Dungeons & Dragons: The Book of Vile Darkness

I really do not understand the low scores on this movie...

Yes, it is low budget, and yes it lacks the shine of those expensive movies...So? The plot is OK, love story is more realistic than in many many other movies, even the characters are believable. I usually find many annoyances in films, even the best ones, but whats very weird, nothing really annoyed me in this one.

I have played D&D games, and many other RPGs, but I don't think thats of any relevance, this is a decent movie for all who like these sword & magic fantasy flicks.

For a low budget movie, even the CG effects are very successful. And there's some more eye candy in the form of a Gothic hot chick ;D I had somewhat low expectations for this one, and I was very positively surprised, so 8/10 for this one, and thanks to other who have commented, wouldn't have watched it without you.

If you are into this kind of movies, try it, you might be surprised too...

On a world where sorcery is real, a greenhorn knight (Jack Derges) teams-up with a dubious group to find his father who was kidnapped by mysterious evil powers. The group includes a witch (Eleanor Gecks), a sorcerer Vermin lord (Barry Aird), an assassin (Lex Daniels) and a goliath warrior (Habib Nasib Nader).

"Dungeons & Dragons: The Book of Vile Darkness" (2012), also known as "Dungeons & Dragons 3," is the third of currently three D&D flicks, unconnected to the other two: "Dungeons & Dragons" (2000) and "Dungeons and Dragons: Wrath of the Dragon God" (2005). Evil wizard Damodar (Bruce Payne) was the only link between the first two movies, other than the fact that they both took place in Izmir. This third film abandons all links and takes place in Karkoth.

The first movie was the only one released to theaters and therefore had a hefty budget, but it was hampered by camp and a goofy tone centered around Wayans' humor. The second one, my favorite, was released to TV and therefore had a lower budget, but still pretty significant at $15 million. This third film is similar to the serious tone of the second, but is noticeably darker. The group the knight joins for his quest lacks the nobleness and camaraderie of the sojourners in "Wrath of the Dragon God." They're all either morally dubious or outright sinister.

The D&D universe is similar to the world of Conan the Barbarian, but with a more medieval flair and a little more sorcery. If you like Conan, you'll probably like this. The locations & sets are superlative while the magical F/X are TV-budget fare, but otherwise effective. The dragon especially looks good and the dragon-slaying episode is great. There's also a very creative (and dark) zombie girl sequence. On the negative side, this is easily the least of the three flicks in the feminine department, although Eleanor Gecks is a'right, I guess.

The film runs 1 hour, 30 minutes and was shot in Bulgaria.

GRADE: B-

Considering the previous two failed attempts at making D&D movies, I was positively surprised at this one. Having followed the Book of Vile Darkness promotion a year past, I knew that the movie was in production for quite some time, along with its source material (the D&D 4th Edition Book of Vile Darkness for those wondering), and there are several references in the movie that will appear more than anything as name dropping or inside jokes - which can be a good thing, provided that you know what is being referred to. To be precise, the Heroic and Paragon tiers are mentioned in regards to magic armor, and the main character also encounters thassil root poison, and both Vicious and Vorpal longswords, along with a Bag of Holding (the last of which is used in a manner that most seasoned D&D players would be proud of). Furthermore, both the sun god Pelor and the Shadowfell, the D&D realm of the dead (along with Gloomwrought, the closest thing it has to a capital city) are mentioned. The inclusion of shadar-kai and a goliath instead of the typical elves and dwarfs is also a nice touch, and in line with this, it breaks with many typical fantasy tropes.

As mentioned above, knowing the source material beforehand can be a boon in the case of this movie, especially since the Book of Vile Darkness in its previous edition was suited only for people aged 18+ because of its... well, "vile" contents, along with a focus on playing evil characters that is unheard of elsewhere in typical D&D, where the player characters are usually the heroes - and the main character in the movie faces some of the same moral quandaries that are mentioned directly in the D&D source material. There is also the fact that the main characters mention a red dragon at some point in the movie that is clearly not a dragon, but a Nhagruul Dragonspawn, and is thus again tied to the Book of Vile Darkness supplement for D&D 4th Edition. It is strange that this isn't mentioned at all in the movie, however.

The acting isn't the best that one could want (maybe except for the Vermin Lord, who fits the bill perfectly) and some of the lines are somewhat illegible at times, but I would praise the story in that it both manages to feel somewhat "realistic" (in-universe at least) while staying interesting and entertaining.

All in all, I would consider this movie a success, in that it was both entertaining and thought- provoking, the latter of which especially with the aforementioned moral quandaries in mind. It's probably not for everyone, but I would recommend it to any somewhat seasoned D&D player, along with anybody interested in a fantasy film a bit darker and grittier than the usual.

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. :-)