The Gamers: Hands of Fate (2013) User Reviews

A great movie about fantasy gaming with heart

[jpace · 8/10 · 15 August 2013]

Though initially dismissive of customizable card games and its player base, when the abrasive Cass meets beautiful gamer girl Natalie he enters a tournament for the CCG Romance of the Nine Empires in order to wrangle a date from her. In an alternate reality, the heroic princess Myriad searches for a way to protect the kingdom of Holden from the wars that rage across the world of Countermay. She begins to suspect, however, that her fate is controlled by something altogether outside of her reality. Will Cass get the girl? Will the land of Holden survive the coming war? The fate of the land of Countermay depends on the outcome of Cass's CCG tournament...or is it the other way around?

For viewers unfamiliar with the previous movies The Gamers and The Gamers:Dorkness Rising (the original movie was more of stand-alone, extended sketch comedy skit than a full-fledged movie, and featured few of the same characters from its two sequels) , the story should be pretty easy to follow, though a few elements may leave some people scratching their heads, and some of the humor might fall a little flat with those who aren't familiar with the gaming community and its tropes. Also, it should be noted that this is a low budget, Kickstarter-funded production, so the production values might be lower than what most viewers are used to which could be a turn-off.

For returning fans, while Dorkness Rising focused on nice guy Lodge and his frustrations with both his dysfunctional role-playing group and a case of writer's block, Hands of Fate shifts its focus to the ultimately good-hearted jerk Cass. There's also a larger focus on the real world plot than there was in the last movie. I think Cass is an entertaining lead protagonist, so these aren't problems so much as things to be aware of.

If you're hoping for a continuation of the story-within-a-story that was the focus of Dorkness Rising, you'll be disappointed, as one of the sub-plots of Hands of Fate is the fact that the gaming group can't seem to get together to play. Instead, we get to see into the world of Romance of the Nine Empires, a fictional CCG, and its inhabitants are their own entities rather than the extension of their players in the real world. This is a negative, in my opinion. It's not that the CCG world is any less engaging than the RPG world was, it's just that the fantasy storyline was never the point in the first place--it was the dynamic of seeing the characters switching back and forth between their real and fantasy personas that made the whole thing fun. Unfortunately that's mostly absent here.

As far as the acting is concerned, I thought the the main cast was pretty good. Brian Lewis as main character Cass did a great job, and takes a character that was originally designed as kind of an antagonist in Dorkness Rising and turns him into a relatable protagonist. One of my favorite performances is actually Scott C. Brown as Leo--while Leo was new to RPGs, he's actually experienced in CCGs, so his character gets to transform from fumbling newb to wise master, and I thought he was able to pull it off without it seeming like we were looking at a new character with the same face.

Some of the less prominent acting can be a little hit or miss around the edges which is to be expected since the cast seems to be fleshed out a bit with amateur actors. What might be a problem to some viewers though is understanding when the acting is bad on purpose, such as when a character in the movie is himself playing a character and is meant to be bad at it. For instance, there's a sequence where a number of people are Live Action Role Playing, a sequence filled with bad deliveries and cheesy speeches--but they're supposed to be that way. I can see how some people might not get it if they're not really understanding what they're looking at.

I do have a few nitpicks, mostly it just seems like a little more finesse could have been used. Sometimes Checkov's gun is set on the mantle a little too obviously, or points where I feel an emotional payoff for a storyline seemed a little too calculated. The one major problem I had was with the plot for the Gary character--it starts off amusingly silly but then goes off into a really darkly absurd place that's out of sync with the rest of the movie--while still being treated as just slightly kooky.

In all, don't let the low budget or the niche genre nature of the material turn you off to the movie--it's a funny, smart movie about gamers. Sometimes they antagonize each other, sometimes they have different ideas on how things should be played, but at the end of the day they are there because they love gaming.

Both a change of frame and a return to roots

[siderite · 8/10 · 29 August 2014]

From the forty-five minute The Gamers, through the one hour and a half The Gamers: Dorkness Rising, we get the two hour long Hands of Fate. It starts with the same team as in the second film, all happily playing their D&D game, only to be thwarted by cell phone rings "from work". It made me think that it will be a continuation of Dorkness, made in the same vein: the mature gamers who can't really play their game with reality intruding. I was wrong.

Soon enough we realize that reality has intruded way too much. They are not able to play the role playing game anymore. They are barely meeting once a year and then they never manage to end the game. Enter Natalie, a CCG player with a real passion for a card game with a storyline and a real nice face. Cass immediately falls for her and proceeds to learn to play the game. The entire movie is then about the fantasy land of the CCG game.

I don't want to spoil anything, so I will not reveal anything more about the plot. Enough said that the ending is reminiscent of the first Gamers film and that, even if at first I thought it was going to turn into a sort of weird documentary of what happens at Gen Con and I really really hated the Gary subplot where he is trying to kill the mascot of the show that replaced his childhood favorite, I ended up liking it.

I especially appreciated that Cass is as much a noob at card collectible games as I am and has the same disdain towards them as me, but as the movie unfolds, he gets to understand and respect the game, so I get to identify and evolve with the character while I am watching. I loved that.

Not that everything is dandy dory: most of the acting is completely over the top and some scenes did make me cringe. However the overall feel of the movie, the fact that most of the geekiness made sense and the subtle humor made me like the experience. A bit too long (just make a Director's cut without Gary's story! :) ), but enjoyable nonetheless. I do miss the free fantasizing of the D&D game, though.

A Different Kind of Gamers Movie

[fettguy1138 · 8/10 · 23 August 2013]

As a fan of all works by Dead Gentlemen Productions and Zombie Orpheus Entertainment, I was unsure of what to expect with this movie. At a convention panel earlier this year, ZOE showed the first 5 minutes of the film. They also let us know that they would be doing something different with this one. Previous movies have followed a singular storyline, with different plot points along the way. In this installment, characters each kind of follow their own story lines, each to be explored individually. The movie centers around Cass: an "I'm better than these dorks" kind of gamer who breaks most of the stereotypes. He learns to play a CCG (or TCG, depending on your lexicon) to impress a girl. His adventure takes him through character development and growth, and he is a little less douchy for it.

Lodge, Joanna, Gary and Leo are all there in some capacity, but much less than in other films. Their story lines are going to be explored in a number of ways by ZOE in the future. Gary provides a good amount of comic relief, but shows a more sensitive side during this film.

When I first watched this movie, I appreciated what ZOE did with their budget. Seeing truly creative people get some serious funding allows them to show what they can do. True, this movie wasn't as funny as other Gamers movies, but it was more whole. It showed that even the most elite Gamer can grow, and that forgiveness can be found in the most unlikely of places. Overall, this movie was a better movie than any previous Gamers flick. I can't wait to see the stories that surround the rest of the gang's GenCon experience.

Worth the time? Absolutely Worth the money? Definitely

A change of pace, but a good one.

[bpierce · 9/10 · 7 September 2013]

Those I've spoken to who have watched G:HoF seem divided into two camps. The first camp is disappointed, because the movie isn't what they expected. In fairness, G:HoF is quite a departure from Gamers and Gamers: Dorkness Rising. The humor is more subdued, and the storyline is much more pronounced; the film is primarily character-driven rather than situation-driven.

The second camp...and I fall firmly in this camp...are pleased with the movie for precisely those reasons. I honestly think that if they'd tried to do a third movie exactly in the vein of the original, it would have fallen flat. There are only so many joking references to gaming tropes and clichés you can make before the material starts to become stale.

Instead, the third movie builds on the characters established in the second, fleshing them out and humanizing them; making them less caricatures and more fully-fleshed characters. Cass takes the role of protagonist, and while he's still the same cocky, hyper-competitive power-gamer, he's given a chance to demonstrate other facets of his personality; there's real character development here, and you find yourself rooting for him as the film progresses. Leo gets a welcome chance to be something other than "the guy who dies a lot"--I personally think that Scott Brown is one of the most talented actors in a talented cast, and it's nice to see him get a chance to show it.

The focus is on a collectible card game in this film, but I found that much of the humor is a loving send-up, not just of CCGs or gaming conventions, but of epic fantasies and their tropes, with a good dose of spaghetti Western thrown in. Most of the well-worn and well-loved conventions are here: the rebellious loner who comes to down to find it beset by a tyrannical band of marauders; the call to heroism; his initial resistance ("I'm just passing through") worn down as he comes to care for the community; his arrival at the last minute for the showdown with the villain.

One discordant note for me is Gary's subplot. It starts off funny, but quickly goes in a very dark direction that doesn't seem to mesh well with the overall tone of the film...less "Eccentric gamer" and more "Seriously psychologically disturbed gamer." While, yes, there were over-the-top acts of violence in the earlier films, those were generally confined to the characters within the games. Seeing similar behavior from one of the players comes across as less funny and more disturbing.

Apart from that, though, the film's a very solid and enjoyable one, and one I plan to both own and watch again.

An excellent drama

[sethmd73 · 10/10 · 13 November 2013]

I am one of the 4,311 people who helped make (at the time) The Gamers: Hands of Fate the largest crowdfunded movie via Kickstarter. As a fan and follower of Dead Gentlemen Productions and Zombie Orpheus Entertainment, I knew going in that this was going to be a very different story than its predecessors: The Gamers (2002) and The Gamers: Dorkness Rising (2008). That said, you know I've got both rose colored glasses as a fan, and a critical eye as someone who threw money at this to get it made.

There are several stories intertwined here: Cass (Brian Lewis) trying to win a date with Natalie (Trin Miller); Joanna (Carol Roscoe) dealing with an anticipated marriage proposal from Lodge (Nathan Rice); Gary (Christian Doyle) confronting Chibichan, the dreaded destroyer of his favorite T.V. show; and the card game characters Myriad (Samara Lerman) and Dundareel (Jesse Lee Keeter) having to deal with the fate that has been handed to them; just to name a few. The story weaves very well from beat to beat and it is easy to follow the flow.

Overall, I was not disappointed with my investment, writer Matt Vancil does a fantastic job setting pieces in motion and the entire ensemble steps up and delivers. Every actor, especially the supporting actors, have some great moments to shine. It is not a cheeky gamer comedy, but an enjoyable drama. I agree with other reviewers that Gary's story starts out funny and the denouement is also good, but gets a bit too dark. Finally, kudos to Steven Wolbrecht who pieced together a very nice score and some memorable songs. I look forward to backing the next one.

Failure

[Kalyarin · 3/10 · 19 August 2013]

I was astoundingly disappointed with Hands of Fate.

With Dorkness Rising I remember feeling like I was making so much noise laughing that the neighbors would wonder what was going on. Hands of Fate wasn't totally without laughs, but there were so few that it was not worth the boredom waiting between laughs.

I mean, they have 2 previous movies and both are based off RPGs, both movies are a bunch of people playing D&D, then you see them playing their characters for "real". HoF was based off of a fictional CCG. The scenes in the CCG weren't played by the person playing the game (one of the things that made the other movies fun) because the cards were all being played by Cass, the biggest jerk from the first movie. So basically, they took 95% of what made the first 2 movies great, threw it out the freakng window, and went a whole new way, and tried to convey some messages that I really didn't care about.

I was at Gen Con 2013 and was really sad that they didn't have copies of Hands of Fate for sale there. Now I'm glad they didn't, because I'd be mad if I'd blown money on that boring movie.

The only redeeming thing about the movie, in my opinion, is the ending. The very end left open the possibility that the 4th Gamers movie might be what the 3rd should have been. I certainly won't be spending any movie on it until after I've seen it though.

Unexpectedly Good

[realvedmak · 10/10 · 4 October 2013]

I was expecting bad movie and got pleasantly surprised. First 5 minutes almost made me stop watching, until cell phone started ringing and ...

It is B budget, and B acting, but casting was great, story has plenty of good jokes and if you have ever played in Legend of the Five Rings tournaments, this movies scenes just bring back memories. It is more like LOT5R because of entire focus on Story lines, but they took elements from Magic The Gathering as well.

If you have never been into Collectible Card Games nor Role Playing Games you might not get this movie, but then you would not be target audience, so its OK.

Did not connect with the story...

[john-cathcart · 3/10 · 18 May 2014]

One of the things that made the first two movies in this series great was that I could identify with the characters in the movie. I saw bits of myself and other gamers I've known in those characters. I also understood the game and the rules the movie was based around (Dungeons and Dragons) which only further pulled me into the story.

When I originally heard that there was to be a third movie in the series, I, and my entire gaming group were immensely excited about it. We couldn't wait to see where they took their characters next or what kinds of ridiculous things might happen... then we all saw it and a resounding sense of disappointment set in.

Now the movie wasn't about a group of gamers playing a game that we recognized or understood with characters we could identify with. It was about a single gamer playing a fictitious game that no one could ever really identify with on the same level as the other movies because no one has ever played that game. Even if we have played other card based games like it, we haven't played THAT game and have no understanding of the rules or reasoning behind it.

There was no roleplaying, no game to recognize and laugh about or think that the players were using a clever twist on the rules, and no connection to the story. Ultimately, while it had better production value than the previous movies, I never connected with the movie in any kind of meaningful way and generally which left me feeling disappointed.

I'm not saying it's a bad movie, because it isn't a bad movie. It just was just missing everything that I found fantastic about the first two movies.

Took it in a new direction and it worked

[jrralls · 10/10 · 27 February 2014]

I loved Gamers 1 & 2 and was really curious how they would keep the story fresh. I loved all their D&D jokes on the last two but wasn't sure what they would do to keep the momentum going; the answer was to change and take a risk.

That can often be a tricky thing to do in a trilogy, but they pulled it off. At heart, this is actually a sports movie, just the game is a card game rather than a physical game. This, combined with a much higher budget, allowed them to do all sorts of fun bits that they couldn't have done if they just would have stayed with the same tried and true formula.

I'm glad they mixed things up while still keeping it a very entertaining ride. Can't wait to listen to the commentary tracks to see how they did so much with so little.

Bittersweet

[arkif1 · 9/10 · 4 September 2017]

"Hands of Fate" is quite an endeavour in terms of telling a story that people might not like to listen to, but it is a very good film.

I liked "Dorkness Rising" better, pretty much like most people prefer youth to old age. The first two films were only slightly exaggerated reports on role players, this on the other hand is a fantasy, that is a parable that is supposed to make you dream as opposed to grin, about meaning that people build up for themselves, and about letting go of that, when it's all just mere self indulgence, i.e. this is not a film about how ridiculous gamers are, but how sad it feels to let go of this world.

Now, in my case, it's some 25 years back that I went through this, so I'm not troubled by this anymore and can look at a rather clever film in an observing way, for there are some good points to behold: 1. That RPG made room for LARP, although the latter is far more restricted.

The reason for this is, and it's a bitter one, that humans will work together when you make them accept the rules first, even when the rules are somewhat dumb, but will be unable to come together, when you give them too much freedom choosing the rules themselves.

In the film this shows in the contrast between being able to design your own character and play characters written on cards. But it is the latter standardisation, which allows a common universe to grow.

This is truly meaningful, one of the most depressing things of human existence, people throw themselves into chains and progress and you as a free person never get involved in anything, at least not how you'd want to.

2. The absence of meaning in modern life and the addictiveness of the drug to create your own in your head alone, resp. in the heads of a collective.

And this is even more bitter. At least the RPG folks can eventually silently acknowledge the futility of it all. But the LARP guys are in stronger chains and drive themselves into insanity, as the Ninja Dragon episode most overtly shows, but it's also in other things, like when the bleeder gets punched in the nose in a situation that any sane person would understand as asking for a fight.

And again, it's quite general. You stand alone, you might resign like Schopenhauer would suggest, you're part of a group, you defend Berlin until the end.

3. Selling you your humanity.

Giving you a chance to build up meaning for a buck as is the theme of the whole Legacy episode.

In real life that would be states, telling their "citizens" their respective narratives. So you can be a good Communist, American or what have you.

Well... that's all bittersweet, bitter because of the designs you can't choose, sweet because of the life that you spent in them.

To be honest, I can't give these kind of films 10/10, no matter how good. Hitchcock's "Shadow of a Doubt" for instance or Tarkovsky's "Offret" and this film is even better than those.

I mean, what would that be? An excellently depressing film? There's a hint of perversion in that notion.

Stupid and Vile

[lluewhyn · 2/10 · 3 May 2015]

My wife and I were over at a friend's house and found out that he had obtained a copy of this movie and asked if we wanted to watch it. We ended up being tortured for nearly two hours.

We all really liked the first Gamers movie. Despite its very cheap budget, it was fairly well done and focused. Although some jokes at random gamer culture were tossed around (such as the one college gamer with a girlfriend who ditches the game to go out on an actual date), the humor was primarily about one thing: how ludicrous the story would actually look based upon the actions, rules and die rolls of the game. Although the gamers were all typically dorks, you could laugh at the portrayal and see the various ways that we all have acted like that in the past. For the most part, a lot of the scenes actually came off as actual videotapes from a game.

The second one had a higher production budget but was a lot more scattershot in its targets. Although there was a little bit of odd humor in the way the game would play out based upon player actions, there was also jokes about ineffective character classes, a complete novice somehow combining obscure feats and traits to make an OP character, a male player playing a female character completely wrong, and random gaming references like light-sabers and cards from Munchkin. There were still plenty of jokes that hit the mark, despite them being all over the place.

One other noticeable change is that the characters were a lot less sympathetic. The DM was a rail-roader, but an otherwise nice guy, and his new girlfriend was also a positively portrayed dork. However, the three main players consisted of two obnoxious jerks and one guy who was creepy and apparently mentally ill. These were the kind of players that you would quit games if they joined.

Which brings us to this third movie.

The entire movie focuses on one of the aforementioned jerks attempting to win a Gen Con card game that's like Magic combined with a campaign story. The card game isn't something that we can relate to because it's not similar to anything currently on the market. Therefore, the scenes from what's taking place have no basis of comparison to anything the audience has experienced. They are all awfully rendered with horrendous computer backdrops as opposed to actual scenes on location like the previous movies. There's also an overall narrative about the characters realizing that they're just pawns in a card game (hence the title) that goes basically nowhere.

Oh, and did I mention that the reason that the aforementioned jerk is playing a card game at this convention just so he can try to get into a girl's pants? I don't just mean end up dating her, he's literally serious about using this opportunity to try to have sex with her. Plenty of other obnoxious and misogynous comments are dropped all over the place as well, making gamer culture look absolutely repulsive. Although there is definitely sexism in gaming, the behavior of these players (including the protagonist) would likely result in a fight. (My wife said she'd knock the teeth in if other players made the kind of suggestive comments that these were making to her face).

Virtually every portrayal of a gamer is negative in some way. They're either abusive, clueless, completely absorbed in their own reality or all of the above. Even Lodge and Joanna having a healthy relationship and mutual love of gaming are picked on for having almost no sex together.

Gary, the slightly creepy player from the last movie goes full on creepy and psycho for laughs. There's a subplot about him having a hate-filled anger towards a cartoon character that caused his favorite television show to be cancelled, and taking it out on the actual hired mascot playing that character at the convention. He's shown physically assaulting this poor schmuck numerous times, and at one point kidnaps him and covers him in gasoline as revenge. Yep, we're supposed to be laughing at one of the main characters attempting to burn an innocent man to death because his favorite television show was cancelled.

So, in summary, the plot of the story revolves around a despicable character playing a game neither he nor we care about in hopes of having sex with a woman who finds him repulsive. The "money shots" of seeing the game played in real action looks horrendous with poor special effects and drags on with little point. Finally, almost all other portrayals of characters other than the main protagonist are used to negatively portray gamers as anti-social psychos who have too much time and money on their hands.

I'll give it two stars because despite all of the dreck there were actually a couple of jokes that were actually funny (the scene where the protagonist is confronted by the Legacy in the hallway was clever), and the movie finally comes to some kind of competently written climax in the final card match. The rest was just unbearable to watch.

Long but entertaining look into the lives of gamers

[JimE-36-668522 · 8/10 · 9 June 2017]

With the extended edition coming it at 2 hours and 25 minutes, this is not a quick watch, however the extended edition does add quite a bit of depth to the treatment and allows you to become fully immersed in the film. There is lots of subtle humor throughout the film that becomes clear in later scenes.

The film crosses so many other films and TV shows into it just for the fun factor this is a must see just for that reason,

A Magic the Gathering vs Karate Kid Scene - Got it Hannibal Lecter vs a Pokémon like character - Got it Destruction of a Super-Mega Rare CCG card - Got it Power Rangers talking sense into Hannibal Lecter - Well almost

Along with all the fun and hi jinks that goes on at a convention this film will let you embrace your inner geek

I'm being generous giving it a 3

[alexandriarch · 3/10 · 19 October 2020]

I try to write reviews that focus on what others don't say. This movie is bad. The other 2 Gamer movies are treasured gems. The problem with this movie can be summed up rather briefly. It's source material is obviously MTG and as nearly the entire scene is vile, so is the movie. Where the other Gamer movies are funny this one falls utterly flat. The reason is simple, most MTG zealots refuse to make fun of themselves or the game. The film can't let itself be funny for the same reason you can't draw a cartoon caricature of Muhammad. Sad.

Horribad but entertaining

[texawegian · 5/10 · 10 October 2013]

Story: cheesy. Acting: atrocious. Special effects: non-existent.

Yet, somehow it drew me in past the first few crucial minutes. I found myself actually enjoying it and caring about some of the characters. And wanting to play the CCG game. Some of the side-stories are a little odd (e.g. Gary) but kinda-sorta worked ..

And wanting to go to GenCon ... The depiction of GenCon was particularly funny (although I have never been to one, i would imagine that the stereotypes were portrayed).

All-in-all, if you are looking for a bit of brainless entertainment, this is a good choice. Very light and funny at times.