El Caballero Y El Dragón

There was a lot to complain about in this film - the editing was awkward, the fight scenes poorly shot (they were well choreographed, but poorly filmed), and the special effects were mediocre.

Still, I'd watch this movie again, simply because the characters were so much fun, and the movie made the point of not taking itself seriously.

I saw this movie on Sci-Fi channel, and didn't realize it was any thing other than a made- for-TV movie, and so thought that many elements were better than average. James Purefoy and Piper Perabo were wonderful - and had a good chemistry. Piper was absolutely delectable as a spunky, confident woman. Certainly not 'period,' at all, but then the really good princesses never are.

James Purefoy was equally enjoyable - he seems very much the natural, whether on horseback, wielding a sword, or doing a classic double-take. He makes every scene his own with great charm.

Michael Clarke Duncan, while having a small role, was enjoyable, and would have liked to see have seen his character more fully developed.

Patrick Swayze was very, very weak - he didn't seem interested in what he was doing, unless it was a fight scene. An English accent wouldn't have killed him either.

But I had fun with the movie - I laughed out loud more than once, and really, really enjoyed the jokes. I thought that they kept the tongue-in-cheek quality at just the right level.

This is such a sweet little film - it's too bad that it is having such horrible distribution problems. I think lots of kids would enjoy it, and it's quite watchable for adults, too! Especially since James Purefoy is wonderful in it. After his performance in "Vanity Fair," a serious and heartbreaking dramatic role, it's nice to know that he is just as capable of making a funny, lighthearted film as well.

Everyone else is grand as well, except for Patrick Swayze, who just sort of walked through his role. Even the simple, scaled-down fairy tale type dialogue just sounded awful, falling out of his mouth like clumps of half-chewed food. Of course, the CGI dragons aren't exactly as slick as you'd like them to be in 2005, but the cinematography is beautiful, and the editing is fast and keeps the pace rolling along at a good clip.

Did I mention that James Purefoy is wonderful? And the outtakes at the end are great!

They always say never judge a book by its cover. Well, the truth is we all do, even though we know better. Some do it more than others. Me? Well, I guess I'm no different.

I saw this movie listed on my "You might like this" list at one of the DVD websites, and, after scoffing at it here and there, wondering what kid of film would have such unimpressive DVD cover art (technically very good, but nothing unique) for a title I'd never heard of? After a while I became curious, dismissed it, then became curious again, until I finally broke down a bought a copy.

It was pleasantly enjoyable for what it was. The sets, costumes and even the acting were respectable and entertaining. The truth is this is a kids' flick, so you can't really expect true-to-history swordsmanship and all that went with it. It's meant to tell a tale of knights and chivalry to youngsters who are into that sort of thing. And the film does so successfully.

I have no great love for the film, but I appreciate it for what it is, and even then I think it's A quality flick in terms of historic children's' fair. Respectably shot, though somewhat skidding a rough gray area of prosaic and inspired lensing, the film achieves a certain artistry that might be compared to some of the black and white classics in terms of shot composition. But maybe that's getting too high- falutin' for film meant for younger ages.

There's some contemporary pop culture references, and the acting is a little over done, but again it's all aimed at younger audiences.

The one interesting aspect was to see Patrick Swayze in a historic/fantasy film. One is so used to seeing him in films dipped in Americana that it almost almost seemed out of place for a middle aged Texan to be donning chain mail and strapping on a sword. But, he's an actor. That's his job. He can be anybody. Does he succeed? He sure does. He's in the same thespian league as the rest of the cast.

It's an entertaining little film that should put grins on young boys and girls alike on a lazy weekend. If my adult side had a serious criticism, well, I'll just keep those to myself :-)

Not a big favorite of mine, but something that shows that a film in this genre can succeed. It's a film that despite being aimed at younger viewers, shows that there's more than enough story material that can be eeked out of a period that's very unfamiliar to most people. In fact this film didn't need all the theatrics and SFX had it been aimed at an older crowd. It shows how this kind of stuff is truly interesting to people... dragons or no.

With that in mind, give it a chance.

Enjoy with the family :-)

Returning from the crusades, our hero George wants nothing else than to get a piece of land and to settle down. Soon he finds himself on a quest to find a lost princess. A princess who turns out to have quite a big secret.

George and the Dragon is a simple, and light medieval comedy that takes on the story of St:George and the dragon. But foremost it is a traditional knight-rescuing-princess story with a dragon, a king, some bandits, an evil guy and a few good fights. It would probably fare well amongst the younger movie viewers.

Michael Clarc Duncan is far from convincing as a moor with that wide American accent, but that does not matter. The filmmakers seem to have focused more on having fun than trying to outdo the LOTR-series. And if you still were in doubt, you will be convinced by the clumsy thatcher falling in the town scene. The movie is pleasantly free from overbearing Hollywood cliché humor that most simple comedies are contaminated with.

The story is very simple, and quite skittish: first this happens, then he did that, then they did this. No quirky explanations or long winded story, and there are really no surprises you could not figure out far ahead. Nothing for the movie buff, but perhaps just the thing for a younger audience. Especially since the violence is quite harmless, and of course there is a happy ending. My only complaint is how the Picts (scots?) are depicted (no pun intended) as simple grunting savages. But hey! I guess SOMEONE had to play that part.

George (James Purefoy) is charming as the hero, and the princess (Piper Perabo) is willful and strong, although she feels like a college sweetheart at some points. The role of Garth seemed made for Patric Swayze, and the rest of the cast are quite likable as well.

If you are looking to be dazzled with a good story, sparkling action and mesmerizing effects. Look elsewhere, or be disappointed. If you accept this as a simple happy-go-lucky knights tale, you'll be better off. Perhaps not worth the movie admissions, but should be great on TV, or as a rental for the kids. Who knows, it might turn out to become a childhood classic, just as The Princess Bride.

This film looks as though it had major production problems with cast (disapearing) and hence a revised plot line?? After what I imagine is a bit of a bodge job on the script the cast has persevered with a lot of humour and gusto to present a story which although it has many flaws also has a charm that makes up for this to the credit of Purefoy, Perabo and Duncan who throw themselves into making the best of it I suspect. If you like a comedy along the lines of A Knights Tale combined with a bit of Robin Hood Prince of Thieves then this is pretty much what you are getting, a good old romp with some hammy over the top theatricals thrown in.