Dragon Fighter

I really wanted to like this movie, and i was entertained to a point. But, there are tons of things very wrong with this movie.

There is a very annoying split-screen style that occurs every so often during the movie, showing different camera angles of the scenes. Inventive yes, but i found it quite distracting and just plain annoying to watch it in that fashion.

Another thing is the cloning of the "Dragon" so rapidly. How could something go from a single DNA strand into a multi-ton beast within a few hours? Let's forget that it is basically scientifically impossible, but where was it going to get so much raw organic material to produce that level of exponential growth? This isn't the first time in a movie that they've leaped over the seemingly obvious scientific facts, hoping that the dummies out there wouldn't care or notice.

The ending was equally as troublesome, military airplanes shooting down the Dragon? That reminds me of what happened in the horrible movie "Retillian". At the very end we see soldiers (or scientists) exploring the underground facility which was blown up by a Nuclear core meltdown that was 53% of Hiroshima, right after our heroes escaped. When the soldiers go in, the facility only appears to be mildly damaged...how they could even go into it at all is beyond me.

Anything positive about the film? Well, the beginning of the movie that takes place during medieval times is decent, and the Dragon CGI effects are fairly believable except for a few scenes. The acting is admirable, but that in and of itself fails to help the weak plot.

This is far from the worst film i've ever seen, but i wouldn't recommend it or give a seal of approval. It's worth a single viewing for fans of sci-fi movies, but for everyone else...just forget Dragon Fighter.

This is a formula B science fiction movie, and the director made no bones about it. It is about a dragon who is restored to life by a scientific team. Everything done is stuff you've seen many times before. It is a weak script, with no real characters. In fact, it is full of stereotype characters and situations. The director attacks this by just making it a formula movie, with no attempt to fool us, and that gives this movie a mild appeal, but it isn't something you're likely to remember a while. It is best seen while you're cooking, cleaning, working out. Sort of mindless fun. It has its place in entertainment, but it certainly isn't something you sit down with friends to watch, unless you're all just drunk and don't care. The mass rating of 3.2 is probably fair. I don't think it is as crappy as most people, but I am surprised that some people in the postings thought this was spectacular. That really eludes me, as I see no attempt to even make this a memorable film.

The first 45 minutes of Dragon Fighter are entirely acceptable and surprisingly watchable. The characters are believable and interesting. The cloning lab looks really high-tech. After that, it all collapses. The characters start behaving idiotically, and a new subplot is introduced from nowhere about a fusion reactor (and this is supposedly "present day") going critical, the only plot justification of which is that it is required to kill the dragon - only it doesn't. The finish is incredibly weak. One wonders what made a movie that started out so well turn so wrong.

All the characters except Dean Cain are played by Russians. This results in some weird situations and details, like the character being played by Vessela Dimitrova being called "Bailey Kent" despite her heavy accent (and despite her, on one occasion, inexplicably switching to *Spanish*!).

Because of the decent start, I considered rating this movie a 5, but it really was more disappointing than that, so I only give it 4.

The bad out takes from "Reign of Fire" strung together, without any real story.

Dean Cain tries to be a real actor, and fails again.

In the end the dragons quit in disgust.

BARF!

Sure it's got it's weaknesses - it's inconsistencies are annoying, the effects (though, for the most part excellent) occasionally vere towards laughable, and the acting ain't gonna win any Oscars this year....(Razzies, anyone?)...

BUT - it's driven along by a good, solid premise (obviously inspired by Jurassic Park, complete with moral debate), a considerable amount of effort by the star to keep it going - he does an admirable job, incidentally - and the aforementioned mostly-excellent special effects.

My biggest moan about the film is the dreadful soundtrack. Not only was it drab and boring, believe it or not - don't know if you noticed - the damn thing stopped about 10 minutes before the end of the movie!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

OK, the movie was obviously made to cash in on the DTV-likers who heard how bad Reign of Fire was, but it shows alot about the movie market these days when the supposed DTV clunker is actually 5 times better than the movie it was made to cash in on, doesn't it?

Rent it, catch it on Cable (I saw it on Sci-fi UK)....it'll engross you for an hour or so, and you'll walk away wondering, as I did, why it wasn't given a bit more of a budget - it certainly deserved it...

Do I hear the words "Big Budget Remake", anyone......?