skeltonmegan-90496 I found this film in a charity shop and forced my D&D group to watch it with some drinks. We had an absolute blast.An utterly horrendous movie, and yet we were pissing ourselves laughing the entire time.Would recommend this film be watched with a lot of alcohol and some good company, you won't regret it.

Python Hyena Dungeons and Dragons (2000): Dir: Courtney Smith / Cast: Justin Whalin, Marlon Wayans, Thora Birch, Bruce Payne, Jeremy Irons: Pathetic piece of junk that is so hideous that every copy in circulation should be used to start a campfire. Bruce Payne plays a henchmen villain trying to steal a scepter for his master. The blue lipstick does him little justice. Thora Birch plays the Empiress who must avoid a war. Justin Whalin and Marlon Wayans play a couple of thieves who get caught up in the scheme and are accompanied by a dwarf, a magician's apprentice, and elves. The screenplay is about third grade level with special effects that are about as festive as a bag of puke. Poor directing by Courtney Smith with horrible acting performances to back him up. Whalin and Wayans are horrible in what will never be a compliment to their abilities. Birch is laughable riding that flimsy magic carpet. This is a major downfall especially since the previous year she gave a flawless performance in American Beauty. Payne looks like a barbaric version of Divine with that blue lipstick. Even poor Jeremy Irons, an accomplished actor, somehow got suckered into being part of this garbage. This piece of junk is easily one of the worst films to be released this year. It is a total embarrassment to everyone involved. It is a foolish mess that should be tossed into a deep hole and buried. Score: 0 / 10

pietroschek With all the moaning about how bad this movie is, it seems weird to me that nobody even mentioned a single strength of it. I am a bit lengthy here, but I work to make a point. The first of, on date of writing, 3 Dungeons & Dragons movies is a powerful roleplaying work. It is really not played by supreme actors, still each actor and actress did quite a performance in their roles as characters any D&D player of the planet can recreate within the rules of the pen & paper game.The people called bad actors here should have been called pioneer roleplayers along with it, as even flawed efforts are better than the ever-moaning horde which neither funds a project, nor invests any own work in finishing one!CONTEXT: A magocracy has been selfish and rigid for too long, henceforth getting separated and weak. Evil sensing it musters its champions to indulge a proverbial hostile takeover. The involuntary 'heroes & heroines' are forced to make their stands, as the story unfolds with fools lying vanquished along the wayside.Sense Motive: The idea of social change is something plenty of teenagers consider powerful, necessary, and somehow their birthright. No miracle then that they waste their own energy on that plus some ever-obvious attempts to get laid and party. Within the movie we get the classic love overcoming prejudices, as the Romeo here is a Rogue from the disease-ridden underclasses & Juliet is a wizard from the establishment. BONUS: The duty of the elven ranger, the duty of the evil fighter, and even the thieves guild; Are all recognized as lessons any character above level 8 MUST know. Levels 8 to 12 are the levels which, outside of badly plagiarized video games, focus mostly on building a class-suiting stronghold, and learning to operate it. While the movie certainly did not aim at it (like AD&D Birthright did), it was nice to see some decent yet practical examples of it applied properly!How anyone entitling himself or herself a roleplayer & gamer could fail to notice any of it is... Suspicious! For it looks, as if some failures tried to get a proverbial 'smear job' done.LISTED:+ The movie introduces D&D storytelling to people with a minimum of background knowledge.+ The movie attempts to compromise between roleplay & acting, though it clearly fails on it here and there, too.+ All characters are authentic and within the rules, compared to video games within which dumbest ideas are forced unto us by cheat- leveled pseudo-superiors. + The movie looks like a high-school or college project done by fans, and that atmosphere is brought across without messing up the story. Even with age 42 I still remembered some teenage moments, did all others forget? ;-) Rhetorical Question. + If you prefer to look only for the bad sides you might manage to find absolutely every negative aspect mentioned by the other reviewers! + The movie succeeded in inspiring a sequel, not a bad re-narration of the same idea.

geekgirl101 I didn't think it was too bad of a movie, although I have to agree with a few people about some roles that may as well not have been there. I think much of the venom is about this not being related to the Dungeons & Dragons series or game.Most of the main roles are played by teenagers, so this would suit as a family movie for children who aren't young enough for Disney cartoons but old enough for some live action that won't give them nightmares.Acting is overall pretty good. It doesn't feel like a budget movie, and certainly doesn't show to be a budget movie with the dragons. You really do feel that they put a good amount of effort to make everything look convincingly realistic, but what is disappointing is that half the cast don't even have a role. They'll do or say something once or twice but they hardly do or say anything else that actually contributes their character to the movie. You start to forget they're actually there as the movie is centred on the main hero, girlfriend, and protagonists.And as for the ending it was something that was slapped in a year later without thinking about how the audience is going to relate it to any part of the movie. It leaves you confused asking yourself what just happened because it didn't happen anywhere else in the movie and there's no reference anywhere to explain why it would happen. It was an effort to make it not seem as depressing but the writer should've at least have thought of adding something somewhere else in the movie to explain why it ended like it did or an explanation at the very end instead of "don't question the gift you've been given." In fact it seems that there is a lot of unanswerable questions in the movie with the excuse that it's not to be questioned, and it leaves you a bit frustrated because you want answers to understand the movie, not to be left guessing why some people weren't allowed to help or why things happened the way they did. It becomes nonsensical jibber jabber that screams out badly written because the author couldn't be bothered to put in an explanation and left it to our imagination, but there's only so much our imagination can tell us and without any clues anywhere else you may as well say "they can't help rescue the girl because they ate bread for breakfast."