# Dungeons & Dragons: The Book of Vile Darkness (2011)



## Knightfall

Dungeons & Dragons: The Book of Vile Darkness (2011) - IMDb

Release date is set to be December 31, 2011.

Dungeons & Dragons' Third Entry - DVD News at IGN



> *Dungeons & Dragons' Third Entry
> 
> Nerds, rejoice: new info on the third film has arrived.*
> 
> November 10, 2010
> by David McCutcheon
> 
> All of you D&D nerds out there will love this heads up: the third Dungeons & Dragons motion picture is in the works.
> 
> Not much is currently known about the soon-to-be-in-production Dungeons & Dragons entry, but new info has suddenly surfaced regarding the returning director from the second film in the series, Gerry Lively, being penciled in to helm the project in Baton Rouge, where filming will begin in mid-January, 2011. Brian Rudnick, one of the three writers for Dungeons & Dragons: Wrath of the Dragon God, is set to write the screenplay, according to IMDb.
> 
> The first grumblings from the depths of the Internet cavern regarding the third film in the series, titled Dungeons & Dragons III: The Book of Vile Darkness, came from the festering pit of depravity known as Twitter, thanks to the folks at Production Weekly. The particular tweet of interest reads, "Dungeons & Dragons III: The Book Of Vile Darkness is scheduled to begin filming January 17th in Baton Rouge, Gerry Lively returns to direct."
> 
> We'll be reporting more info on this upcoming release as soon as it arrives. Stay tuned to IGN DVD for more information about this and other upcoming releases!


----------



## Knightfall

Also, see this thread in the General RPG Discussion forum...

http://www.enworld.org/forum/general-rpg-discussion/298603-get-role-new-d-d-movie.html


----------



## Knightfall

*Eleanor Gecks*

Character Name: Akordia


----------



## Knightfall

*Jack Derges*

Character Name: Grayson


----------



## Knightfall

*Anthony Howell*

Character Name: Ranfin


----------



## Orius

I don't know who wrote that piece that was quoted at the top, but they obviously don't know nerds.  Given the sheer nerdrage that has been generated over the movies made so far (particularly the first one), I wouldn't count on much rejoicing or love.


----------



## Knightfall

*Dominic Mafham*

Character: Mayor of Little Silver Keep


----------



## Knightfall

*Barry Aird*

Character Name: Bezz


----------



## Relique du Madde

Filming in January Release in December?!?  Someone's making a straight to DVD movie.


----------



## El Mahdi

Relique du Madde said:


> Filming in January Release in December?!? Someone's making a straight to DVD movie.




From what I gathered from the other thread (Get a role in the new D&D movie!<!-- google_ad_section_end -->), they've already been filming in Eastern Europe. I believe the filming in January is just the beginning of stateside filming. I don't know what percentage of the film is being shot where, but I expect that a significant portion is already filmed.


----------



## Dannyalcatraz

As Ian Malcom would say:

"Oohh, Aahh, that's how all of this starts, but then later there's the running and screaming..."


----------



## Wycen

I know everyone has different levels of what counts as *vile* but I think that was a horrible choice of iconic artifact.


----------



## Relique du Madde

< speculation >
I think they came up with the idea of using the Book of Vile Darkness after reading the script.   Before the readthrough it was the Necronomicron... but then the producer said "That script was vile."
< /speculation >


----------



## megamania

Dungeons & Dragons III: Script of Vile Darkness




that said .... will I buy it?    Give a "Hell Yes!"    sigh....... OCD.


----------



## Beginning of the End

I remember being lightly entertained by the second movie (although it was apparently completely forgettable, since I can't remember anything about it beyond this vague impression). This is written by the same guy. I'll at least give it a viewing.


----------



## megamania

The first movie was a "fantasy" movie.  There were leaps and bounds in believability and actions / outcomes of characters.

The second movie was a "DnD" movie.   There were clear class distinctions, clear creature distinctions and a lot of DnD adventures mentioned and hinted at.    I hope the third one is the same-   I really appreciated hearing about Plume Mountain and the such.   It made it more "real" as a DnD gamer to me.


----------



## Truth Seeker

Why, oh why...did this not get mentioned on the news sites?

Never mind...


----------



## Klaus

According to this week's Ampersand, this is going to be a SyFy original movie.


----------



## El Mahdi

Yeah, I read that too. Not sure if that bodes good or bad for the quality of the movie...or if it's completely inconsequential.

It could simply be that the movies haven't done that well in the past, and with the current economy and environment for movies, going the SyFy original movie route and then straight to DVD/BluRay might be the most effective course.

Honestly though, I'm expecting quality on a par with _The Librarian_ movies (on TNT). I'm not going to get my hopes up over it...but I'll watch it anyways (even moreso now, since it will be on TV).


----------



## tajlund

Just came across this site while looking for info on this movie.  I feel megamania hit it dead on. I loved D&D:WODK, as a gamer I was geeking out at the fact that all the characters had clearly recognizable character classes and they even gave a good representation of the skills.  Hope this one is done with the same respect as the first one.


----------



## Mark CMG

The second movie was definitely better (more a D&D movie) than the first but due in part to some special effects that must have cost them a fair amount.  I wonder how the budget will weather the shift to SyFy.


----------



## tajlund

I have a good feeling about it. From what I've read they weren't working with much of a budget on Dragon King, so I don't think Syfy will be that much worse.  I've actually seen some pretty decent effects out of Syfy lately. (am I the only one who really hates that stupid Syfy thing. Go back to Scifi, please.)


----------



## TanisFrey

The second one was made in part for Scifi.  It aired first on Scifi but, I don't think that they put much $$ into the project.  It did go stright to DVD then within a month or two air on Scifi.

Dido on they should drop the silly Syfy and just rename the channel totally, as they show more stupid disasters movies/WWW than real Scifi projects.


----------



## Klaus

I hope they stick to monsters that fit their budget, instead of doing those half-a***d dragons from #1 and #2.


----------



## Felon

They should get the Henson Company to work on projects this. If they could get the same production values as an average of Farscape had, that'd be a step in the right direction.


----------



## Dannyalcatraz

Felon said:


> They should get the Henson Company to work on projects this. If they could get the same production values as an average of Farscape had, that'd be a step in the right direction.




I just had sudden visions of the party attacked by a Roc that has yellow feathers, a depressed Dire Mammoth, and a duo composed of a scrawny Green Slaad and a anthropomorphic pig (with IUC).


----------



## Chainsaw Mage

A third low-budget, straight-to-DVD film that uses the name "Dungeons & Dragons" in its title.

I'll try to contain my sheer, unadulterated excitement.

(Yawn)


----------



## Dannyalcatraz

I only know of 2- this one and the sequel to the original (which DID show in theaters).


----------



## El Mahdi

Dannyalcatraz said:


> I just had sudden visions of the party attacked by a Roc that has yellow feathers, a depressed Dire Mammoth, and a duo composed of a scrawny Green Slaad and a anthropomorphic pig (with IUC).




_It's time to play the music,_
_It's time to light the lights..._




Or maybe a (possibly) more appropriate part of the theme song...

_Why do we always come here?_
_I guess we'll never know._
_It's like a kind of torture,_
_to have to watch the show._


----------



## Dannyalcatraz

I _DID _ also have visions of the party being tormented by Statler & Waldorf...though in what capacity I was unsure.

Bards a la Sir Robin's troupe?  BBEGs?


----------



## Knightfall

*On the set of Dungeons & Dragons: The Book of Vile Darkness*

The link below takes you to one of three photos on the IMDb profile page for Micheal Rogers who is playing a "knight" in the movie.

Photos of Michael Rogers

He's on your left.


----------



## Knightfall

Beau Brasso on the set of D&D 3. No name for his character, yet.

Photos of Beau Brasso


----------



## hopeless

Knightfall said:


> The link below takes you to one of three photos on the IMDb profile page for Micheal Rogers who is playing a "knight" in the movie.
> 
> Photos of Michael Rogers
> 
> He's on your left.




The middle one wearing the holy symbol of Pelor is meant to be a cleric right?


----------



## Thunderfoot

The first one was an absolute utter PoS!  If a Wayan's is ever cast in another D&D film, please for the love of the gods, let him get hit by the kraft services truck on day one of filming so they have to re-cast his part...

The second one was on SciFi and though it was better than the first, I think the funny WotC D&D commercials during the film was as good as the movie, especially since they were rules for gamers, such as #3 never split the party, and they invariably broke the rule in the very next scene.  My wife and I were on the ground laughing most of the time.

If the third one is like that, good, seeing that a DnD: WotDG writer is on board makes me less apprehensive.  But, honestly, the second one was only good because the first one blew chunks so bad....


----------



## Dannyalcatraz

I'm told by my friends that my post-movie rant RE: the first D&D movie- which I saw_ in theater_- was pretty choice, not just in the expertise of my dissection, but also the tone & delivery.


----------



## Thunderfoot

Dannyalcatraz said:


> I'm told by my friends that my post-movie rant RE: the first D&D movie- which I saw_ in theater_- was pretty choice, not just in the expertise of my dissection, but also the tone & delivery.



I hear you.  We took our whole gaming group (which was quite large at the time) to go so it.  We panned it all the way home, and all night long around my kitchen table.  We had some choice words about the way we wanted to see it end, but it probably wouldn't be Grandma friendly and may have the mods all over my butt about wishing ill of people with sharp and extremely hot objects....


----------



## Dannyalcatraz

I was 100% clean in my assessment...but acid-tongued nonetheless, pointing out the bad CGI (including obvious cuts & pastes for crowd scenes), Wayan's performance as a second-rate Chris Tucker impression, Jeremy Irons' "inarticulate method screaming", black vulcan elves, Bruce Payne's character being "too sexy, to sexy for his helmet" and visible mold seams on plastic props.  One wonders where that $20M was spent.


----------



## frankthedm

Dannyalcatraz said:


> One wonders where that $20M was spent.



$30M - $45M by some estimates. 

Hollywood is really good at making money disappear. In this case, what i have heard was the CG company sucked the budget like a flock of dire stirges.


----------



## Dannyalcatraz

Good link, Ftdm!

It covers a lot of the same ground- albeit with some variation in the numbers (which do not alter the conclusions)- that I had to in school.  _Coming to America_ is the classic example, but _Raid on Entebbe_ was just as classically bad- Israel provided all kinds of assistance & materiel in exchange for a share of the net profits.  My recollection is they got enough money to buy a military spec Jeep.

But with Hollywood accounting, the usual end result is screwing the investors.  The $$$ they claim is being spent on the filming actually does get spent that way and shows up on the screen.

That 1st movie was given a decent budget, but you wouldn't know it from watching it.


----------



## Thunderfoot

I remember wondering if the budget was spent on actors salaries that someone was asleep the day they taught casting 101 at film school.

The sad part is how much of the CGI ended up on the cutting room floor and how the plot was completely overhauled in editing.  The original supposedly had more shots of beholders and some battle scenes with them as well (I always thought the scene where they snuck past the beholder guard as laughable.)

Supposedly most of the Wayans footage was actually shot on soundstage after the filming wrapped. (not sure how much of that is true, but it would make a lot of sense.)  And the reason for the changes in the script and storyline were to give him more comic presence on screen (talk about your poor production decisions.)

But enough about the bad first movie...

If the third follows the second, and so far there is no reason not think it will, there should be lots of "in" references for gamers that have been around from the beginning, some okay effects and a villain with blue lips.


----------



## Knightfall

*Habib Nasib Nader*

Character Name: Vimak


----------



## Knightfall

*Aaron Saxton* (rumored)

Character: KNIGHT


----------



## Dannyalcatraz

Kind of looks like Vin Biodiesel.


----------



## cyderak

And we thought that because the LOTR movies made a nice profit that they might think of doing a decent D&D movie.  Boy were we wrong.  Don't get me wrong,  the 2nd D&D movie was more accurate.  The 1st one sucked zombie balls.  and the third is just going to be another Sci-Fi saturday night special "just O.K." movie.  I know alot of people are sick of hearing this but why in all that is holy don't they make a Companions of the Hall movie.  You know,  Drizzt,  Cattie-Brie,  Bruenor,  Wulfgar,  and the rest.   Awesome fight scenes abound.  It would be a blockbuster waiting to happen.  (If done right.)

Instead we'll just drown our sorrows in a tub of popcorn and a buttload of MD while choking down another "O.K." D&D movie.

And just to put the cherry on the top, (and maybe start another edition war),  Just another thing WOTC F-ed up!

Wait.........You hear that...........its the stampede of 4th edition players who can smell the chum I just threw in the water.

Hehehehe.........Relax guys......i'm just joking around.......But it is true...........Gotta love Grue.


----------



## TarionzCousin

Did you say "Groo"? I would go see a live-action *Groo* movie. 






Would it star Jack Black, perhaps?


----------



## Dannyalcatraz

TarionzCousin said:


> Did you say "Groo"? I would go see a live-action *Groo* movie.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Would it star Jack Black, perhaps?




Steven Seagal.

I mean, that hair, that face...
steven seagal - Google Search

Imagine that raspy whisper praising Rufferto, or asking the immortal question, "Did someone just call me a...mendicant?"


----------



## cyderak

Dannyalcatraz said:


> Steven Seagal.
> 
> I mean, that hair, that face...
> steven seagal - Google Search
> 
> Imagine that raspy whisper praising Rufferto, or asking the immortal question, "Did someone just call me a...mendicant?"




Two words..........WILL......FERRELL.........Your Welcome!!!!


----------



## Dannyalcatraz

Will Ferrell would require makeup- Seagal would not.


----------



## Klaus

Dannyalcatraz said:


> Will Ferrell would require makeup- Seagal would not.



Plus, Will Ferrell isn't funny. Ever.


----------



## Dannyalcatraz

Klaus said:


> Plus, Will Ferrell isn't funny. Ever.




While Christopher Walken makes this skit sing, Will does a damn good job in it, IMHO.

More Cowbell! from Christian Juarez


----------



## Heathen72

Klaus said:


> Plus, Will Ferrell isn't funny. Ever.




He was funny in Zoolander.


----------



## Dannyalcatraz

Yeah, there as well.


----------



## cyderak

Dannyalcatraz said:


> While Christopher Walken makes this skit sing, Will does a damn good job in it, IMHO.
> 
> More Cowbell! from Christian Juarez




I'm tellin ya......i gotta have more CowBell baby!!!!


----------



## Klaus

spunkrat said:


> He was funny in Zoolander.



No one was funny in Zoolander.

Will Ferrell, Ben Stiller and Adam Sandler are three actors I just can't seem to find funny.


----------



## Heathen72

Klaus said:


> No one was funny in Zoolander.
> 
> Will Ferrell, Ben Stiller and Adam Sandler are three actors I just can't seem to find funny.




Re: Zoolander. I and the cinema filled with laughing people I saw it with beg to differ. I have no issue with your second comment as it at least acknowledges your limitations to be the issue at hand.


----------



## Klaus

spunkrat said:


> Re: Zoolander. I and the cinema filled with laughing people I saw it with beg to differ. I have no issue with your second comment as it at least acknowledges your limitations to be the issue at hand.



Oh, I'm sure there are people who think these guys are funny. It's just a very localized thing.

For instance, most Will Ferrell movies are direct-to-DVD here in Brazil because his box office appeal is very limited to us.


----------



## Heathen72

Klaus said:


> Oh, I'm sure there are people who think these guys are funny. It's just a very localized thing.
> 
> For instance, most Will Ferrell movies are direct-to-DVD here in Brazil because his box office appeal is very limited to us.




Ahh, I see. Yes, your location explains everything. Thanks.


----------



## Dannyalcatraz

> For instance, most Will Ferrell movies are direct-to-DVD here in Brazil because his box office appeal is very limited to us.



Brazil, you say?
Would you find him funnier if, saaaay, he performed his roles in a Speedo?


----------



## Thunderfoot

With the single exception of the cowbell skit - Will Ferrel is about as funny as case of herpes.  And with only a couple of exceptions, which are not coming to mind (no the Fockers is NOT one of them) Ben Stiller also falls in that category.

Adam Sandler is not funny when he tries to be stupid boy - when he acts like a person instead of an idiot (like in _50 First Dates_ or I_ Now Pronounce You Chuck and Larry_) he's actually quite good.


----------



## Thunderfoot

Klaus said:


> Oh, I'm sure there are people who think these guys are funny. It's just a very localized thing.
> 
> For instance, most Will Ferrell movies are direct-to-DVD here in Brazil because his box office appeal is very limited to us.



They know humor (or the lack of it), Rush and Iron Maiden are top bands, they have Carnival and most of the beaches are topless - why the Hell haven't I moved there yet?


----------



## Thunderfoot

cyderak said:


> Two words..........WILL......FERRELL.........Your Welcome!!!!




Four words ....GODS ....I ....HOPE .....NOT!!!!!   No, you're welcome.


----------



## Thunderfoot

cyderak said:


> <SNIP> I know alot of people are sick of hearing this but why in all that is holy don't they make a Companions of the Hall movie.  You know,  Drizzt,  Cattie-Brie,  Bruenor,  Wulfgar,  and the rest.   Awesome fight scenes abound.  It would be a blockbuster waiting to happen.  (If done right.)



I can think of three reasons this wouldn't fly.:

1)  The story is way too intricate to put on acetate. Batman is re-launched three times, Superman look like its getting yet another re-launch, etc, And each re-launch tells the evolution of the character to ensure that everyone knows it, which is a good assumption because everyone doesn't know the evolution of these iconic superheroes.  You  can't assume everyone knows their backstory story that will see the movie, because not everyone will.  Think how big a hit _Iron Man _was and how many people saw it that had zero interest in the comic book. (let's face it Iron Man was a second rate title compared to some other Marvel staples.)  It started with fans yes, but it grew daily because it was a great movie.

2) The budget is too limited.  With a big story arc you need dedicated funds to continue the story to make it manageable, otherwise you end up with a single movie trying to tell an entire story that should span multiple movies in less than two hours.  In other words, you get _DUNE_.  Great novels, great acting in the movie, the movie was way too short to explain what the heck was going on.  Cult classic, yes, great film for all time, not even in consideration.

3) Star Vehicle limitations - the first movie had great star power with three very well known named actors/actresses playing big parts, and all that money for production went right in their pockets and starved the real reason for the movie, to tell a story.  In order to propel a story arc like the one you propose you may be able to get away with shooting the first movie with a bunch of unknowns, but by the second and third movie they will demand larger salaries and if the movies are only marginal, well, see the first movie.

I agree that they need a good story and one that will appeal to fans, but it also has to appeal to non-fans.  Someone suggested Dragonlance - I wouldn't watch that if you paid me, I think Weis & Hickman are hacks.  I realize I am in the minority, but considering the lack of D&D movie support so far, every ticket counts, so you cannot polarize your audience.

Your idea has merit if you focus on one character, Drizzt for instance would probably be a good one to start with, telling about his crawl out of the underdark, maybe introducing one or two other characters in a limited capacity and then building on it.  But you are banking a lot on the success of the first one to continue to generate income for any sequels, and as we saw with the first one, one misstep causes the whole thing to become a niche project.  

I have a feeling that unless someone in Hollywood comes up with a very large personal amount of money to fund a big budget D&D movie, we should just get used to small screen one-off throw aways and probably be thankful we are getting those.


----------



## Dannyalcatraz

> Your idea has merit if you focus on one character, Drizzt for instance would probably be a good one to start with, telling about his crawl out of the underdark, maybe introducing one or two other characters in a limited capacity and then building on it. But you are banking a lot on the success of the first one to continue to generate income for any sequels, and as we saw with the first one, one misstep causes the whole thing to become a niche project.




And after his 3 year stint in the Fed's Tax Pen, Wesley Snipes will portray that role with a depth that will earn him an OSCAR!

Really, though, I think they should _*ahem*_ redeem the D&D movie brand name a bit by going small screen: a good, well scripted miniseries or series that can launch the occasional major miniseries or TV movie, and THEN a big screen adaptation.*

Ancient Alcatrazian Secret: First learn walk, then learn run.




* Marvel Comics did this, most recently with _Mutant X_, a thinly veiled reworking of the X-Men books...


----------



## Ahnehnois

> I wouldn't watch that if you paid me, I think Weis & Hickman are hacks. I realize I am in the minority, but considering the lack of D&D movie support so far, every ticket counts, so you cannot polarize your audience.



You're not the only one. To be fair I've only read one Dragonlance book many years ago, but I never found any of the D&D-based novels very interesting. They may or may not have any merit but D&D is about creating your own stories.

...which is part of the problem in creating a successful D&D movie. When they made the LoTR series, they had one fairly unified set of source material to work from, and they produced an interpretation that a large number of people found acceptably faithful. In contrast, there's no agreement as to what is good in D&D or even what D&D is; it's a very fractured fan base. When they made the first movie, 3e was a reasonably obvious choice, but now it's not clear what edition you'd base it on.

Personally, I don't want a D&D movie based on the novels, I don't want one that has anything to do with 4e, and I don't want one that's PG-13. Of course, these are all things that make movies marketable. They already tried making an "original" movie and they blew it. No one is likely to put big money towards that again and small money is not going to make a great movie. Here's hoping for Baldur's Gate: the Movie...


----------



## Knightfall

FYI... the IMDb page notes that the movie is now in post-production.


----------



## Dannyalcatraz

Which means it will be in pre-immolation any time now!


----------



## GSHamster

Klaus said:


> Plus, Will Ferrell isn't funny. Ever.




I'm not a big fan of most of his movies, but _Stranger than Fiction_ is quite good. 

Similarly with Adam Sandler, _Punch-Drunk Love_ and _Reign Over Me_ were very nice, and I admit to having a soft spot for _Happy Gilmour_ and _The Wedding Singer_.


----------



## Kzach

I still haven't even bothered to watch the second one, despite having it given to me as an owner of a DVD rental store. I never bothered to put it on the shelf either 'cause I didn't think it was worth the $0.15 for the security tag and lockable case.

Hell, I wouldn't even waste bandwidth downloading it. I highly doubt that number three in this series is going to warrant any more attention than the previous two.


----------



## Klaus

D&D 2 was no worse than a 90-minute episode of Hercules or Xena. It still had many flaws, but it also had Ellie Chidzley as Lux the Barbarian, and that's okay in my book!


----------



## Quickleaf

Klaus said:


> D&D 2 was no worse than a 90-minute episode of Hercules or Xena. It still had many flaws, but it also had Ellie Chidzley as Lux the Barbarian, and that's okay in my book!




Well she can't portray a skilled warrior but she sure can play a stripper/writing critic.

"All I'm saying is that if you can't fit your idea into the first line then it's too diffuse."


----------



## OpsKT

I saw this movie last night on SyFy. It was glorious in how terrible it was. 

First off, during the knighting ceremony (err, Paladin... Knight is a fighter, no gods required) you could see the looks of the guys faces every tiime they called out to Pelor. It was the 'Who the  writes this ' look. 

Later on, he literally goes to a store called the Adventurer's Vault, and buys things by referencing tiers, I kid you not. 

"And that suit of knight armor."

"Heroic or Paragon?"

"Paragon." {With a look that says I have no idea what this means}

Oh, yeah, whores in Points of Light must get paid really well, cause our hero gets his  paid for by the helpful whore. Yeah. 

How did we have a Shadar'kai with no mention of the Raven Queen once? Unless I missed it in the horrible dialog. 

The SHadowfell looked cool, except for the fact that it looked more like the elemental chaos raped the abyss and then deposited their baby on the Shadowfell's doorstep. The Shadowfell is a dark reflection of the world, not floating islands, last I knew. 

Yeah, it's terrible. There was a sex scene that SyFy did the blurry bits for, that implies this was supposed to be direct to video. But it still doesn't help. Also, since when were Shadar'kai females fans of 50 Shades of Grey?


----------



## Gomezaddams51

I watched it and found it to be entertaining.  In watching it, I found myself thinking that it would be cool to join that little mercenary group...they were my kind of "people".  It would be fun to play an D&D RPG with party members like that...  I was trying to figure out what classes they were.  The one was a Paladin, one was an assassin, not sure what type the two mages were though and what the blue guy was supposed to be.

I have enjoyed all the D&D movies so far.  I take them for what they are, entertainment.  I don't expect them to be actual D&D movies that follow the rules exactly.    It would be nice for someone to take some of the modules and make a movie out of them but I doubt it will ever happen.  So I take what I can get.


----------



## AslanC

Overall I preferred it to the 1st D&D by leaps and bounds, but not as much as the 2nd, which I found to be wholly entertaining.  Here's to hoping we get a 4th one some time, cause really this is better than any of the post-LOTR boom of fantasy films shot in Vancouver (Can you name them all?)


----------



## AslanC

What thread?


----------

