alright, given the reviews and the ratings on IMDb for "Dungeons & Dragons: The Book of Vile Darkness" then I was fearing the worst of this movie, especially because the prior two movies were not all that great. (Should be noted that I found the second movie "Dungeons & Dragons: Wrath of the Dragon God" better than the first movie.) Despite the critique, bad reviews and overall poor ratings, I decided to give it a go because I am a big Dungeons & Dragons fan (been playing it for some 26 years or so), and if bad came to worse I could always turn it off and find something else to watch.

And having seen it now, I honestly do not understand the critique, the bad reviews and the general moaning there has been about this movie, because in my opinion, "Dungeons & Dragons: The Book of Vile Darkness" picks up the prior two movies, slaps them around and then shows what D&D should be like.

In this third movie we follow a party of less than lawful-good characters here in a party out seeking the three parts of the Book of Vile Darkness. And it is refreshing to see a fantasy movie where the main characters are not goody-two-shoes. Sure, there was the devoted of Pelor (the good guy in the movie) thrown into the midst of a vermin lord, goliath, assassin and a sorceress - all of whom are less than your average lawful-good hero. So as a D&D player it was such a blast to have a group of anti-heroes starring as the main characters for a change.

This movie is a blast to anyone well traversed in the D&D universe, because there are some really great aspects to the world; such as you have your iconic D&D items - a vorpal sword (although it is beyond me why it wasn't put to use), a bag of holding, and of course the holy symbol of Pelor. But it was also really interesting to see the prestige classes such as the vermin lord and assassin brought to life on the screen. Personally I was well in favor of the vermin lord, because it was nailed right on the money as it is described in the actual Book of Vile Darkness (D&D 3.5 accessory as published by Wizards of the Coast).

The effects in the movie were actually quite alright and worked out well enough. So again, I must admit that I don't understand the moaning and complaining from other reviewers. It worked to illustrate what it was meant to do. And for fans of the D&D world (and those who own the Book of Vile Darkness 3.5 accessory) there are some really nice touches in terms of spells being used in the movie; spells that were taken right out of the rulebook.

Storywise, well the movie was pretty straight forward, fairly much like participating at a D&D gaming session, so it was alright. The story was somewhat predictable though, but still it was adequate entertainment.

Sure, "Dungeons & Dragons: The Book of Vile Darkness" might not have had the same kind of budget and famous Hollywood actors to use as baiting in people, but the ones that they did hire for the roles did adequate jobs with their roles. Sure, it wasn't award-winning acting performances, but still it was worthwhile to watch and everyone did contribute something to the movie.

One thing that did miss from the movie was monsters. You can't really have a Dungeons & Dragons movie without brandishing off a couple of monsters. There was a red dragon, which was cool enough, although it was quite easily defeated, and being familiar with the rules of D&D, it was so strange that the dragon didn't make use of its breath weapon to defeat the 'heroes'. Then there was the undead child, which was a rather interesting creature for them to put into the movie, and the last monster was the wraith-like undead protecting the undead child. I will say that these creatures all looked alright in my opinion and worked out well enough.

If you are a fan of the Dungeons & Dragons game and were discouraged by the previous two movies which were, well, let's just say below average, then you definitely have to treat yourself to "Dungeons & Dragons: The Book of Vile Darkness" because it is actually quite good.

I know this review is written with my pro-D&D goggles on, but I just don't see there is any leverage to the complaining and moaning that the movie has been getting. To me, this movie was enjoyable and better than the previous two D&D movies.

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