Customer Reviews

Dungeons and Dragons/Dungeons and Dragons: Wrath of the Dragon God

5 star:		(1)
4 star:		(2)
3 star:		(2)
2 star:		(1)
1 star:		(0)

 

 

Some would say that Dungeons and Dragons is a kid movie. Okay, I'm good with that .. I'm a 60 year old kid, and I laugh at all the cliche jokes because they're fun .. they tickle my funny bone. So, yes, it's a fun movie for kids, and even for adults who crave a little juvenile fantasy in their lives from time to time.
Wrath of the Dragon God was a pleasant surprise .. a bit more mature in theme with some excellent screen effects.
These are two great movies to watch with the grand-kids .. and if the kids won't behave, kick them out and enjoy the popcorn yourself.

One is classic, and funny in the sense that its trying to simulate DnD. The second movie is much more true to DnD, but maybe a little too close thus losing the sense of a story and instead just having many DnD references (Possibly this view is due to my interest in DnD). I recommend these movies only to those who have, or are still playing Dnd; anyone else seeing this will just be witness to a B-grade fantasy movie.

I feel sorry for Dungeons and Dragons fans. I really do.

These poor souls have suffered through some of the worst adaptations in movie history, namely the "Dungeons and Dragons" movie -- nonsensical, horribly produced, and filled with abysmal acting and writing. In fact, it's so bad that the SyFy sequel "Dungeons and Dragons: Wrath of the Dragon God" was a huge step up.

In "Dungeons and Dragons," the evil mage Profion (Jeremy Irons) wants to overthrow the pure-hearted Empress (Thora Birch), and her only chance is to get the Rod of Savrille (it's French?) which controls red dragons. But the secret location of the Rod has fallen into the hands of an apprentice mage, a pair of idiot thieves, a drunken dwarf and a snotty elf.

Honestly, that movie is so bad that it makes you want to impale yourself on a barbecue fork -- it's actually watchable only in a MST3K way. With that in mind, the sequel literally cannot get any worse... and it doesn't.

In "Dungeons and Dragons: Wrath of the Dragon God," the dragon god Falazure is waking in his mountain prison, because a hammy baddie from the first movie has captured a magical orb with his power. Ex-knight Berek (Mark Dymond) assembles the usual crew -- an elf wizard, a thief, a barbarian warrior, and a cleric -- and sets out to capture the orb before the world is destroyed (and his wife turns into a zombie... don't ask).

Anyone who has heard of THE WORST fantasy movies in existence will hear of the original "Dungeons and Dragons," right alongside such gems as Eragon and In the Name of the King - A Dungeon Siege Tale. And honestly, it deserves all the scorn heaped upon it -- exactly ten seconds into this movie, you can see the despairing look in Jeremy Irons' eyes right before he gives up even trying.

There is NOTHING that works in this movie. Leaden direction, silly action scenes (how many times can Marina club someone with a torch?!), goofy CGI, silly costumes (shoulderpads of DOOM!) and a story that meanders along with random side-trips (Ridley has to run through a ridiculously easy maze), and dialogue that makes you want to set your own brain on fire (the Empress' "rousing" speech to the Council).

As for the actors, they have exactly two decent actors in this movie -- Thora Birch and Jeremy Irons -- both of whom are obviously not trying. The other actors are dismal at best, and Marlon Wayans plays a borderline racist character whom even the WRITERS got tired of.

So is "Wrath of the Dragon God" any better? Yes! It was obviously written and made with real affection, and it's kind of likable in its earnest attempt to, if not make an epic classic fantasy movie, then at least make a movie worth watching. Sadly it's still a mess, mainly because of the weird pacing, thin plot, and a literal deus ex machina.

But the characters are much better than in the original movie, mainly because they TRY SO HARD -- especially the wonderfully dry-witted Stern and the wholehearted woman-warrior Chidzey, who sadly gets some of the worst dialogue ("Come, villainy. Death awaits you"). The problem is that one dead guy and two critically-injured people are... just forgotten at the end of the movie. Weird.

"Dungeons & Dragons 2-Movie Collection" is distinctive mainly for having one of the worst movies to never get roasted by MST3K, and a lackluster BUT TRYING REALLY HARD sequel.

Two DVDs on a single double-sided disc. What more do you want?

(Side A) "Dungeons and Dragons" --- Damon Wayan's performance is simultaneously stereotypical and necessary for the movie's main character to grow. Wayan's character is a buffoon who acts heroically when he must. In a meta-game sense, Wayan's character reminds the audience that the movie should not be all doom-and-gloom and that heroes can be the most unlikely of people. And Wayans brings a big name to the movie. OK, moving beyond that element . . .

The actors are all more than adequate. The special effects are impressive and massive in scale. Special effects have improved since this movie was made, but they are still great in this movie. The script makes me care what happens if the characters fail; at least one country will fall into civil war, and the world may be destroyed as well.

(Side A Extras) The DVD commentaries are informative, especially when the pre-movie difficulties are explained. Dave Arneson's comments are randomly inserted into the commetaries, which is a bit distracting.

(Side B) Dungeons and Dragons: Wrath of the Dragon God --- The movie sticks closer to a roleplaying game, which is both good and bad. The action is continuous, the characters are familiar, but it does not dare to become something more. It overcorrects for the faults of the first movie and stays on point.

(Side B Extras) I did not buy this DVD set for the snippets of Gary Gygax, but his brief extra is great. The other DVD extras have a D&D twist to help explain the movie.

ungeons and dragons are my favoret type of movies, these two are great, action is great acting not bad, i have seen worse. U will enjoy.

OK, the original Dungeons & Dragons is a good movie, but I didn't like the second one nearly as well is the first. The first movie had much better backgrounds and I felt that what it was intended to show was very well done. However , the second movie was almost like seeing a completely different movie. Instead of the kingdom we come to expect based on the first movie, you find yourself in mud huts, etc. It's almost if if someone made the choice to forget what had went before. If the second movie is suppose to take place later on, then the kingdom has really gone down hill! I do like both movies but think a better second movie could have been made.