Donjons & Dragons 3: Le Livre des Ténèbres

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-

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.

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...

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. :-)

This is a modest-budget swords-and-sorcery fantasy based on Dungeons and Dragons... and for what it is, it is pretty good.

Don't expect Oscar winning performances, but most of the acting is acceptable and some is actually pretty good; the fellow playing the Vermin Lord does a very good job of quietly understated evil.

The effects and creatures are comparable to D&D:WOTDG (the second movie), but it moves faster and there is more action, and more variety in spell use with better imagery, and better fight scenes.

Gladly lacking the first D&D movie's lame humor and misplaced modern sensibilities about egalitarianism, and the slow-paced and stilted wordiness and failed melodrama of the second, this one is a bit more stark and grim than the others, with more actual fighting.

It is also more in line with actual D&D material, 3.5e I believe though the version I am more familiar with was new 30 years ago. :) D&D fans will enjoy it, Swords&Sorcery fans will like it, appreciating it for what it is. If you're looking for deep dialog with Johnny Depp and Julia Roberts, though, perhaps you should look elsewhere.

As for me, I was indeed entertained.