Dungeons & Dragons 2 - L'ira del dio drago

I enjoyed this more then the first. There was no slapstick comedy which really teed me off in the first film. Although there was a clear leader, it was more balanced on a party of characters. It was more of what I would expect from a D&D movie. The action was well paced, and the plot progressed well. The SFX were decent. A few times the CG wasn't that good but it didn't really detract that much. Ellie Chidzley as Lux was very easy on the eyes. Hope to see more of her in the future.

In overall context of movies maybe 6.5/10. In the context of a D&D movie and to those looking for one I give it 8/10.

Worth a view.

A surprisingly satisfying film. This film takes the subject matter far more seriously than the original film, with the end result bringing me more into the story then the previous film. While on it's own it's really only passing fair amongst other films of the genre, it's connections to the original film, and it's remaining true to the spirit of the material from which it was drawn made this movie an enjoyable watch for me. Without giving any spoilers, I would have to say as a D&D'er, this film is much truer to the game then the original movie in every possible way. The character's are more interesting, the perils they face are more dire, the antagonists are clever and deceitful (which is rare in any genre), and their is definitely some decent, though not great, acting. I would definitely recommend this movie.

I was someone that had mixed feelings on the original D&D movie. I thought the script was clunky, the acting was awful as far as good guys were concerned, it contained wildly inappropriate dialog for the setting, and the tone made light of what could have been dramatic events. On the other hand, the movie looked good, had a couple decent fight scenes and the huge Dragon war at the climax was dynamic and exciting. Still, with it's less than impressive reception, I figured this would be a series of one.

Imagine my surprise when a sequel was announced, and even greater shock when I watched the films premier and found it to be everything I felt it's predecessor lacked. The acting, while not Oscar worthy, was perfectly reasonable work from a handful of unknowns. The plot is treated seriously this time around, with a minimum of cliché and jest (Although there are two laugh out loud moments) and actually features an intelligent foe with a genuinely epic plan for the forces of justice to combat. Speaking of which, the heroes are a nice diverse bunch, and the film manages to showcase each one's unique talents well.

As for the action and eye candy, there's plenty. The fights are staged better than 90% of the action flicks on the shelves, with realistic flow and quick pace. The special effects are among the best I've ever seen in a non-theatrical film and are leaps and bounds above any other Sci-Fi premier yet broadcast (Though not quite as good as a theatrical release). The final battle is not as kinetic as the first films finale, but manages to be a fitting climax to the quest.

If this is what this crew can produce with a terribly low budget, I say give them 70 million bucks and get Dungeons & Dragons III in theaters ASAP!

For all of those who play DND and have played DND throughout the years... you may have seen a movie that came out in 2000 that you may have hated or maybe even liked what was called Dungeons and Dragons The Movie. Well in my opinion it was a flop... Well recently they actually made a Dungeons and Dragons 2. I watched it last night even though it has not been released yet (it plays on the Sci Fi channel on Oct 8th) and well... it was great! I was totally surprised with the production. It wasn't cheesy (except a few of the special effects) acting wise or production wise. The movie played out like it was a regular adventure that a DM would make up, the spells were cast properly, the "core" rules were not broken, and most importantly the characters were interesting and were not INVINCIBLE... they are just like us PC's (getting arms eaten or chopped off or getting eaten whole by a purple worm!). So trust me... it was great. Even though it was obviously lower budget than say... Battlestar Galactica. But what DND game isn't low budget.

The first D&D movie was largely hated by D&D players, partly because it wasn't a good movie, but also because it was not very much like D&D the game.

Perhaps because of the cool reception of the first, this was changed dramatically in the sequel. It now really is like the game, sure to provide lots of geek moments where viewers try to guess which spell is being cast or what magic item is being used. The characters also tend to act like D&D characters, and they actually explore a dungeon.

Unfortunately, as a movie, it has some shortcomings. For one, much of the acting is uninspired. Not bad, but about a wooden as a dummy of Keanu Reeves. The first movie also suffered from this problem, but in this movie, it's probably because most of the actors are new, this generally being their first film. Exception being Tim Stern, the guy playing the Rogue, who brought some life to his character.

The characterization and dialog isn't great, either. Less character development than in some commercials, even though this is a fairly long movie. But I chalk that up also to the inexperience of the screen writers (though also is relatively common in D&D games, so perhaps is a feature, not a bug).

When it comes to special effects, they are about on par with Sci-Fi channel offerings. Slightly better. Lord of the Rings it ain't. But not terrible, either.

Still, just judging it as a fantasy movie, it's much better than most other low budget ones. Worth watching. And for D&D players, it's a lot of fun.