Alright, given the reviews and the ratings on IMDb for "Dungeons & Dragons: The Book of Vile Darkness" then I was fearing the worst of this movie, especially because the prior two movies were not all that great. (Should be noted that I found the second movie "Dungeons & Dragons: Wrath of the Dragon God" better than the first movie.) Despite the critique, bad reviews and overall poor ratings, I decided to give it a go because I am a big Dungeons & Dragons fan (been playing it for some 26 years or so), and if bad came to worse I could always turn it off and find something else to watch.

And having seen it now, I honestly do not understand the critique, the bad reviews and the general moaning there has been about this movie, because in my opinion, "Dungeons & Dragons: The Book of Vile Darkness" picks up the prior two movies, slaps them around and then shows what D&D should be like.

In this third movie we follow a party of less than lawful-good characters here in a party out seeking the three parts of the Book of Vile Darkness. And it is refreshing to see a fantasy movie where the main characters are not goody-two-shoes. Sure, there was the devoted of Pelor (the good guy in the movie) thrown into the midst of a vermin lord, goliath, assassin and a sorceress - all of whom are less than your average lawful-good hero. So as a D&D player it was such a blast to have a group of anti-heroes starring as the main characters for a change.

This movie is a blast to anyone well traversed in the D&D universe, because there are some really great aspects to the world; such as you have your iconic D&D items - a vorpal sword (although it is beyond me why it wasn't put to use), a bag of holding, and of course the holy symbol of Pelor. But it was also really interesting to see the prestige classes such as the vermin lord and assassin brought to life on the screen. Personally I was well in favor of the vermin lord, because it was nailed right on the money as it is described in the actual Book of Vile Darkness (D&D 3.5 accessory as published by Wizards of the Coast).

The effects in the movie were actually quite alright and worked out well enough. So again, I must admit that I don't understand the moaning and complaining from other reviewers. It worked to illustrate what it was meant to do. And for fans of the D&D world (and those who own the Book of Vile Darkness 3.5 accessory) there are some really nice touches in terms of spells being used in the movie; spells that were taken right out of the rulebook.

Storywise, well the movie was pretty straight forward, fairly much like participating at a D&D gaming session, so it was alright. The story was somewhat predictable though, but still it was adequate entertainment.

Sure, "Dungeons & Dragons: The Book of Vile Darkness" might not have had the same kind of budget and famous Hollywood actors to use as baiting in people, but the ones that they did hire for the roles did adequate jobs with their roles. Sure, it wasn't award-winning acting performances, but still it was worthwhile to watch and everyone did contribute something to the movie.

One thing that did miss from the movie was monsters. You can't really have a Dungeons & Dragons movie without brandishing off a couple of monsters. There was a red dragon, which was cool enough, although it was quite easily defeated, and being familiar with the rules of D&D, it was so strange that the dragon didn't make use of its breath weapon to defeat the 'heroes'. Then there was the undead child, which was a rather interesting creature for them to put into the movie, and the last monster was the wraith-like undead protecting the undead child. I will say that these creatures all looked alright in my opinion and worked out well enough.

If you are a fan of the Dungeons & Dragons game and were discouraged by the previous two movies which were, well, let's just say below average, then you definitely have to treat yourself to "Dungeons & Dragons: The Book of Vile Darkness" because it is actually quite good.

I know this review is written with my pro-D&D goggles on, but I just don't see there is any leverage to the complaining and moaning that the movie has been getting. To me, this movie was enjoyable and better than the previous two D&D movies.

This is a modest-budget swords-and-sorcery fantasy based on Dungeons and Dragons... and for what it is, it is pretty good.

Don't expect Oscar winning performances, but most of the acting is acceptable and some is actually pretty good; the fellow playing the Vermin Lord does a very good job of quietly understated evil.

The effects and creatures are comparable to D&D:WOTDG (the second movie), but it moves faster and there is more action, and more variety in spell use with better imagery, and better fight scenes.

Gladly lacking the first D&D movie's lame humor and misplaced modern sensibilities about egalitarianism, and the slow-paced and stilted wordiness and failed melodrama of the second, this one is a bit more stark and grim than the others, with more actual fighting.

It is also more in line with actual D&D material, 3.5e I believe though the version I am more familiar with was new 30 years ago. :) D&D fans will enjoy it, Swords&Sorcery fans will like it, appreciating it for what it is. If you're looking for deep dialog with Johnny Depp and Julia Roberts, though, perhaps you should look elsewhere.

As for me, I was indeed entertained.

I went into this film expecting it to be awful. I hated the first two films in the franchise - unlike many here, I thought the 2nd film was far worse than the 1st, and the 1st one was bad. I was pleasantly surprised by this one (the 3rd).

Sure, it is cheesy at times. Some of the dialog is stilted, and the acting is spotty in places (like the shopkeeper, for example). The first battle sequence was worrisomely bad (as in, oh no. . .), but mercifully short. However, the rest of the fights scenes were well done. The CGI was much better than the first two films. While it was still obviously low budget, I have seen worse in theatrical movies. So, it was money well spent.

Remember how embarrassed Jeremy Irons looked in the first movie? There's none of that here. The actors try, and for the most part succeed, in playing their parts well. Some of them were quite good, others are amateurish in parts, but over all they were good.

The story was decent. The script could have used some improvements. Without spoiling anything, the end felt rushed and forced. The tone was a much darker take than previous entries in the serious, and that turns out to be a vast improvement.

I am puzzled by a lot of online reviews / summaries of this film, which describe the plot inaccurately, and even list characters and actors that are not in the movie. Even IMDb lists Meagan Good in the cast, when she's not in it. Clearly, these reviewers have not bothered to watch.

In conclusion, I would watch this for free on cable or Netflix, but it might not be worth paying to see. If you are a fan of D&D, RPGs in general, or S&S films, give it a shot, and you may just like it.If you're not a fan of any of the above, I can't relate to you, so this review may not apply. :-)