janehere If you haven't watched this movie, Don't do it. I did it, trusting on a positive review here, and it was a complete waste of time. Spoilers are marked on this review.The characters were bland. The professional assassins were just sociopaths. The ONLY black person in the movie was "coincidently" the only character whose skin was all painted over. The only female character who isn't a whore, decides that one day after meeting the hero that "her body belongs to him" for his pleasure, and from then on she's just madly in love with him for no reason. This of course, was after she was the one who needed saving from a dragon, and the knight had to go save her. Not clichéd at all, of course.*SPOILERS* The plot was so weak. If one of the Knights of the New Sun code was to not have sex, how come Grayson even exists? His father clearly broke that vow. And why would it be needed a Knight of Light's blood to make the ink for the Book of Vile Darkness? It wasn't said at any point that it had to come from a "good guy", and it'd be way more logical to come from a bad one. Was it for the irony? It just didn't make sense.And then the move just ends with him them saying goodbye. It was badly done, it just seemed like they ran out of things to say so they called it a stop. I was expecting a conclusion made like the introduction was, telling us how Grayson destroyed or hid the book parts again, but apparently the future of the book is irrelevant for the movie called The Book of Vile Darkness.

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.

Howie Reith I was pleasantly surprised by this movie. I watched it expecting cheesy fantasy action with a dumb plot, bad acting, and blatant appeals to fans of the game like Wrath of the Dragon God did. It delivered on some of those things, but it far surpassed my expectations.The most wonderful thing about this movie was how many risks it took. It was not a traditional fantasy movie at all. The protagonist is a good knight type but he teams up with a very evil party. The writers didn't assume its audience was dumb and that they'd need a clear good guy and a clear bad guy. I appreciated that so much. The character dynamics are excellent and you're constantly wondering where everyone stands. The good ones have flaws and the evil ones have relateable and redeeming qualities. They're complex, it's really wonderful. Hollywood doesn't do that much any more. The ending is also very non-traditional. Some may find it disappointing, and to some degree it is, but I thought it was effective. It's elegant in its simplicity.I found myself wondering what would happen next the entire film. At the end I wished it were longer. The dialogue was well-written and well-delivered, which is more than I can say for a lot of Hollywood blockbusters.Special effects were sub-par but that's easily forgiven, I thought they were pretty excellent for the budget. There was some cheese and some of the film will definitely be lost on people unfamiliar with Dungeons and Dragons. I imagine that's why it has such a low rating. I gave it 10 to boost it up, but IMO it deserves a solid 7/10 or more.