# Spoiler-free review of the new D&D movie.



## Altamont Ravenard (Aug 30, 2005)

Hello all,

Yes, yes, I am a terrible man. I have seen the new D&D movie (the elemental might). It doesn't excuse anything, but I will be buying it when it does come out.

I'm not terribly gifted at writing opinion pieces, so bear with me. Here's my account of the movie in question.

First of all, I must say that the movie gains *a lot* from _not_ being an american movie. That is to say, it's very much different from the 1st one. Different as in better.

For those who said that you can't make a RPG system into a movie, well, I'd say you're wrong. What D&D is has been used effectively to create a coherent world. Magic has definite rules. Creatures have recognizable characteristics. Plus, they use they D&D mythos as part of the backdrop of the story very well. There are even a few references to existing modules. There are a lot of magic items, most of them recognizable and used to good effect.

The story is taken seriously and is coherent. There aren't any stupid characters that make you want to rip out your own spleen and beat yourself unconscious with it. The scenery is pretty good. The CGI is... well, it's adequate. 

There are a few flaws that are not unique to this movie. Long BBEG soliloquies happen often, and while they serve to explain the evil dude's motivation, usually make no real sense, ie no evil guy will talk aloud to himself and say "and one day I shall destroy them all!".

There are some bumps in the script, but nothing major. The actions scenes are okay (of Xena level, say). In the beginning, I was afraid that the movie would be a little sappy, or that it would be aimed for a young audience, but when the proverbial fecal matter hits the fan, it's not always pretty.

The acting is adequate, and sub-par for certain characters.

Overall, I'd say that it's much, *much* better than the first movie, and that's it's totally worth the rental. IMO, it doesn't miss much to be worthy of theatrical release. I hope it does well, and I'm not afraid that it won't.

Now, if you have some questions about the movie, I'd be happy to answer them a little later this evening.

AR

PS: yes, pirating movie is wrong. As soon as the movie comes out, I'm buying it and deleting this movie from my PC. I'm also not going to "distribute" what I have.


----------



## KenM (Aug 30, 2005)

One question, how long is it? 1.5 hours or closer to two hours?


----------



## Altamont Ravenard (Aug 30, 2005)

1:45. I didn't feel that there were useless parts, or that they skipped important stuff. Good editing, I guess.

AR


----------



## frankthedm (Aug 30, 2005)

The First movie was dealt some killblows when they had to slice out scenes where the CG never got made due to budget problems. Glad to hear that does not seem to be a problem this time.


----------



## Viking Bastard (Aug 30, 2005)

(Copied from the other thread: )


I liked it.

I mean, it's not great or anything, but it really makes me think how fun a well made, 
albeit low budget, D&D TV series could be.


A few thoughts, though:



Spoiler



- Didn't the Dragon Specters survive the first movie? Y'know, as a evil Dragolich God
descends on your city, now would be a pretty neat time to use 'em. Since they're
going with the first movie's continuity an' all.

- Now, since Izhmar surrendered it's Magocracy to the rule of the people 100 years 
ago, it really has gone down hill. Maybe the Mages had the right idea after all.

- Hahah. The Lich betraying Damodar was great. He just seemed bored, getting involved
for the heck out of it. That's what centuries of undeath will get you. Boredom.

- For the ÜberHenchman he was in the first, Damodar seemed kinda wimpy here. No
battling at all. Of course, in the first he was just against a bunch of wimpy thieves,
no Lord Minister and gang. Maybe he was just a big puss making big noises with his
purple lipstick and necksnaketentacles.

- Is it me, or was the whole adventuring party just kinda copied from the 3e PHB's
illustrations, right down to the tattoos?

- Damodar was just thrown in jail? Guess who's the baddy in D&D 3, then.

- I liked the Rogue. He was fun.

- The girl playing the Lord Minister's wife was awful. Cute, though.

- The Elf had what, three lines?



Next movie, can we please get a Beholder? There's nothing that says D&D to me like a
Beholder. Beauty in the eye of... and all that.


----------



## KenM (Aug 30, 2005)

Viking Bastard said:
			
		

> Next movie, can we please get a Beholder? There's nothing that says D&D to me like a Beholder. Beauty in the eye of... and all that.




  Beholders were in the first DnD movie.


----------



## Mouseferatu (Aug 30, 2005)

You must have gotten hold of an older version, considering that the movie isn't _called_ "The Elemental Might" anymore, but rather "Wrath of the Dragon God."

Still, I hope that what you saw is at least similar to the finished version, since it sounds like much more of what I wanted than the first movie was.


----------



## Viking Bastard (Aug 30, 2005)

KenM said:
			
		

> Beholders were in the first DnD movie.



Bah! Call that a Beholder?!


----------



## Fast Learner (Aug 30, 2005)

Well, that newer title is definitely better.

This movie was considerably better than the first, imo. If the direction had been a little better, the editing a little tighter, and the CGI improved a fair bit, it would definitely make a reasonable American theatrical release.

The best thing is that it felt like a real D&D adventure, used identifiable D&D spells and magic items, D&D monsters, D&D dungeon conventions, D&D adventuring party composition, and all of the characters got to use their special skills in a useful way, the way a good DM ensures.

Really, other than just being low budget (which means non-top-notch actors and filmmakers), it's a good film.

Definitely recommended. And I quite disliked the first one.


----------



## nikolai (Aug 30, 2005)

Thanks for the reviews, everyone. I'm surprised that comments so far have mainly been positive - I wasn't hoping for much on the budget they were working with. It's nice they've stuck close to the D&D brand.

How does it rate alongside the other films in Sword & Sorcery cinema?


----------



## takyris (Aug 30, 2005)

Viking Bastard said:
			
		

> Bah! Call that a Beholder?!




I remember when my wife and I were watching the first movie, and the beholders came on. My wife, who knows nothing about gaming except what she knows through me, heard Snails or whoever say, "Whoah, beholders! Let's distract them," and then the beholders got punked.

My wife turned to me and said, "Wait... in *your* game, beholders are really really scary, and your buddies all freak out when they meet one. What the hell?"

If my non-gaming wife could see the problem in taking one of the big badass evils particular to D&D and turning them into guard dogs, it's kind of surprising that the guys working on the movie couldn't.


----------



## bloodydrake (Aug 30, 2005)

It was so much worse then the first one.
how? 
because the first one was funny campy..in that omg thats so bad its funny kinda way.. this one is omg this is so bad and its taking itself serious.

horrible horrible horrible.
I've never heard dialog so bad its like 10year olds playing dnd.
"ROGUE YOU BETTER OPEN IT"
"CALM DOWN BARBARiAN"
"Wizard  CAST LIGHTING BOLT"
'CLERIC BANISH THOSE UNDEAD"

It tries so hard to tie things into dnd but does to so blatently and with a sledge hammer its ridiculous.

xena was 10x as good as this thing.
Heck the cartoon version of dnd was better than this.

don't expect anything but a really bad fantasy movie ..That EarthSea miniseries seems like LOTR compaired to this.

sigh


----------



## BrooklynKnight (Aug 30, 2005)

Yanno, for a D&D movie i really wouldnt expect any less. Its NOT LOTR, its the DUNGEONS AND DRAGONS movie, and frankly i think that fits in.

In what game DONT you hear lines like that?

Campyness like that is what made The Gamers such a good D&D film too.

I watched D&D2 this morning and I liked it. It was better then the first one, and I appreicated the level of campyness in this one. 

Damodar however, really did get gimped, oh well.


----------



## Fast Learner (Aug 30, 2005)

That Earthsea mini kicked this movie's ass in special effects, and was in every other way quite inferior.

The first one wasn't campy, it was just accidentally stupid.


----------



## Altamont Ravenard (Aug 30, 2005)

Did you all notice that the actor playing the lich had trouble talking, as if his big teeth were about to fall out?

AR


----------



## Viking Bastard (Aug 31, 2005)

Heh, yeah. 

Very Buffyesque makeup.


----------



## Fast Learner (Aug 31, 2005)

This is the spoiler-free thread. Mentioning specific creatures like that is a bad idea, even if it doesn't specifically give away plot, imo.


----------



## Felon (Aug 31, 2005)

Altamont Ravenard said:
			
		

> For those who said that you can't make a RPG system into a movie, well, I'd say you're wrong.




Well, I don't know about RPG's on the whole, but there are those who have said you can't make _D&D_ into a movie, and if you say they're wrong, then I would say this movie doesn't back you up. They certainly took the easy way out of a lot of the elements of D&D that don't make for good storytelling, chiefly by killing the cleric early in the story so there wouldn't be one in the party to heal or raise characters later on.


----------



## Dioltach (Aug 31, 2005)

Altamont Ravenard said:
			
		

> For those who said that you can't make a RPG system into a movie, well, I'd say you're wrong.




Yeah, that Lucas guy did a pretty good job with SWRPG!


----------



## draco2005 (Sep 3, 2005)

One question in regard to the D&D 2 movie.  Where can I find a trailer for it?  Also, will it be in the big screen, or just in DVD. and when is it coming out?  Thanks!


----------



## AdmundfortGeographer (Sep 3, 2005)

In the US, it will premier October 8th on Sci-Fi. Then DVD release in November.


----------



## Wormwood (Sep 3, 2005)

Just saw it. I'll buy the DVD just to assuage my consienece. 

It's like Order of the Stick: the Movie...without the funny bits.

ps. Bruce Payne is the balls.

pps. Hello? They mention the Ghost Tower of Inverness and the Barrier Peaks! That alone is worth a geekgasm. This movie rocks!

ppps. I'm going to stop posting while drunk. But before I do..I BEG you to watch this movie. it's awesome!

pppps. Oh, and the rogue acts EXACTLY like every thief I've ever played in any game system. Bless his little mohawk.


----------



## Upper_Krust (Sep 4, 2005)

*I finally got to see the movie.*

Hi all! 

Okay, I watched the movie today.   

Personally I think gamers will get a kick out of it, but I am not so sure the general movie going audience would, so it was probably a wise decision going straight to television/dvd.

I thought the special effects were at least as good as the first movie, if not better, and when you consider it had only 1/5th the budget thats pretty good going.

The acting was for the most part inoffensive, the actors were decent enough, with the Rogue and the Barbarian stealing the show.

Okay spoilers to follow:

The Good

1. Lux: The Barbarian was gorgeous, no doubt about it, and amazingly there was nothing gratuitous about her either. I would have prefered to see her absolutely lose control in the fight with the bandits. Probably needed a magic item of some kind, I'm thinking Horn of Valhalla maybe, or a Horn of Blasting. Also, maybe its just me, but I would have prefered seeing her with a greataxe (perhaps one which split into two hand axes upon command?).

2. Nim: The Rogue, probably the best character, most of the better scenes and dialogue featured him. Had the Gem of Seeing which was really cool, especially when we got the cameras eye view. Although one thing struck me as odd...a Rogue only having one dagger - most unlikely. Some squabbling over treasure would have been nice, but the most annoying thing was we never got to see him hide in shadows, move silently or sneak attack anyone.

3. The little vignettes for each of the main characters when Berek was discussing who he wanted for his party, were quite cool. I would have liked to have seen an even bigger tavern brawl with the Barbarian; the Rogue going back and robbing the other two thieves who cheated him; and a bit more thought put into the scenes with the mage and the cleric.

4. The Lich with no name: The Lich was easily the best villain in the movie, the one big mistake of that first scene was setting it during the day. Set at night, the lich would have looked more menacing and the created spectres would have looked awesome. I have to concur with one of the previous posters, his treachery was amusing.

5. Dungeons: This time around, unlike the first movie, the dungeon scenes were pretty good. Illusions, puzzles, monsters (although someone should have got tagged by one of them), locked doors, traps. I would have prefered a BBEG in the dungeon, but you can't have everything I suppose...oh, and where was the light coming from? 

The Bad

1. Faluzure: Faluzure should have had his energy drain breath weapon. It would have been cool to see the people of Izmir being killed and raised as the undead, their numbers growing with each attack, while the ever fewer defenders torn between attacking the dragon god and the undead.  

2. Damodar: I thought Damodar was an incredibly weak villain, bordering on the pathetic. I mean he didn't do *anything* really in the whole movie. He virtually stood still while being attacked, twice! What happened to his fighting ability from the first movie? Damodar should have been brought back as a Death Knight, not some ambiguous undead. If they still wanted to show the actors face he could have worn some mask of illusion, although why the heck they he wanted to disguise his appearance was a mystery.

3. The Orb: Also what the heck did the Orb actually do, apart from awaken the dragon? It would have been nice to see it actually have some secondary powers.

4. The Bandits: No character at all, probably would have worked better as a band of orcs. Also had none of the bandits ever heard of missile weapons (!?) at least then we could have seen the Mage using Protection from Arrows and the Barbarian going into a full mouth-frothing rage when she got injured! The Bandits definately needed something to make that encounter memorable.

5. Spatial Awareness: The main battle scenes could have done with some better co-ordination and choreography.

6. Missile Weapons: The heroes really needed some missile weapons, or at least one character specialising in thrown weapons such as the Rogue. Okay, we get to see him throw a dagger, twice, but he should have had a brace of daggers to throw.

The Ugly

1. The Mistake: Okay, its been mentioned before, but how could they have missed the continuity error about there being no divine magic in the city, when the wizard bought the divine scroll from the temple of Obad-Hai!


----------



## Hypersmurf (Sep 4, 2005)

Altamont Ravenard said:
			
		

> The actions scenes are okay (of Xena level, say).




Oi!

-Hyp.


----------



## Thanee (Sep 5, 2005)

Felon said:
			
		

> ...but there are those who have said you can't make _D&D_ into a movie...




The Gamers has already proven, that it is possible (even though they played pseudo-AD&D, because of copyright issues, I suppose). 

Bye
Thanee


----------



## Blue_Kryptonite (Sep 6, 2005)

I really liked the first one, it reminded me of my own group and our campaigns. I'll have to see if I like the second one when it comes on Sci-Fi. But based on the fact I hate every new fiction show they have except Stargate: Atlantis (Which is starting to get on my nerves, it used to be less dark and gritty... elements I find boring... And more upbeat) bodes ill. I smell Firefly and Battlestar Galactica and other (IMO, of course), pointlessness.


----------



## Bass Puppet (Sep 6, 2005)

Upper_Krust said:
			
		

> Hi all!
> 
> Okay, I watched the movie today.
> 
> ...




I'm with you on all the pro's and the con's

Add this to your con's.

The Undead Black Dragon "God" breath weapon is fire.


----------



## Fast Learner (Sep 6, 2005)

Yeah, especially when previously, in the cave, his 



Spoiler



breath weapon


 appeared to be 



Spoiler



gas


.


----------



## Bass Puppet (Sep 7, 2005)

For some odd reason that really bothered me.  :\


----------



## Desdichado (Sep 7, 2005)

BrooklynKnight said:
			
		

> In what game DONT you hear lines like that?



Mine.


----------



## Blue_Kryptonite (Sep 7, 2005)

BrooklynKnight said:
			
		

> In what game DONT you hear lines like that?
> 
> 
> 
> ...




To each their own, indeed. But man, I'd likely be either kicked out or walk off your game so fast no one would remember I was there. Sounds a little like the "musical Xena Episode" or "Angel is a demonic vampire puppet" or "Toss me!/Mammoth Shredding Legolas" sessions are relatively rare in your playstyle.


----------



## GentleGiant (Sep 9, 2005)

Fast Learner said:
			
		

> Yeah, especially when previously, in the cave, his
> 
> 
> 
> ...



It might just be me, but wasn't that a wholly different 



Spoiler



dragon - a "standard" black dragon


?
I've only seen it once, so I might be misremembering, though.


----------



## AdmundfortGeographer (Sep 9, 2005)

GentleGiant said:
			
		

> It might just be me, but wasn't that a wholly different
> 
> 
> 
> ...



I'm highly certain that it is the same one. Barak (sp?) called it out by its size category, 



Spoiler



a colossal black dragon


. It is really likely that this was a usage of a D&D game term in the movie, and the movie is chalk full of game terms spoken by the characters. How many 



Spoiler



colossal black dragons should be sleeping under the same mountain. 

But the change breath weapons does seem odd. Possible to handwave it away by saying that the dragon is unique, a supposed dragon god after all. Why not handwave it as a superior unique dragon that *does really* have multiple breath weapons. *shrug*


----------



## Fast Learner (Sep 9, 2005)

That was my rationalization.

And yes, definitely the same 



Spoiler



dragon


. That's the plot of the film.


----------



## Wormwood (Sep 9, 2005)

Fast Learner said:
			
		

> That was my rationalization.




Here's mine:



Spoiler



He's not using his breath weapon...he's casting Fireball. Lots and lots of fireballs.



/grasping at straws


----------



## Wraith Form (Sep 10, 2005)

Mild spoilers ahead.  You've been warned.

Upper_Krust's observations were decent, but I have to say the first "pro" in his spoiler list....well, if she'd gotten naked I'd be a happier man.   She was very pretty but couldn't act to save her life.

Oh, wait...._none_ of them could act to save their lives.

It _was_ cool to hear offhand references to D&D modules thrown around in the script (The Ghost Tower, Barrier Peaks, Jubilex, Shrine of Kuo-Toa....wasn't one of the mage-dudes wearing a _robe of eyes_?  But the eyes were metal clasps that kept the robe closed?)

I didn't see the first D&D movie, so I'm not speaking from that reference point.....but I'd wait to rent this, people.  It was crap-tastic-awful.  Except the aforementioned girl, who should have kept her mouth shut and just looked tall & gorgeous.  (And, sigh, naked.)


----------

