Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Slime Lord 10-09-05, 08:01 AM	OK. Maybe "it Rocked" is a little bit of an overstatement, but let's admit it here people, last night's movie was 100x better (no sarcasm) than the first so called movie. Now, I don't know my DnD like I do my FR, but none the less, it was preety damn good. It kept you up to date on all aspect of the story, the Mages, the Champions and the Evil. It wasn't all "watch this" and stuff from each character too. Me and GothicDan agree it get's a good soild B as it's rating.
warlockco 10-09-05, 08:16 AM	Damn, I knew I forgot something. :( Spent the entire day hanging out with a friend, and forgot to set my VCR to record it.
Zanan 10-09-05, 08:58 AM	Spent the entire day hanging out with a friend, and forgot to set my VCR to record it. As in: it was shown on TV rather than out as DVD/video first? Strange ...
Slime Lord 10-09-05, 09:36 AM	As in: it was shown on TV rather than out as DVD/video first? Strange ... Well, it was a made for tv movie anyways..so yes ;) Did you see it?
Silverpanther 10-09-05, 10:01 AM	there is another D&D movie? :confused: these are the moments in a roleplyers live when you hate it to live in germany :weep: just no market over here :raincloud
Mage eye 10-09-05, 10:45 AM	I thought it was good and hope they do more.
Mirtek 10-09-05, 10:48 AM	Hm is it good as in "Nice to see on TV" or good as in "Worth to import the DVD from Amazon if you don't happen to live in the USA"?
WVgamer 10-09-05, 10:52 AM	It was pretty good, but I fell asleep right as the dragon was attacking the city. I liked how the cleric of Obad-Hai(basically Silvanus in FR) died first, realistic. The lich was decent, and the spell CGI's were better this time around. I give it a 3.5 out of 5, and it could have been better if the lightning trap didn't look so...you know.
ElGrecoETAC 10-09-05, 10:54 AM	That movie was painful. The dialogue was contrived. The CGI were awful, even for made for TV movies--some of the FX they used to show spellcasting (the blurring of the screen used for some of the early spells, especially) were just so poorly done. Hercules and Xena shows from years past had better CGI monsters than that horrible, horrible, papier-mache Dragon. Some of the fight scenes were better choreographed than others, but the ones that were bad were bad. I literally suffered through that movie.
Kuje31 10-09-05, 11:07 AM	I thought it was pretty good and I agree with Ed when he said it was better then the first one. BTW there is going to be a third one. :) Ed discussed the movies, briefly, about a month ago.
Old Sage 10-09-05, 11:13 AM	I thought it was pretty good and I agree with Ed when he said it was better then the first one.Well, that's good to hear at least. Although, I won't get to see it until December...
Thysl 10-09-05, 12:38 PM	I'm more of the mind with ElGreco, it was bad. Not nearly as bad as that first one, but bad. I think the worst aspect was the dialogue; if the Hero Lord adventured with the Cleric why did he need some BS exposition about divine magic from his old lady. Was that a lightning bolt that the elf wizard cast? I know someone said so but, well, it looked like light blue confetti. Lightning Bolts BOOM, and - come on - why skimp on something that is as common a natural effect as lightning? And what was up with the weird slime eating butt-mouth in Damador's back? 'Oh, so he really is a bad guy', duh.... Could've done without that scene altogether! Anyhow, watch it as a rerun if you can but don't pay DVD prices for a copy, its not worth it. ;)
Zanan 10-09-05, 12:40 PM	Well, it was a made for tv movie anyways..so yes ;) Did you see it? Well, I'd assume that it'll take at least a few month till it appears on the German screens.
Herr Doktor 10-09-05, 12:55 PM	Definetly better than the first one, didn't care for the makeup jobs on the lich and half-orc (?), or that the black dragon was spitting fire, though. The rogue fella was definetly my favorite (first time actor along with the barbarian lady), when the elfs bird companion that has been her "life-long friend" gets blasted into dust and he starts laughing... Excellent. ;}
GothicDan 10-09-05, 01:52 PM	Significantly better than the first. I do agree, though, that the Sci Fi channel could have done better with the CGI - making it clearer, among other things. The dialogue was campy at times, but really, the LotR dialogue was campy too - it just had more money to make it seem less campy in the context of the show. I really think of they had had a much larger budget, it would have qualified as a very good movie. And normally I don't think that budget is what makes a movie, but in the case of the fantasy/sci fi genre, I truly believe in it. I'd call it "adequate." A C+ or so.
WraithCaller 10-09-05, 02:06 PM	The lich sort of reminded me of Dyrr... In the 2nd - 4th books, not 5 where he got all moody and tempermental. And that last line was the BEST... "This whole endeavor was worthwhile, if only to see the look on your face..."
Slime Lord 10-09-05, 02:12 PM	I'm getting the idea from most it's like a 3:1 ratio. 3 folk like it (enough) 1 folk hated it. Not bad...
Ryltar Swordsong 10-09-05, 06:41 PM	It was good, but they messed up alot of stuff. I give it a 2.5/5.
Bone Lord 10-09-05, 07:31 PM	I enjoyed the film aswell. I went into it expecting disappointment and quality the likes of the 1st movie. I came away entertained and pleased that my initial feelings had been squashed. I agree with what has already been shared; it is 100x better than its pedecessor. IMO its not a great movie, but it was a good movie. That, and the commercials were fun aswell!
Sun Krigo 10-10-05, 12:15 AM	! Where the HELL did they show THIS?!
Kuje31 10-10-05, 12:35 AM	! Where the HELL did they show THIS?! Sci Fi channel.
Sun Krigo 10-10-05, 12:42 AM	No wonder, I HATE that channel. Haven't gazed at it in about two years...
Bone Lord 10-10-05, 12:53 AM	No wonder, I HATE that channel. Haven't gazed at it in about two years... I bet. I am sure most all of your time and resources are directed at plotting world domination and the destruction of those pesky 'Joes'. ;) [A reference to your choice of avatars] "COOOO-BRAAAA!"
shiyongseng 10-10-05, 02:03 AM	It was a horrid movie, but is definitely better than the first. No memorable characers, acting..., special effects somewhat eye pleasing at times for not being a big theater job. I rather felt like I was watching a beefed-up Zena; never a fan. The opening of the movie was rather cheese looking. (spoilers) The cleric character was laughable and didn't last long. The thief - not as annoying as what's-his-face in the other is a small plus. There was a bit where the mage did a detect magic spell in a room and everyone was wearing something magical, but you never really got a chance to know what they had- so the main character's sword was rather odd when it burst a mortar wall open like a hammer. Then of course later he cut through steel like butter when they got caught in a cage. There was a lich helping Damodar? Sorry if the name isn't correct, it's because again nothing really memorable. Anyway, the lich of course seemed to have the best magic in the whole movie while Damodar seemed to have nothing special, yet he was the guy trying to stomp a mud hole in these guys. The lich went against the heroes and failed to kill them... In one sceen near the end Damodar was riding away on a horse with the main "goodguy" in persuit and not using any magic at all??? Of course he didn't get far. The elven mage had more power in her staff than he did in the whole movie. Ya... Wow... Great movie here.. I think the only good part about it was that it was better than the first. Just download it from the internet or something since piracy isn't as big in the States as it is here- don't waste money renting it. I've been here in BeiJing, China for almost 2 years now, and I've seen better magic effects on TV here. That's bad- China is still a third world country; they put these effects in almost all their TV shows. You should see the filter they use for the cameras here to film these movies, it looks like you're watching a late-night car comercial. But at least they still do better effects than this movie had. Perhaps when the producers decide to make another blunderous movie like this they should send the crew here to China and learn a few things. I read that some director by the name of Uwe Boll directed the movie- well props to him for doing such a poor job, and props to the grand idiots that wrote such a bad script.
Bone Lord 10-10-05, 02:20 AM	It was a horrid movie, but is definitely better than the first. No memorable characers, acting..., special effects somewhat eye pleasing at times for not being a big theater job. I rather felt like I was watching a beefed-up Zena; never a fan. The opening of the movie was rather cheese looking. (spoilers) The cleric character was laughable and didn't last long. The thief - not as annoying as what's-his-face in the other is a small plus. There was a bit where the mage did a detect magic spell in a room and everyone was wearing something magical, but you never really got a chance to know what they had- so the main character's sword was rather odd when it burst a mortar wall open like a hammer. Then of course later he cut through steel like butter when they got caught in a cage. There was a lich helping Damodar? Sorry if the name isn't correct, it's because again nothing really memorable. Anyway, the lich of course seemed to have the best magic in the whole movie while Damodar seemed to have nothing special, yet he was the guy trying to stomp a mud hole in these guys. The lich went against the heroes and failed to kill them... In one sceen near the end Damodar was riding away on a horse with the main "goodguy" in persuit and not using any magic at all??? Of course he didn't get far. The elven mage had more power in her staff than he did in the whole movie. Ya... Wow... Great movie here.. I think the only good part about it was that it was better than the first. Just download it from the internet or something since piracy isn't as big in the States as it is here- don't waste money renting it. While I can and do appreciate your opinion, and understand your feelings on the film..though I dont share them. What I dont understand is why just because your the primary or main antagonist, you must also be the most powerful villain of the bunch. Perhaps at times the more interesting character is the one who possesses the least(or lesser)amount of power, but accomplishes the most in the end.
shiyongseng 10-10-05, 02:31 AM	He suposedly had a lot of power to have gotten past the ancients magic that sealed the dragon (god)- though weekened after time. After that I don't think he hardly cast a single spell the whole movie, yet he couldn't cast a magic missle spell at the hero chasing him. Or even have just one magic item besides the orb he stole that could have helped him- and he was so powerful. I don't think I know a mage in any D&D setting that is suposed to be that strong and not have a single magic item on him to protect him from fighters, or just to protect himself since mages don't do well in hand-to-hand combat.
WizO_Lyoness 10-10-05, 10:42 AM	So.... What does this have to do with FR exactly? ;) I mean, with the other movie related thread I could see it, but this one...
Slime Lord 10-10-05, 11:45 AM	You can lock it if you feel it's not related enough with this board and the movie. I don't know what else to say... :confused:
bobsan 10-10-05, 12:16 PM	Well, you can stick me in the camp with those who enjoyed this film. Of course the effects were so so (CGI worse off than the other effects), the acting was a bit coarse, and there were some things that were either overlooked or forgotten (Like placing it back into stasis). Otherwise, given that it was a low budget, made by Sci-fi, straight to tV movie, it was fun. It was most definitely better than the first (By a long shot) and was, in my opinion, a fun film to watch and something I'll probably buy cheap (Though I'm afraid if I put it next to my copy of the first movie (Which I got for free, wouldn't have paid for it) it might melt the first one)
ElGrecoETAC 10-10-05, 12:26 PM	I get the feeling that a lot of the people who "liked" the movie and thought it was good actually liked the fact that it was a D&D movie more than any of its actual qualities. Of course, that's just conjecture, and I could be entirely wrong. :)
bobsan 10-10-05, 12:27 PM	I thought it was pretty good and I agree with Ed when he said it was better then the first one. BTW there is going to be a third one. :) Ed discussed the movies, briefly, about a month ago. And here's what was said, straight from Kuje31's site. - http://home.rochester.rr.com/kuje/ (Page 388 in Word) One last thing: some of you may soon be pleasantly surprised at the quality of the second D&D movie. I have it on good authority that the third one (yes, there will be a third one, and not all that far into the future, either) will be even better.
Slime Lord 10-10-05, 01:02 PM	I get the feeling that a lot of the people who "liked" the movie and thought it was good actually liked the fact that it was a D&D movie more than any of its actual qualities. Of course, that's just conjecture, and I could be entirely wrong. :) Yes and No. There were bits and pieces like the explantion of Divine magic and the such, that I hated. But it was a RPG movie and I wasn't being bored my Saturday night ;)
Bone Lord 10-10-05, 04:14 PM	I get the feeling that a lot of the people who "liked" the movie and thought it was good actually liked the fact that it was a D&D movie more than any of its actual qualities. Of course, that's just conjecture, and I could be entirely wrong. :) I would say that this doesnt apply in my case. As I didnt like the 1st movie AT ALL . As a long time reader and collector of comics: I havent enjoyed 4 of the six Batman films. I didnt care for the more recent release of the Punisher. I found both Spider-man films mediocre( 1 more than 2 save for the villain) I didnt enjoy Daredevil in the least On the other hand, I did enjoy the following comic related flix: Constantine X-men 1 & 2 Hellboy Elektra Blade 1, 2 & 3 Spawn The League of Extraordinary Gentlemen I really cant say about the Fantastic 4, as I havent seen the movie as of yet.
warrior-poet 10-10-05, 04:20 PM	Don't want to be too scalding, but I have to STRONGLY disagree. The movie bit. Aside from some blatant inaccuracies (a Black Dragon that breathes poison gas and fire???), the acting was lackluster (chief villan looked like he would have phoned it in if he could have), and the story line was... weak and was actually the best part. They made this drivel and pasted the DnD name on it so that they could get an automatic fan base.
Bone Lord 10-10-05, 04:27 PM	So.... What does this have to do with FR exactly? ;) I mean, with the other movie related thread I could see it, but this one... By popular demand, or at least from a source carrying the most board weight. ;) With the release of the most current D&d film - Wrath of the Dragon God, what would you enjoy seeing in the way of a Dungeons & Dragons film set within the Forgotten Realms. Where within the Realms? If you could choose one notable Realms personality to be seen on screen, who would it be and why? Would you enjoy seeing a particular race within the film? Perhaps the representation of a particular faith? What known villainous Realms personality would you enjoy seeing fuel the story/drama? >To once again touch on the recent D&d : WoTDG film. I think they did very well considering it was produced at one 5th the budget of the original.
Thysl 10-10-05, 05:56 PM	With the release of the most current D&d film - Wrath of the Dragon God, what would you enjoy seeing in the way of a Dungeons & Dragons film set within the Forgotten Realms. Where within the Realms? If you could choose one notable Realms personality to be seen on screen, who would it be and why? Would you enjoy seeing a particular race within the film? Perhaps the representation of a particular faith? What known villainous Realms personality would you enjoy seeing fuel the story/drama? There was a great thread about just this over at Candlekeep's Forum (I'll see if I can find it later). In my opinion an FR movie is a bad idea. Unless one of us superfans can flip the bill for a multi-million dollar major motion picture I see any attempt at an FR movie as another 'Wrath of the Dragon God'. I'd rather not have my most favorite mental vacation spot tainted like this. So anyhow are any of you millionaires? If so maybe we can talk... Thysl in Silver
joepoe 10-11-05, 12:53 PM	there is another D&D movie? :confused: these are the moments in a roleplyers live when you hate it to live in germany :weep: just no market over here :raincloud Norway isn't much better ;)
Gallameed 10-11-05, 04:33 PM	Fantasy movies are having a bit of a comeback lately, thanks to the sucess of LOTR's it looks like hollywood will churn out a few more in the next couple of years. LOTR, Willow, they are Good. We have the Dragonlance cronicles to look forward to and Mirrormask is just around the corner. But then you remember Hawk the Slayer, Beastmaster 1, 2, 3, and Dragon Heart and you want to die. The first D&D film was an awful pile of excrement, the sequel didnt have much to live up to did it? The words "STRAIGHT TO VIDEO" mean alot. I havent seen it yet of course but I was wondering if the cast have returned, is that "Ken Doll" freak from Louis and Clark still in it? Has the talentless actor who is one of the terrible Wayans brothers returned to play the cowardly thief again? If you liked this sequel, did you also like Xena and watch WWE westling for fun? Will a normal person be able to sit through it all the way to the end without wishing he/she was living out the events of a victim in "Saw 2" instead?
The Simple Seeker II 10-11-05, 10:45 PM	Anyone who wish to see it again...or for those who missed the first time. A rebroadcast will on Thursday 9/8 p.m.Central. On SCI FI Channel. And oh, for the record, SFI FI Channel had nothing to do with CGI, as it was stated, incorrectly. They acquired a finished product, edited it for commerical time...and that is it. From a scale from of 1 to 10...a 5. And that is being nice, for the effort made.
arcanist supreme 10-12-05, 12:18 AM	what is the show's title? SCI FI?!?!!
The Simple Seeker II 10-13-05, 07:12 PM	what is the show's title? SCI FI?!?!! Here, this will help (http://www.enworld.org/showthread.php?t=151783)
WVgamer 10-13-05, 08:59 PM	:bump: For those who missed it and want to watch it, it's currently on Sci-Fi.
Crust 10-13-05, 10:35 PM	I'm watching this movie while chatting with a good friend and fellow gamer, and it's great spotting out moments where the rogue passes his seach check, or when the cleric turns undead, etc. That's fun, but that's the only thing this movie is good for. Not that I'm shocked. It's Sci-Fi, the ultimate in cheese. Aside from some funny (and cheesy) quotes, a few flickering moments of what could be defined as coolness, this movie is, as expected, a disappointment. I only tuned in to see how disappointing it would be. To be honest, I don't like the idea of someone watching this film and thinking, "That's what D&D is? How lame!"
Slime Lord 10-13-05, 10:38 PM	I'm watching this movie while chatting with a good friend and fellow gamer, and it's great spotting out moments where the rogue passes his seach check, or when the cleric turns undead, etc. That's fun, but that's the only thing this movie is good for. Not that I'm shocked. It's Sci-Fi, the ultimate in cheese. Aside from some funny (and cheesy) quotes, a few flickering moments of what could be defined as coolness, this movie is, as expected, a disappointment. I only tuned in to see how disappointing it would be. To be honest, I don't like the idea of someone watching this film and thinking, "That's what D&D is? How lame!" Gotta give them credit none the less. And yes, I did see some things (given I don't know the game like most of you) things where I was "wait..should she of done that before?" And, why was the Statue that was hidden in ENGLISH?! AIyaya...Couldn't they of done it in some other lango?
Crust 10-13-05, 10:44 PM	Sorry. Didn't realize the original post took. :embarrass
Kuje31 10-13-05, 11:00 PM	Sci-fi didn't make the movie, they only played it on thier station. A different company made the movie. :)
Katowice 10-14-05, 02:54 PM	Both movies were terrible. At least this one was just a terrible made-for-tv movie this time around (not that all movies shown on Sci-Fi are gems). :thumbsdow
WizO_Lyoness 10-14-05, 03:47 PM	This is getting too far from the FR topic. I'm going to move this to DnD General, but note that if they find it too off topic there, they may close it. -Lyoness
The Simple Seeker II 10-14-05, 06:07 PM	Both movies were terrible. At least this one was just a terrible made-for-tv movie this time around (not that all movies shown on Sci-Fi are gems). :thumbsdow For the record, the film in question, was not made for television per se. The intent was at the time, for silver screen release...but cooler heads prevailed and rerouted it to DVD. As for the 'terrible' factor...well...it is called what it is called... :rolleye2: That is all.
Voran 10-14-05, 07:04 PM	In some cases, some decent rules use. Actually using a gem of seeing like it should be used. What happens when you teleport to an area you haven't been to before? Small chance of...oops..your arm in a wall! A couple of wierd things, storyline suggestions that went nowhere. What was the whole point of introducing the 'new' captain of the guard. Anyone get the mislead that he was going to go bad and fight the main-char 'old' captain of the guard near the end? Instead he just got nuked by the lich. WHo knows, maybe the main character had a sword of super sundering or something :P
Saurstalk 10-14-05, 07:28 PM	I'm watching this movie while chatting with a good friend and fellow gamer, and it's great spotting out moments where the rogue passes his seach check, or when the cleric turns undead, etc. That's fun, but that's the only thing this movie is good for. Not that I'm shocked. It's Sci-Fi, the ultimate in cheese. [....] To be honest, I don't like the idea of someone watching this film and thinking, "That's what D&D is? How lame!" Sci-Fi may have plenty of cheese, but it DOES have the new Battlestar Galactica, too. And, IMO, that is FAR from cheese. (Perhaps, SciFi will pick up Firefly, too and take off where Fox screwed up.) As for you latter comment, I agree. The movie was B-rate. I expected it to be, so I wasn't disappointed. Some of the magic spells looked good and some of the characters were pleasureable to see in action .. especially the barbarian and the rogue. In the end, what I was most disappointed in were the DnD commercials. LAME. I had hoped that WotC would have taken advantage of this opportunity to create some high-class and exciting commercials to draw in the audience. An example I've used includes having some of DnD's top artists create animated scenes - bringing their artwork to life. IMO, fast action animation of combat, spellcasting, and monsters ... something to leave the audience with their eyes wide and the word "Cool," on their lips. Instead, the commercial seemed more geared to someone who already plays DnD by saying, "Hey, look here we are advertising! Cool huh?" Uh, no. BTW, was the rogue supposed to be a halfling? For me, that part was never clear.
shiyongseng 10-14-05, 09:23 PM	The bad thing about all of this is there is going to be a third one in the future. Maybe they will at least make it after the FR series or DR, but I doubt it. It will more than likely be made after some lame story line again- possibly with the same characters or villain. I still say a movie based on one of the books (done by a good director of course and a proper budget) would be refreshing to see, instead of having to see another load of trash like this. At least have the movie in a setting that would be interesting- places or people that conjure images in our minds from the books. Maybe it wouldn't have to be about Drizzt or Elminster, just something that doesn't scream "CHEESE, look at ME, I'm over here!". I saw the movie once and it was enough, but when I saw the dragon in the end it rather looked like a lich to me, but it was breathing when it was sleeping. Last time I looked in the Monster Manual and such- undead didn't breathe. I could be wrong, maybe it was't a lich- just poor effects.
Templetroll 10-14-05, 09:58 PM	I havent seen it yet of course but I was wondering if the cast have returned, is that "Ken Doll" freak from Louis and Clark still in it? Has the talentless actor who is one of the terrible Wayans brothers returned to play the cowardly thief again? If you liked this sequel, did you also like Xena and watch WWE westling for fun? Will a normal person be able to sit through it all the way to the end without wishing he/she was living out the events of a victim in "Saw 2" instead? I don't know any normal people. I like Xena and dislike WWE. The only person from the first movie is the guy playing Damodar but he does not have blue lips this time. The rogue was cool; he was cold-blooded with the jerks in his introductory scene and the use of 'ancient guild secrets' later was amusing. There were several instances of class abilities, like the barbarian rage, that were decent. Someone noted elsewhere that themessage on the tomb was written in Common, not English. :D The commercials for D&D were okay. SciFi channel was as good a place as any to have the movie; the audience was right for the commercials to have a chance to attract new players. I think the commercials were amusing enough to get their attention. I think that WotC are grateful that the guy with the license for these movies isn't trying to make a Drizzt or Dragonlance movie the way he has done these. This was better than the first and if they can keep that guy from direct participation then the next one may be even better.
Saurstalk 10-14-05, 10:12 PM	If the producers were to base the next movie off a book, I'd choose something rich in character development, like The Yellow Silk.
primemover003 10-14-05, 10:40 PM	There were several instances of class abilities, like the barbarian rage, that were decent. Someone noted elsewhere that themessage on the tomb was written in Common, not English. Are you kidding? You could barely tell she was in a "Rage"... The commercials for D&D were okay. SciFi channel was as good a place as any to have the movie; the audience was right for the commercials to have a chance to attract new players. I think the commercials were amusing enough to get their attention. They were VERY adult swim... I liked them. As for future movies, it'll be hard for all of US to agree the movie is good until you find a screenwriter with talent that just happens to understand the game mechanics and history of it... I mean the two guys writing the Transformers movie made this bonehead comment... Screenwriting partners Alex Kurtzman and Roberto Orci told SCI FI Wire that they are writing the screenplay for the upcoming Transformers movie, but that it's not easy turning a toy franchise into a film. "Transformers is very tricky," Kurtzman said in an interview while promoting his latest movie, The Island. "It's a movie franchise based on a toy line, so the first question you have to ask yourself is, 'Well, what's the movie?'" Kurtzman added: "We sat down with [executive producer] Steven Spielberg and we said, 'Listen, the action scenes in this movie are a given. So what's the movie?' And he said, 'It's the story of a boy and his car. I want to bring back the old Amblin' movies.' I went, 'Oh, my God, Back to the Future. Great. We're in.' So we got it. And it's a real challenge, because very much like The Island, very much, I think, like pretty much any movie—and I totally believe it's why War of the Worlds worked so well—the key to making those movies work is to be so invested in the people and to maintain the subjectivity of your humans. If you start Transformers with giant robots sitting in a spaceship flying through space, your movie is dead in the water. So it's all about keeping it at a human level and seeing the amazing things that are going on through the eyes of your characters. Notice the bolded section... that's exactly what Transformers is all about!!! Unfortunately this is probably the exact treatment Hollywood would give a GOOD D&D movie.
barney barnsquabble 10-14-05, 11:44 PM	'The Gamers' is still the only true D&D movie.
Veldan Rath 10-15-05, 12:17 AM	[QUOTE=Gallameed]Fantasy movies are having a bit of a comeback lately, thanks to the sucess of LOTR's it looks like hollywood will churn out a few more in the next couple of years. LOTR, Willow, they are Good. We have the Dragonlance cronicles to look forward to and Mirrormask is just around the corner. But then you remember Hawk the Slayer, QUOTE] Hey! Hawk the Slayer ROCKED!!! Bearer of the Mind Sword!
Saurstalk 10-15-05, 12:45 AM	'The Gamers' is still the only true D&D movie. HERE HERE!
The^Wanderer 10-15-05, 01:54 AM	The movie was not a great movie; it was not even a good movie. It was, however, an enjoyable movie. I suppose it's all in the frame of mind. I didn't watch it as if I was watching a high budget blockbuster film. I watched it was if I was watching a Dungeons & Dragons movie. It had a simple plot (BBEG wants to release some dragon and ruin the world), a typical plot hook (oh brave heroes, save our city!), and some typical inter-party dialogue (hey, rogue! - help me out here). In that regard, the movie exceeds expectations. It delivers the feel of a less-than-perfect, but entertaining DnD game. With that said, I still hated the first movie. That one was just dreadful. It would not, I wager, have even made a decent DnD game.
Cli' San Aquanova 10-15-05, 07:08 PM	The rogue fella was definetly my favorite (first time actor along with the barbarian lady), when the elfs bird companion that has been her "life-long friend" gets blasted into dust and he starts laughing... Ditto. Nim rocks, and that scene had me laughing my ass off. :D This movie was a hell of a lot better than the first. Not like that's saying much, but this wasn't that bad, really. I was expecting another let-down, and was pleasantly surprised. It kinda catered to the actual D&D fans, what with the previously mentioned game mechanics (like when Nim made his successfull Search checks, and Sneak Attacks, as well as Ormaline's being limited to spells she had already prepared), as well as the rogue's appropriately limited HP (IE, getting blasted by a lightning bolt and almost dying, as opposed to the rogue protagonist in the first who could outfight city soldiers... :bored:.). The lady who played Ormaline actually hit a good spot with me, for some reason. She seemed to play an elf pretty well (and definetly had the look; she wasn't too bad on the eyes ;)), at least compared to all of the other elves in the two movies. If the third one's much better than this (and if Eddy says so, it must be true), then we may have a pretty decent movie on our hands. :) -C'SA :u:Bring Back Merfolk!!!:u:
primemover003 10-15-05, 08:19 PM	Yeah what was up with the Grugrach looking elves in the first movie!!! And Tom Baker was a brilliant Doctor Who, but an elf king he was not...
Penknight 10-16-05, 12:15 AM	I thought it was good and hope they do more.I heard somewhere (forget right now where) that they are wanting to do one more, making it a trilogy.
Elendur 10-16-05, 04:03 AM	The movie was enjoyable. At least there were actual D&D references. Ghost Tower of Inverness, Barrier Peaks, Obad-Hai, ect. The dragon's were actually scary rather than just been hoards of blurry figures flying around like in the first movie. My favorite line was when Damodar was saying something typically cheesy about ushering death, destruction and misery into the land, and the lich says "Good times".
SirCaran 10-16-05, 09:33 AM	This movie seemed to me like it was trying to get people to play DND. The part after the fighter guy blew up the wall and Nim found the lever and used"secret guild knowledge" on the "complicated device" , ie. the lever, that was awsome
Saurstalk 10-16-05, 10:48 AM	Incidentally, has anyone garnered a guess as to what the character levels were for the various heroes and villains? Moreover, has anyone attempted to lay out their stats? I'm curious.
SirCaran 10-16-05, 10:57 AM	i would say at least 10 they have been on various adventures as referenced by the movie well the wizard would have to be 15 to teleport 5 people (i know, the cleric died, but they were planning on 5)
AmanitaEata 10-17-05, 09:20 AM	The dialogue was campy at times, but really, the LotR dialogue was campy too - it just had more money to make it seem less campy in the context of the show. No. And normally I don't think that budget is what makes a movie, but in the case of the fantasy/sci fi genre, I truly believe in it. No.
Knightfall 10-19-05, 12:31 PM	If the producers were to base the next movie off a book, I'd choose something rich in character development, like The Yellow Silk. The rumor is that Silver Pictures is trying to get the rights to The Temple of Elemental Evil for the third film. Knightfall
Knightfall 10-19-05, 12:34 PM	'The Gamers' is still the only true D&D movie. Then the followinging link will make you happy... The Gamers: Dorkness Rising (2005) http://us.imdb.com/title/tt0447166/
trollbill 10-19-05, 12:51 PM	Then the followinging link will make you happy... The Gamers: Dorkness Rising (2005) http://us.imdb.com/title/tt0447166/ It has Ed Stark and Monte Cook in it? :blink: I own the first one and I knew I would have to own the sequel when I first heard about it...but this is just too rich. :evillaugh
Saurstalk 10-19-05, 01:06 PM	The rumor is that Silver Pictures is trying to get the rights to The Temple of Elemental Evil for the third film. Knightfall What's "comical" about this is that after the first DnD movie, the talk of a sequel and third movie were to involve the same characters in the first. (Recall the ending of the first movie ... made it pretty darn obvious given Snail's implied resurrection or reincarnation .. and all the happy notes of this new adventuring party's friendships. That said, I don't object to switching gears. I do like how the second movie tried to do a better job imitating the rules of DnD. As for Temple of Elemental Evil, I wouldn't object to switching gears once more to yet another unrelated story theme for the final movie of the trilogy. Just don't bring back any of the original bad guys. Perhaps the heroes from the second one - perhaps the Temple being a sort of 'prequel' to the second one ... but new and better baddies. (Heck, the Temple's full of 'em.)
Professor Gas 10-19-05, 11:48 PM	I heard somewhere (forget right now where) that they are wanting to do one more, making it a trilogy. I hope they make tons of these. I don't care if parts are cheesy. I don't care if Lord of thr Rings was so much better. I enjoyed the heck out of this movie.