Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Plissken 12-06-05, 11:36 AM	I know it premiered on TV (a channel I wans't able to get) The release was set for Nov., but I asked at the local HMV and GAming store, they said it wasn't avaible, and not till late feb. Was the release pushed back for canada? What happened?
Talmar 12-06-05, 02:47 PM	Well, the canadian amazon site lists the release date as 2/7/06 but it's already released here in the states. Don't know why.
overelemental 12-06-05, 07:27 PM	It's been released, i got the dvd a month ago from Canada
aramil99 12-06-05, 07:45 PM	Does it suck as badly as the first D&D movie? That would be quite a film-making feat if it does.
VictorC 12-07-05, 12:19 AM	You (in my opinion) should be in no hurry to get or watch this movie. I watched as much of it as I could stand when it premered on the scifi channal. It was kinda like the Street Fighter movie in the way that they were trying so hard to let people know that your watching a DnD (or street fighter) movie. Or better, watching some creep name drop. No offence to anybody that enjoyed the movie.
Ryltar Swordsong 12-07-05, 04:51 AM	Does it suck as badly as the first D&D movie? That would be quite a film-making feat if it does. It was better than the first one, but not by much.
Gallameed 12-07-05, 05:09 AM	You (in my opinion) should be in no hurry to get or watch this movie. I watched as much of it as I could stand when it premered on the scifi channal. It was kinda like the Street Fighter movie in the way that they were trying so hard to let people know that your watching a DnD (or street fighter) movie. Or better, watching some creep name drop. No offence to anybody that enjoyed the movie. AKk! Streetfighter... There's not enough words to describe how soul destroyingly awful that horrid peice of John Claude Van Dumb dreck is, poor, poor Raul Julia's last ever performance was as M Bison in that... thing. I am now going to have to watch something like Raging Bull so I can feel clean again.
Vestigial_Thumb 12-07-05, 07:34 AM	AKk! Streetfighter... There's not enough words to describe how soul destroyingly awful that horrid peice of John Claude Van Dumb dreck is, poor, poor Raul Julia's last ever performance was as M Bison in that... thing. I am now going to have to watch something like Raging Bull so I can feel clean again. Maybe it's just me being kinda like Quentin Tarantino, but I liked it because of its infinite crazed stupidity.
Gallameed 12-07-05, 08:38 AM	Maybe it's just me being kinda like Quentin Tarantino, but I liked it because of its infinite crazed stupidity. Sicko! :D I suppose there is some kind of god-awful dirty glee to be gained from certain moments in the... Ahem movie. It would (and did) take quite a few vodkas though, just dont ever tell anyone I told you. ;) *Thinks about "Blanka"* *giggle*
LordKandis 12-07-05, 03:56 PM	It was better than the first one, but not by much. That is an entirely factual statement that sums up the movie pretty well. :yuck:
Realmsrat 12-07-05, 08:11 PM	I actually though the movie was pretty good. I guess that me and Gary Gygax are the only people who were impressed with it...
Edymnion 12-07-05, 08:46 PM	Nah, I liked it too. No, it wasn't a GOOD movie, but it was very enjoyable, which totally makes up for it. I mean, you could sit there and name off moves and spells and feats they were using (I swear, barbarian girl bending over backwards to avoid the blow she didn't see coming, thats gotta be Uncanny Dodge!). Its not going to win any awards, but its a lot like a Bruce Campbell movie. Sure, its cheesy, its campy, but it its still a lot of fun to watch. I plan on buying it as soon as it comes out. Although, if memory serves, its ALREADY out under a differant name.
obrysii 12-07-05, 09:26 PM	I enjoyed the fact they had actual dragons in it. Not those sad excuses for the first movie.
Gallameed 12-08-05, 12:06 PM	its a lot like a Bruce Campbell movie. Now you've made it a must-see for me!
Fiddlypoppin 12-08-05, 12:17 PM	I haven't seen the second one yet, but I want to. I was living in Japan when the first one was released, so I didn't even know there was a D&D movie until a year or two after it was released. I stumbled across a DVD of it about 6 months ago, and bought it ($5). That was one of the funnest experiences of my life. Because the movie was so good? Goodness no. Because I got to sit there laughing about how it was obviously drawn from a gaming group where the DM couldn't write dialog to save his life and the PCs fell into stereotypical niches ("Aarrr, I'm a dwarf! Aarrr!"). I think that movie would have been absolutely perfect if they had interspersed the scenes with shots of a group of teenagers (or 20-somethings) sitting around a table littered with books, minis, and Cheetos. I can still see in my head one of the players jumping up and yelling at the DM, right after Snails gets thrown out of the castle, "You did NOT just kill my character!!!" Anywho, just my two cents. It's sort of like my own personal, gamer-geekified MST3K.
Patrakis 12-08-05, 12:21 PM	I also very much enjoyed the movie. But i didn't sit down expecting to see a good movie per say. I was expecting a gaming movie about a game i love. And that is what i found. I WANTED to see reference to the games. I wanted to be able the recognise a class, a spell or a creature from the game. I especially liked the extra features with interview with Mr. Gygax. You can see the actors reading the player's handbook to get an understanding of the character they play. Now that s a real gamers movie!! And the acting was on par with the average talent of a good roleplayer. hehe Oh and the movie is available in Canada. I found it in a Zellers store. Pat
Sir Knight 12-09-05, 10:39 AM	I kinda liked the first movie. It was a bit campy and enjoyable in my opinion. The second one started good enough but... well... I coulda written a better movie and I'm not a film maker. If I see one more fantasy movie where people refer to each other by their classes "Watch yourself Rogue! Rogue, check for traps! Rogue..." Bah! It was lame. The "special" effects were a bit... well.. horrid. The CGI was subpar. I say this all with regret as I am not a harsh critic but D&D 2 looked worse than any Episode of Hercules/Xena and wasn't on par with any "movie" made in the past 10 years. That said, it is an enjoyable flick to watch but I certainly wouldn't purchase it. "The Gamers" is a far better movie to watch and it was privately made w/a tiny budget. It is a lot better than D&D 2!
Aladdar 12-09-05, 11:40 AM	If you compare it to a multi million dollar movie such as LoTR then it sucked, but if you compare it to the other sci fi movies it's actually much better than many of them. There were parts that were silly and they tried a little too hard to make sure you knew it was a dnd movie but it wasn't horrible.
yergerjo 12-09-05, 06:09 PM	All in all better than the 2000 one... Jubilex...ok fine... Obad Hai Clerics...hmmmm more suited for druids...seems like they just tucked an inoffensive name of something neutral for the cleric... Minion in #1 now BBED...ok he was the best character in the 2000 movie always wondered what was done to him... FIRE BREATHING UNDEAD BLACK DRAGON.....WTF???
Realmsrat 12-10-05, 12:33 AM	FIRE BREATHING UNDEAD BLACK DRAGON.....GOD!!!
Cennedi 12-10-05, 09:53 AM	The Gamers > DD2 or DD1 cant wait to see the gamers pt2.
Feriin 12-11-05, 12:09 PM	I recently watched this movie. I thought it was FAR better than the first one. I liked both of them. The only thing that irritated me was ths subpar (assuming this movie were the par) actiing of the Barbarian (although she was pretty nice to look at). I thought the Dragons in this one were far better than the first movie. I personally liked the special effects, I thought they were well done. As for the Black Dracolich God, I was kinda ticked that it breathed fire. Granted there is a spell in the Draconomicon for breath weapon energy substition, but you never see him cast any spells. Also what the hell was up with the Mummy Rot spell? There were alot of crappy Clerics in that city if they couldn't cure it.
Malruhn 12-11-05, 12:58 PM	This has kinda ticked me off for several years. What do you people WANT?!?! The first movie is gaming at its pinnacle. The heroes were believable (though annoying), and the bad guys were played WAY over the top, as only Jeremy Irons could do. I enjoyed the movie to no end - and still do thanks to a well used DVD. The second movie has been more "commercialized" and they TRIED to make it more "movie-ish" and less "game-ish", which I thought was a mistake. But it was a fun, swashbuckling romp with enjoyable characters - and a solid bad-guy. I wish they had explained better why Damodar was still around, but I wasn't upset. You naysayers are so wrapped around the axle with LOTR and EPIC movies, you can't enjoy a good, playful adventure any more. It's almost like you guys don't GAME anymore. I could see EVERY action and reaction happening around my gaming table. Using spells to disrupt the barbarian's rage, the geas on Damodar, the screwed up teleport, the torched feet after being zapped by the trap... it was a darned Saturday afternoon adventure on the big screen!!! I can't wait for D&D 3 (and, no, I haven't heard anything). I'll see you either at the movies, or around the table.
The Club 12-11-05, 09:51 PM	This has kinda ticked me off for several years. What do you people WANT?!?! Um, screenwriting? Character development? Acting? Theme? Plot? The first movie is gaming at its pinnacle. The heroes were believable (though annoying), and the bad guys were played WAY over the top, as only Jeremy Irons could do. I enjoyed the movie to no end - and still do thanks to a well used DVD. Once Jeremy Irons saw the script, he apparently fought like a wolverine to get out of the show. I've always wondered if his egregious acting was an angry reaction to being kept in the cast. You naysayers are so wrapped around the axle with LOTR and EPIC movies, you can't enjoy a good, playful adventure any more. It's almost like you guys don't GAME anymore. Maybe that's my problem. See, when I was watching the first movie, they didn't give me any dice or control over the actions of the characters. Is your point here that a "good, playful adventure" must necessarily read like something typed by an adolescent gibbon with a head injury? I could see EVERY action and reaction happening around my gaming table. Using spells to disrupt the barbarian's rage, the geas on Damodar, the screwed up teleport, the torched feet after being zapped by the trap... it was a darned Saturday afternoon adventure on the big screen!!! And with acting and dialogue almost as good as the average gaming session. I kind of expected a movie/game session with an eight-figure budget to be a little better than something my buddies and I tossed off during an all-nighter during our sophomore year in high school. I can't wait for D&D 3 (and, no, I haven't heard anything). I'll see you either at the movies, or around the table. Anyway, the first movie was more enjoyable because it allowed for the possibility of getting roaring drunk before going into the theater to yell crude insults at the screen. The experience on the TV wasn't the same. Otherwise, I agree with the earlier assessment that the second one was (slightly) better. The Club
Ranger REG 12-13-05, 03:52 AM	This has kinda ticked me off for several years. What do you people WANT?!?! The first movie is gaming at its pinnacle. The heroes were believable (though annoying), and the bad guys were played WAY over the top, as only Jeremy Irons could do. I enjoyed the movie to no end - and still do thanks to a well used DVD. Well, for one thing, an actual dungeon. I mean, what the hell did Ridley just went through inside the thieves den? A mini-dungeon? :rolleyes: You naysayers are so wrapped around the axle with LOTR and EPIC movies, you can't enjoy a good, playful adventure any more. It's almost like you guys don't GAME anymore. I enjoyed Pirates of the Caribbean: The Curse of the Black Pearl. Nothing epic about it, but it's more enjoyable and sensible, fantasy-wise. I mean, honestly? Between Captain Jack Sparrow and Snail, who'd you pick for a drinking buddy? :D
Sir Knight 12-13-05, 08:47 AM	Non-Epic Fantasy... Conan the Barbarian Conan the Destroyer Red Sonja Willow Princess Bride They aren't LoTR quality but they were certainly "D&D-ish" movies. See, the problem is that making Dungeons & Dragons the movies shouldn't be a crappy script and throw in gaming terms. It should be a great script and use D&D as source material and use familiar things (names, how magic works, races, etc) but not have that be a focus. I mean really... did any of us have a problem knowing that the one guy was a Rogue? Who in the hell goes around calling people "Rogue" if they aren't refering to the X-man? I mean it's just silly. It was just low budget and not all that great (and again, I enjoyed it) but when it is given the name of the franchise, you expect something of a higher quality and there isn't any reason why they couldn't have done so. Compare Batman (any of the first four) to Batman Begins. The older ones are cheezy, subpar films that are kinda blech. Then look at the new Batman. It feels more realistic and is just better quality. That is what we need with a D&D film. It's hard to explain... but if you watch the canceled series ROAR (1997) for instance, it is a far better quality "fantasy" show than either of the D&D movies and my problem is why? I've seen fan films that were better quality. That I think is what my problem is. I don't need D&D the movie to be as good as LoTR but I think they should strive for it and not put out a movie on par with Critters. :)
SHADOW1 12-13-05, 01:43 PM	I Have Not Seen The Second Movie Yet And Although A Little Corny The First Movie Was Ok For A Low Budget Film. But I Do Agree That By Using The D&d Title I Was Expecting Something A Little Better. I Was Hoping For Better Out Of The Second Movie But After The Comments Ive Read I Wont Expect To Much.
Leibel 12-13-05, 05:55 PM	The 2nd DnD movie wasn't good much less great - still it was enjoyable and you could recognize spells/feats/etc. All the class's were obvious including the party leader(Fighter turned Aristocrat) and overall it seemed like a mid-level DnD adventure. It could have been better but it was superior to the first DnD movie(which like Star wars episode 2 I'm still recovering from) and if you want an enjoyable, self contained movie it's your thing.
Korhal_IV 12-14-05, 02:50 AM	Is this worth getting as a gag gift for your DM? :D