In 2000, Dungeons and Dragons, based on the popular tabletop game of the same name, hit theaters to the excitement of longtime fans of the franchise. The film was something of passion project for director and entrepreneur Courtney Solomon, who had secured rights to the franchise in 1990 and embarked on a globetrotting, decade-long quest to finance and release the film, which he had originally envisioned as a $100 million blockbuster.

Despite the amount of time and attendant effort that Solomon put into the production, he was never much of a fan of Dungeons and Dragons itself. This is only surprising if you have not seen the movie. Solomon told Cinefantastique that he envisioned Dungeons and Dragons as “the Star Wars of the fantasy genres,” but he also reported that the final film was cobbled together with different scenes from 16 drafts.

Ironically enough, the haphazard nature of the narrative, structured around a series of quests for fantastical macguffins like “Eye of the Dragon,” the “Rod of Savrille,” and the “Map of the Library Wizard,” in all its sprawling and improvisational imprecision, has a lot in common with most actual games of D&D. Alas, this does the film no favors, and the amateurishness of the script ultimately sinks the movie with its poor execution and misguided attempt to appeal to a wider audience.

The D&D Script

New Line Cinema

The first and perhaps most obvious issue with Dungeons and Dragons was its lackluster script. The film’s plot was convoluted and confusing, with little character development or emotional investment for the audience. The script was riddled with clichés and tropes, and the dialogue is often stilted and unnatural, leaving audiences feeling disconnected from the story and failing to capture the magic and depth of the beloved tabletop game.

Related: Why No Dungeons and Dragons Movie Can Capture the Main Appeal of the D&D Game

Solomon, who had little experience with D&D personally, intended to rely heavily on input from Gary Gygax, the game’s original designer. Ultimately, though, Gygax didn’t play much of a role in the film’s production, and Solomon’s approach to the material more as a lucrative business opportunity than a creative labor of love is evident.

The Profit Motive

New Line Cinema

Another major issue with the movie was its visual effects. At a time when films like The Lord of the Rings were pushing the boundaries of what was possible with CGI and special effects, Dungeons and Dragons looked amateurish and outdated. The dragons, in particular, were poorly rendered and unconvincing, detracting from what should have been some of the film’s most exciting moments. The overall look and feel of the film failed to capture the grandeur and epic scale of the fantasy genre, further distancing audiences from the story.

Related: Best CGI Movie Effects of All Time, Ranked

This kind of thinking also led to another one of the biggest issues with Dungeons and Dragons: its attempt to appeal to a wider audience. The filmmakers seemed to believe that they could make the movie more accessible to mainstream audiences by incorporating elements of action and comedy. However, this decision ultimately backfired, as the film felt tonally inconsistent and unsure of itself. The humor often fell flat, and the action scenes were poorly choreographed and unexciting. By trying to please everyone, the movie ended up pleasing no one.

Dungeons and Dragons’ Cast and Creators

New Line Cinema

Another factor that likely contributed to the film’s failure was its lack of star power. While the cast featured recognizable actors like Jeremy Irons, Marlon Wayans, and the vastly underrated Thora Birch, there was no clear leading actor to anchor the story, and the chemistry of the ensemble never quite gels, perhaps owing to the overall ramshackle nature of the film.

Finally, it’s worth noting that Dungeons and Dragons suffers most egregiously from a lack of understanding and respect for the source material. The film’s creators seemed to believe that simply slapping the name “Dungeons and Dragons” on the project would be enough to draw in fans of the game. However, they failed to capture the essence of what makes the game so beloved, capturing instead, surely purely unintentionally, the worst qualities of a game that relies on the spontaneous creativity of amateur storytellers. A quality D&D session relies heavily on the skills of its Dungeonmaster, and Solomon, more businessman than artist and more mercenary than fan, simply isn’t up to the task. This lack of respect for the source material likely turned off many diehard fans of the game hoping for something more engaging than their own Friday nights around the table.

Ultimately, Dungeons and Dragons was a perfect storm of poor scriptwriting, weak visual effects, tonal inconsistency, lack of star power, and failure to understand the source material. While the film had potential to be a successful adaptation of the beloved game, it ultimately fell short in almost every way.

With the recent success of genre adaptations like The Witcher and The Mandalorian, it’s clear that audiences are still hungry for great stories set in fantastical worlds. 2023’s Dungeons & Dragons: Honor Among Thieves, looks to continue this trend, leaving its predecessor to exist as a campy blemish on a hopefully high-quality franchise going forward.