July 10, 2002, 12:55 a.m. CST
this movie is going to kick ass. Releasing it against Road to Perdition is brilliant. I'll see Road first, then this, and will spend the rest of the weekend in a happy stupor.
July 10, 2002, 12:56 a.m. CST
by Darth TJ Mackey
Could be. These reviews make it sound interesting enough to check out...
July 10, 2002, 1:06 a.m. CST
by Johnny Dagger
It's always, "I wanted to see this film, I've loved [fill in the blank with appropriate subject] since I was a kid, I saw the film, I loved the film!". Oh well.....this does look kick ass. I get a good "Pitch Black" vibe from this flick.
July 10, 2002, 1:08 a.m. CST
My girlfriend is taking off for the weekend so I need something to do. Guess I will be checking it out.
July 10, 2002, 1:08 a.m. CST
would make a good Cable? If they ever get around to putting him in the X-Men films, you need a guy who looks like he'd blow you away with a really big fucking gun, and Matthew fits the bill. Either Cable or Nick Fury, cause he reminds me of him with the cigar in the commercials. Reign of Fire looks awesome by the way. And really, who cares about a story when you got really kick ass looking CGI Dragons? Dragonheart, anybody? I think I've made my point clear. I AM SushiX!
July 10, 2002, 1:08 a.m. CST
The naked bongo playing stoner scares me
July 10, 2002, 1:17 a.m. CST
I said it before that killing dragons is not good enough. And the British go slow and American rush in and kill everything cliche is too shallow. Dragons, wherever they are, are too complex a myth to reduce to cannon fodder. I always expect too much I suppose. But I would have liked to see a story featuring and exploring an inter-species encounter.
July 10, 2002, 1:17 a.m. CST
by Ted Striker
That's what Hollywood needs right now -- an original kick ass sleeper hit that smacks of Aliens-type action. Can't wait to see this... And by the by, does anyone know much about DarbeeVision? Check it out at Darbeevision.com; it's a new digital filter that adds "pop" to a DVD's image for more lifelike 3D pictures. The Gosford Park DVD has been 'darbonized' but haven't checked it out yet... Harry, do you know anything about this???
July 10, 2002, 1:29 a.m. CST
PERDITION will have to wait. I'm hearing mixed buzz on that flick anyhow. I need a FUN summer film and Harry's review has me stoked. REIN of FIRE, IT SHALL BE!
July 10, 2002, 1:33 a.m. CST
It's always, I'm obsessed with this, or I've got a huge collection of that, or I have deep-rooted feeling for this knick-knack or that idea or whatever.
July 10, 2002, 1:47 a.m. CST
by Mr. Ho_Ho
Do you ever wonder if Harry is trying to be some sort of GenX kerouac or something? He revels in coughing up feces-urine-sputum-ejaculate-ridden similes and metaphors which usually only end up revealing his rather poor command of english, and which result in nothing other than distraction from whatever point he's trying to make at the moment. It's a great case study of what you get when you randomly elevate a Texas hick to "celebrity" status. All, the same, the guy's getting quoted on the "Fight Club" liner notes, and seems to be the only reviewer that really "gets it". Oh well.
July 10, 2002, 1:49 a.m. CST
by Mr. Ho_Ho
Do you ever wonder if Harry is trying to be some sort of GenX kerouac or something? He revels in coughing up feces-urine-sputum-ejaculate-ridden similes and metaphors which usually only end up revealing his rather poor command of english, and which result in nothing other than distraction from whatever point he's trying to make at the moment. It's a great case study of what you get when you randomly elevate a Texas hick to "celebrity" status. All, the same, the guy's getting quoted on the "Fight Club" liner notes, and seems to be the only reviewer that really "gets it" as far as Fight Club is concerned. Oh well.
July 10, 2002, 1:55 a.m. CST
Far as I'm concerned everything 'till TTT is just cannon fodder, something to grease the treads while I wait for December 18, but if Road to Perdition is no good my Friday morning is going to be a wash.
July 10, 2002, 2:04 a.m. CST
This is a really good movie. A strong movie that takes itself seriously and I can honestly say that Rob Bowman has a bright future ahead of him if all of his projects have this much effort put into it. I would love to see Rob work on 'Aliens vs. Predator' someday (he's a far greater choice than Paul Anderson), his style reminds me a bit of Jim Cameron from the old days (Terminator/Aliens) and I think he could actually breathe life into the Alien franchise if given the chance. Either way, I'll be looking forward to whatever project he decides to tackle next.
July 10, 2002, 2:11 a.m. CST
This is quite a polar opposite of Harry's review, but you know, unlike harry this fellow also liked Minority Report. Hmm odd.
July 10, 2002, 2:33 a.m. CST
Ah, never mind, he broke free.
July 10, 2002, 2:58 a.m. CST
Come on! You don't know what the SECRET LAB is? They've been around for quite some time, under the name of "Dream Quest" (which did the Oscar-winning FX for TOTAL RECALL among others) until they were swallowed by the Disney Enterprises, and debuted with a change of name with the CGI feature DINOSAURS. P.S. It took your glaring lapse of film knowledge to bring me back to the talkbacks. 3 times banned. Later. SITHLORD999.
July 10, 2002, 3:10 a.m. CST
If you are basing your decision on Harry's review. His opinions are a little iffy.
July 10, 2002, 3:21 a.m. CST
July 10, 2002, 3:22 a.m. CST
SithLord is spot on. Time was this site was _the_ place to come for informed comment and insider info. Now Harry doesn't even know that TSL (The Secret Lab) is part of Disney (bless him - it's such a small company after all, easy to miss). But it gets worse, for I'm afraid Harry will be waiting a looooong time to see any more output from TSL. TSL _was_ part of Disney, until DISNEY CLOSED THE LAB IN OCTOBER 2001!!!!! Oh. Dear. News? Cool? Aint neither.
July 10, 2002, 3:23 a.m. CST
If you have ever seen him on any talk show he always has some story to tell that is not run of the mill. The guy can act and he is interesting in a absent minded adventurer way.
July 10, 2002, 3:27 a.m. CST
trying to figure out why I can't work up any interest whatsoever in this movie. I like special effects movies (yes that includes "Independence Day"), I like fanasy (LOTR should have gotten Best Picture damn it), And dragons are a mythological creatures which you would think would be a natural for the big screen. But for the most part the movies don't seem to know how to do them justice. I've never seen "Dragonslayer" from beginning to end. And while I don't share Harry's loathing for "Dragonheart" I agree that it could/should have been much more then what it was. And as fars "Dungeons and Dragons" goes, Harry pretty much said it all. "Reign of Fire" has a cool and original concept, Matthew McConaghy seems to be back on track, going from the underrated and brilliant "Frailty", the Indie pic "Thirteen Conversations about One Thing" (which I haven't seen) and now a balls-to-the-wall action flick really demonstrates his versitility. And yet I see the trailers and all I feel is indifference, and I don't know why. Maybe my anticpiation for "Road to Perdition" has giving me tunnel vision and after I see that I'll be able to work up some enthusasim for what appears to be a really cool flick. Only time will tell.
July 10, 2002, 3:40 a.m. CST
...and while I'm admittedly biased (I wrote one of the reviews for ROF earlier, the positive one,) I gotta say ROAD TO PERDITION left me distinctly underwhelmed. I've been reviewing everything I see and sending it here for the past week or so, but I didn't write one for ROAD, simply because I can't justify spending the time. It's very, very well made, the performances are fine...but utterly uninvolving. And the most tacked on, Academy ass-kissing ending I've seen since...well...EVER. If you need some kind of gauge as to just how quickly this film disappears from your memory...I didn't write a review for it, and I wrote one for MIB II. Yes, MIB II left more of an impression. Not good.
July 10, 2002, 3:54 a.m. CST
Has anyone seen McConaughey's other new film "13 Conversations About One Thing"? Matt was soooo great in "Contact"...
July 10, 2002, 4:06 a.m. CST
July 10, 2002, 4:13 a.m. CST
have to admit that I am disappointed you didn't know who they were. have to admit that I've never seen DRAGONSLAYER in so long that I can't remember anything about it, but now I have to go rent it. I remember it having a cool dragon and that wonderful go-motion technique. I'm really looking forward to seeing this one, too.
July 10, 2002, 4:43 a.m. CST
or does Harry`s new animation look like a blue dick that turns into Pete`s dragon?
July 10, 2002, 5:05 a.m. CST
I am stoked to see that ROF is getting good reviews thus far. After being disappointed by a couple of other "summer blockbusters", this movie has quickly moved to the top of my Must-See list. Here's a link to another review: http://www.chud.com/reviews/reign.php3
July 10, 2002, 5:17 a.m. CST
cause the trailer didn't look that good. i'll pick it up ROF at my local video shop a few months from now on 'special tuesdays' where you can rent 2 tapes for $o.99 cents.
July 10, 2002, 5:27 a.m. CST
by Julius Caeser
Harry, you totally let me down by telling me Blade 2 was awesome, it fucking sucked. And I reckon you have some hidden agenda for liking this film (as you did with Blade 2)... just give us an honest opinion, I bet this film sucks ass.
July 10, 2002, 5:50 a.m. CST
Harry is spot-on on this one, kids. This movie rocks from beginning to end. Sure, if you come to something like this with unreasonable expectations, like expecting a romantic comedy, you WILL be disappointed. This is what it is, Jaws with dragons. You never hear anyone saying they wish there had been more of a rapport with the Great White. This movie does not treat them like the D&D dragons: different species, talking, gold hoarding: They are animals, pure and simple. Intelligent animals, to be sure, but animals none-the-less. My freind was not looking forward to this one, but after it was over, he said he really liked it. I was looking forward to it, and I was blown away. No, it's not a perfect film. Name one. There are always better ways of doing things in films, things that you wonder what the guy was thinking, or that you would not have done it that way. Well, go ahead and think that; obviously SOMEONE thought that character would act that way, and if you have ever been chased by a dragon and did something different, then you have a leg to stand on. As far as Harry liking everything that comes out, it's just not true. He, ironically, did not like Minority Report, and the farther I get from it, the more I don't like it either. I'm not going to go back through the archives here to find more stuff he just didn't like, but you know it's true. Besides, he's not a journalist, and he can say whatever he wants. He is not forced to have the kind of integrity working journalists have, he can like what he likes without it having any merit at all, much like the rest of us.
July 10, 2002, 5:55 a.m. CST
Does anyone here think it is cool that Harry has to compare films and excitement to his balls and such? Every year the reviews get less and less interesting. He is not being edgy, or hip . . . it is sad. He is like a bad SNL skit in real life, it isn't funny and has no substance. Instead of film reviews, we get semi lectures on his growing collection of useless crap or how he really was into "insert genre" when he was a kid. Where did he find the time to eat? Will anyone here see this film b/c Harry finds it better than other bad dragon films? Does Harry owning all that dragon crap make this a better film? Or does it taint his review b/c he is so biased? AICN has become worse than the standard film critics, b/c now the reviews read more like bad porn crossed with commercialism served up with a healthy sized lump of fan boy angst. I would have to think that if you use the standards Harry uses to judge Star Wars films and use them to make your judgements on other films . . . everything seems like a masterpiece (unless you didn't give a private screening). This film will be forgotten in 3 months and Harry will jump on the next "cool looking" film bandwagon while filling us in on how he was always a big fan of "cool looking film past genre work and toys". Will Harry ever see a movie that doesn't affect his balls in someway?
July 10, 2002, 6:03 a.m. CST
I will definitely see this opening night. But this talkback has too much negative vibe about Harry. Can't you have an opinion. And just because you don't agree, it makes the other persons opinion invalid. I don't think so. Just wait, someone will bring up AOTC, a brilliant film. But they will flame it to all hell. Just wait and see.
July 10, 2002, 7:37 a.m. CST
GODD@**it HARRY it's Vermithrax Perjorative!!!!!!!! Dragonslayer is the true bad@ss dragon movie of it's time. Way before computer designed beasties were a twinkle in it's eye! All you jaded negative posting morons should at least see ROF before bashing it....Oh and try removing Harry's giggling balls off your chin before opening your mouth!
July 10, 2002, 9:05 a.m. CST
the Dell Guy's father. Dude, you're getting a Dell!
July 10, 2002, 9:42 a.m. CST
except I'm not sure what one is. If Harry meant "ball jiggiling" than that makes a certain amount of sense I guess. But if my balls started to giggle then I think I'd be going to the hospital. Explain that to your girlfriend when she's going down on you - "hey, what's so funny?..oh, my GOD....." As for the bongo playing stoner, I think you know where I stand on that one.
July 10, 2002, 9:47 a.m. CST
On reading a lot of the comments directed toward RoF and other dragon movies it is clear that the majority of people have given up hope of seeing a truely good film in which the dragons aren't Jaws and being hunted down. Dungeons and Dragons was a great disappointment to me - my god had the writer even read any of the material his film was about? Jeremy Irons as movie villian is now such a huge cliche - I don't think he should make any more movies - he has got to be in it for money alone. I don't understand after the success of FotR and the future successes that will be TTT and RotK why a studio doesn't snap up the rights to Weis and Hickman's Dragonlance Chronicles and Legends. Those books are crying out to be adapted -- but no doubt they would be adapted as cartoon comedies as oppossed to motion pictures. Why is hollywood so completely senseless over original subject matter - adaptation should be faithful or you just piss off your fan base. I am so worried about Superman vs. Batman - even the title is terrible. This is World's Finest and nothing else. Thye should forget this film. Leave Superman alone until Smallville ends it run - the writers of that have a lot of trash but in between they capture the identity of Clark and Luthor completely. As for Batman let's see Batman Year One followed by Loeb and Sale's Long Halloween and Dark Victory. I just don't understand why they don't see this source material as the wealth that it truely is.
July 10, 2002, 9:51 a.m. CST
I think this movie's going to be a blast! This might be the big hit of the summer if all goes well. Too bad neither Bale or McConaughey (sp?) were cast as Anakin instead. Lord knows they would have done worlds better...of course...when you are given mo material to work with, it doesn't really matter how good an actor you are.
July 10, 2002, 10:15 a.m. CST
by Miss Aura
July 10, 2002, 10:43 a.m. CST
Charming, Harry. Absolutely fucking charming. People take the time to write a review for you, obviously fans of your site, the people who read the ads which pay your bills. The send the review in, not expecting a penny in return, and because you disagree with them, you *HATE* them. Charming.
July 10, 2002, 10:45 a.m. CST
I agree wholeheartedly. Blade 2 rocked. Reign of Fire looks fun too. Getting a little tired of the relentless Harry-bashing. That's not to say that I agree with the reviews - sometimes I do, sometimes I don't. But if you know what to expect, why bother reading the reviews in the first place? If you disagree with the reviews or his grammar, get your own damn site and do it better. It seems stupid to me. Oh well. The voice of reason is rarely heard over the din of blabbermouth fanboys around here.
July 10, 2002, 10:49 a.m. CST
Miss Aura, that was supposed to read "I DISagree wholeheartedly." Now my post makes no fucking sense. I'm a moron. -1 point for not proofreading. Where the fuck is Hexus anyway, I'm getting tired of carrying his weight on the points thing. Besides, he's better at it.
July 10, 2002, 10:52 a.m. CST
And I'm happy harry liked it, but... Harry thinks Dragon slayer is good??? HAHAHAHAAH like 5 people on the planet must like that movie, its absolutely appalling. I tend to agree with everyone else, Harry's reviews mean shit. Blade 2 was awful, the original pissed all over it. Spy kids was also terrible. Armageddon was terrible. Harry likes all these terrible movies, so its pretty hard to tell if a new movie he reviews is good or not. And as for not knowing who the secret lab is, wasn't there a feature on here about them one time? Harry can be funny and I admire his non conformist attitude. But when he writes reviews he often comes out with pretentious and often incorrect drivel and says all his friends movies are awesome. I think its about time this site had a rebirth. It needs a new functional design, some real moderators on the talkbacks, some new software for the talk backs to allow signatures and such and keeping up with all the news might help considering the name of this page. Well, this post hasn't really gone the way intended it. Its now turned into a request to SORT YOU DROKKING SITE OUT HARRY!!!!!
July 10, 2002, 11:44 a.m. CST
by fun guy
...would be the Hobbit with PJ directing.
July 10, 2002, 11:56 a.m. CST
Harry, i've never dissed you because i've never really seen the point but I'm finding it really difficult to get excited over that review and, ultimately, over Reign of Fire. The reason? Your scarily similar reviews of Episode II and Blade 2. You treated both reviews of those films with the same orgasmic delight as you treat this one and you know what? Episode II and Blade 2 were two immensely forgettable pieces of celluloid. As a lifelong Star Wars junkie your praises of "probably the second best in the series" and "Lucas has finally done it!" had my pecker hard. Yet when I came out of that movie theatre having witnessed 2 and a bit hours of what I could only describe as a cartoon with camp acting and cheesy lines I swore I would from then on take your reviews with a handful of salt! What u described as "Ewan McGregor is having fun with this role" I describe as "a performance from and actor who can't believe he's being able to get away with such bad acting. It's almost like Ewan knows that as soon as he pulls out his *ahem* light saber none of the fanboys will give a shit about how cheesy and overplayed his acting is. For christ's sake Alec Guiness never even sounded like that and sure as hell never sounded like that when he was younger. It's a poor performance from an actor who, from the start, has been scathing about the way Lucas makes the new Star Wars films and how "boring" they are to work on. Guess what Harry, it shows. Ewan is taking the piss and camping it up big style in this peice of shit! Anyway, I should've learnt from the infamously embarassing "cunnilingus review" for Blade 2. Ok, taking into account your "close" relationship with Del Toro I was willing to give u a little room for being overzelous. But watching Blade 2 I was desperate for a bit of story or character development. Del Toro managed to make something happen that I didn't think was possible. He made shades, leather, cool weapons, vampires, fighting and blood....BORING!!!! I found myself saying "Ok theres that fight over now how about taking the story forwarOHHHHHHH here we go another fight with lots or disintergrating vampires and silver weapons". It was boring Harry! So over the top that what would be cool in another film was simply overkill in Blade 2. And you gave it your highest stamp or approval. So as much as I've been looking forward to Reign of Fire, having read your review, i will put money on it being a poor film with decent production values, a few half decent dragon effects shots (i've seen the pictures and they sure as hell don't look all that) and an over the top performance from everyone's favourite naked bongo player! Sorry Harry!
July 10, 2002, 12:03 p.m. CST
Harry, dude, you seem to be back, giddy about a dragon movie that kicks ass.........Now, loosen up on the love for Michael Bay and I will think that you are back to being the guy that I came to this site for in the first place, way way back when....
July 10, 2002, 12:46 p.m. CST
Harry- What the F? Remember how you splooged when you first saw the D&D trailer? It was a total piece of poo and anybody with an ounce of sense could tell it was terrible. Plus, you raved about "Blair Witch 2" and that was quite possibly the worst sequel ever. Your reviews are worthless. I'll check out the movie because it does look cool and I liked the script, but dude, lay off the jizz gurgling from your buddies at the studios.
July 10, 2002, 12:57 p.m. CST
Harry loves this movie. It's over. All my hopes are dashed and it'll be embarrassingly bad.:(
July 10, 2002, 1:06 p.m. CST
Okay, the story starts in 2020 with Christian Bale's character being pre-teen, like 12, right? In 2084, he's a leader of a group of people, and he looks pretty youthful still, like a bearded 30 year old. Shouldn't he be 76 years old??? Has this been covered and I just missed it or will it be explained in the movie???
July 10, 2002, 1:44 p.m. CST
by Wee Willie
Let's face it. Harry likes what he likes. Doesn't mean he's right. Though most of the reviews of this film I've read have been pretty positive.
July 10, 2002, 1:45 p.m. CST
'Got your attention? Right. Okay, I'm through trying to talk people off the very tired Harry-bashing. Suffice to say, everyone's heard it all before, and it pretty much amounts to this: It's Harry's site, the man can express his opinion about whatever he wants. The rest of us are here to take up the slack. That is all on that. Now, to the real meat of things. Harry hit the nail on the head about dragon movies. Dragonslayer "is" the best dragon movie ever made. (So far; haven't seen ROF yet.) Of course this isn't saying a whole lot seeing as there's only been a handful of them ever made. 'Still. Not to take anything away from it, Dragonslayer is a very good movie which happens to involve a dragon. And I'm afraid anyone who doesn't agree is showing their age. When Dragonslayer first came out, nothing touched it. It was a monumental achievement. Dragonslayer ruled. And it still does to a certain extent if you watch it based on its own merit and not compare it to the effects laden films of today. The only other dragon movie I can say I ever gave a shit about was the Rankin/Bass version of the Hobbit. Of course that's animated, so it doesn't really enter into it. I have hopes for Reign of Fire. *** Oh, and lastly, while I didn't think Blade II was as good as the original, I still thought it was pretty good. Not great, but pretty good. 'Looking forward to Blade III. I wonder who will direct that one. Any thoughts? Harry?
July 10, 2002, 1:50 p.m. CST
...in more ways than one. It's not actually set in 2084...I forget exactly what year it IS set in, but this topic was broached perviously, and it turns out that there's a LOT of problems with the ad campaign, not the least of which was the fact that these idiots promoted a fantasy/legend flim as a friggin ARMAGEDDON-esque CGI wankfest. This may well go down in history as the most bone headed ad campaign ever.
July 10, 2002, 1:55 p.m. CST
Ever since then I have looked towards Moriaty for reviews. Yours mean shit! Still read them thou...
July 10, 2002, 1:59 p.m. CST
by Miss Aura
Sorry but I think you got the wrong end of the stick. By my post, I was suggesting that Blade 2 was the biggest pile of crap I have seen for a long time. I am not having a go at Harry over this, because each individual film gives each person something different and this review of reign of fire is Harry's honest review. I cant wait to see it myself but in my eyes Blade 2 was bad. Nothing against Wesley Snipes, he done good as Blade but when you cast a member of BROS as one of the baddies you are hard pressed to make someone take the film seriously. If I wanted to see Martial Arts action I would watch my DVD of Enter the Dragon not watch some Vampire Hunter tirelessly fight again and again and again when you know all along that he is going to win in the end. To me Blade 2 was just boring escapism which I had seen a thousand times before. But As long as we take it and eat it up then they will just churn them out every week. When you live in a world with 4 Billion potential scriptwriters it really is a mystery how Hollywood keeps giving us the same old crap. ORIGINALITY folks, please.
July 10, 2002, 2:35 p.m. CST
if you read my post that came IMMEDIATELY after the first one, you'll see I corrected my shitty writing in that I *disagreed* with your take on Blade 2. That said, the rest of my post had nothing to do with you, it was just general talkback commentary. So there. thpppt! I liked Blade 2. Different strokes and folks and ends of sticks and all.
July 10, 2002, 2:42 p.m. CST
By the way, Harry, since you didn't know anything about that special effects company named the Secret Lab, let me tell you this... they worked for that amazing masterpiece called 'Unbreakable'!!!!!!!!! (Can't wait for Signs!!!)
July 10, 2002, 2:49 p.m. CST
that needs to put on a poster or dvd cover or *something*
July 10, 2002, 2:51 p.m. CST
by user id indeed!
Man, I love it.
July 10, 2002, 3:07 p.m. CST
With the kind of looks that instantly make women drop their knickers, how angry is Matthew really? Has he ever known the pain of rejection, that raw primal rage borne out of the purest frustration, that eats away and eats away and eats away at a man's soul until he's ready to go postal? Somehow I doubt it. (PS. can you tell I'm bitter?)
July 10, 2002, 3:18 p.m. CST
All of you bastards who keep posting shit like this need to die. So he liked a movie that the majority of people think sucked. Who cares? Like you have never liked a movie that everyone else has hated? I'm sure you have, unless of course you only watch movies that are approved by the masses. So whats the deal? Were you so emotionally trashed by going to see Blade 2 when it got a good review that you can't shut the fuck up about it by now? Just go see the movie for yourself and only read reviews if you are actually interested in the persons opinion who is writing it. BTW Episode 2 ruled! By thats just my opinion.
July 10, 2002, 3:25 p.m. CST
Over-hpyed, unconvincing, so-called noirish pot boiler that mixes groan inducing slapstick with deathly dull pendantics; a pointless visual style and unconvincing futurist setting; a dime store mystery plot with hackneyed sentimentality; and some really bad wire work. It was quite impossible for me and my companion to suspend disbelief for this crock of nonsense. I really would have rather slipped into MIB 2...even as bad as that would have been. As for Reign of Fire: any movie with Matthew and Christian strutting their pecs around is worth at least a rental.
July 10, 2002, 4:10 p.m. CST
There I said it. Must balance out the assholes who clearly have no understanding of SW. Either that or they're still bitter about the kiddie angle to TPM. Do the bashers realize how they are towing the mainstream line by bashing Lucas and SW. You're a bunch of followers who are the lapdogs of the liberal fucking elite! Either that or I wouldn't be surprised you're just a bunch of punk kids who actually splooged over Raimi's average Spiderman. UGH! YOU'RE OPINIONS DON'T MEAN SHIT.
July 10, 2002, 4:26 p.m. CST
Harry, despite the fact that this is the good review that i hoped for, that has got to be one of the laziest, most completely unsupported comparisons that I've ever seen. How is a high octane monster movie like a low-key prose dissection of the barbarism that lurks behind the civility of small town America? It's not fair, Harry, It's not right!
July 10, 2002, 4:41 p.m. CST
by The Talking Pie
but probably won't. all dragon movies suck. coincidence? i think not. none of the good reviews have really gotten me psyched.... i hope im wrong.
July 10, 2002, 4:44 p.m. CST
Sushi-X- Are you that same dude who wrote for Electronic Gaming Monthly? Just curious. Reign of Fire looks awesome. The first time I saw the flaming drool come out of the dragons mouth in the preview I knew it'd rock. We'll finally get to see a naked bongo playing stoner kick ass!!!! (I bet you'd never see those words in the same sentence). Good review Harry. You told me exactly what I wanted to know about the movie without spoiling a damn thing. Keep it up!!
July 10, 2002, 4:52 p.m. CST
Harry was comparing The Lottery to Dragonslayer not Reign of Fire. Try reading the review sober next time. It helps.
July 10, 2002, 4:56 p.m. CST
by The Talking Pie
but probably won't. all dragon movies suck. coincidence? i think not. none of the good reviews have mentioned anything thats really gotten me psyched.... i hope im wrong.
July 10, 2002, 5:48 p.m. CST
Any movie that contains the lines, "The peasants are revolting!" "They've always been revolting, now they're rebelling!" can't be all bad. But they really should have made up their minds whether it was a serious dragon movie or a Monty Python-style parody; you can't have it both ways.
July 10, 2002, 6:13 p.m. CST
You guys got a beef with me being in BROS! Even thou I was the best thing about Blade 2 (Shut-up Donnie Yen fans) you can kiss my ass fleshnecks! You would be lucky to have a reaper like me throat fuck you! FFFFFFFFFFFFAAAAAAAAAAAAAATTTHHHHER!!!!
July 10, 2002, 6:29 p.m. CST
by Charles Grady
For anyone else in LA...Are you dreading the opening weekend audience for this thing? With just about any movie you see in a theatre in Los Angeles, you risk seeing it with an audience of 15-yr-old pokey-haired visor wearing juvenile delinquent hip-hop gangsta wannabes who talk all the way through the fucking movie. But something about REIGN OF FIRE, like XXX, just cries out, "If you value your safety, or at least a quality movie-watching experience, wait for video!" My guess is no one over 18 will be in the L.A. multiplexes for this thing, as it will bring the cholos (and filipino/armenian wannabe cholos) out of the woodwork like nothing else since FAST AND THE FURIOUS.
July 10, 2002, 6:50 p.m. CST
And there is no such thing as a "heroin drip". I think you mean morphine or demerol. Friends don't let friends publish without an editor.
July 10, 2002, 7:14 p.m. CST
Nico, The Last Unicorn. Of course, this is the only unicorn movie that I can think of. The dragon in Reign of Fire looks soooooo fake. Bad CGI, the worst CGI I've seen this side of Phantom Menace. Egad.....
July 10, 2002, 7:17 p.m. CST
by Miss Aura
Yes, I did read it wrong. Sorry about that. I am not having a go at people over liking Blade 2 really, my argument is that Hollywood just brings out the same trash all the time and the public sucks it up. BTW to the poster above Minority Report was a breath of fresh air compared to Blade 2 in my opinion and yes Episode 2 did rock but not only in that it was a good film but also the fact that it sorted out the real SW fans from the ones who claim that George Lucas raped their childhood.
July 10, 2002, 7:31 p.m. CST
Man, you guys are idiots. I see some of you morons posting on this site EVERY DAMN DAY, just to trash the man who runs it. I get TONS of enjoyment out of this site. Leave Harry the F alone, and let him review movies. It's about time we had some dang intelligent dialog on this site again, and dispensed with the Harry-bashing.
July 10, 2002, 7:48 p.m. CST
Was Pete's Dragon. Helen Reddy was hot! The advertising was driving me away from RoF, but I'm starting to change my mind. This, of course, from a guy who just now got around to seeing The Bourne Identity. BTW, I thought Blade II was much better than I. Aura, why do you believe otherwise? Cobra out.
July 10, 2002, 8:55 p.m. CST
Dragons are gay. So are Unicorns, hobbits, elves, dwarves, and wizards. For fantasy, I want a new mermaid movie with a total hottie wearing the fins. Any suggesstions as to who?
July 10, 2002, 9:05 p.m. CST
The previews on this look terrible. It looks like a rental. EIGHT LEGGED FREAKS looks a lot more interesting.
July 10, 2002, 9:10 p.m. CST
this is jack burton talking and i'm talking to whoever's listening out there. i'm quite tired, like all other talkbackers, of being subjected to harry's bodily fluids: "fountains of drool", "orgasmic delight", "geekasms", "like oral sex", etc, etc. quite creepy. jambone, did i read you right that harry jizzed all over D&D??? MHUUUAHAHAHAHHAHA! that says it all. and now i see this REIGN OF FIRE has taken over harry's website. it completely monopolizes the page??!!! what's going on here??? is this an objective review OR IS IT AN INDIRECT MEANS OF PROMOTION??? tell you guys what. i'm going to splurge for a $1 asian pirated version of this DRAGON/SCI-FI/POst-Apolcolyptic KRULL wanna-be, and if it is the crap i suspect it to be, i won't let anyone on this site forget it. and i won't trust harry anymore.
July 10, 2002, 9:21 p.m. CST
by The Hillbrothers
I'm sorry to go off topic but what sparticusmaximus said about AOTC really needed to be said. I am a huge SW fan who was really let down by TPM but immensely impressed with AOTC. I am aware of it's problems, of course, but there's so much to like... I think alot of AOTC fans have been forced to hide their admiration for the movie in talkbacks for fear of not being taken seriously, of being written off as kiddie-film lovers. But it's true that it has become "cool" to dis SW, and disliking SW has become a mainstream sentiment. Magazines like EW love to bash SW at every opportunity. I think many of the big film critics had made up their minds about the movie before they saw it, as most of the criticisms of AOTC were simply rehashed from reviews of TPM. Many of the flaws pointed out just weren't there. Reviewers were afraid of losing their journalistic integrity by liking the movie, of losing respect, and so to be safe they told themselves the whole time they were watching it, "I don't like this movie." Natalie Portman starts off her scenes with some bad line deliveries, and so the reviewer watches the rest of the movie telling himself, "This is all bad acting. This kid can't act" (Christensen had a few clunky lines, too, but he was not bad). And the thing that vexes me most is how the movie's one true strength, the non-stop special effects, is continually regarded as a weakness. The most amazing effects ever, and the movie takes criticism for it? If that doesn't say something about how much people wanted to hate this movie, I don't know what does. I constantly hear that the story, acting, etc, were sacrificed in favor of a "bloated CGI extravaganza." But wouldn't it be more reasonable to just say "well, at least this movie has some great eye candy?" There's not alot of depth to Jeunet's City of Lost Children, it's basically a fable, like SW, but it was lauded as a visual masterpiece (which it is), and reviewers recognized it's strength as a piece of visual art. But the CGI artistry of AOTC is demonized, because the haters just can't allow any part of the movie to be cool. If anyone is considering giving the movie a second chance with a more open mind, here are a couple of things that might help: Think of the "love" scenes as more of a seduction than a romance. Anakin is dark, intense, and forceful. I see Padme as intimidated by him, yet attracted to his power. Also, I know it's cliche to say, but you really have to try to see it in the mindset of a 10 year old to enjoy all of it. It's always said that Lucas is backpeddling when describing these as for kids, that the originals were made for all ages. Well, so are the new ones, but the problem is that most of you weren't adults when you saw the old ones. You can't go back and watch them for the first time as an experienced, discriminating filmgoer, so you have little idea of how much of those originals would have seemed cheesy or shoddy at the time. You also have little idea of how you would have reacted to these new ones if you were seeing them first as a kid, but you must try, because seeing SW through a child's eyes is the only way to enjoy them, in my opinion. They're not as dark and serious as movies like the Matrix, or, returning to subject, Reign of Fire, which I am going to see on Friday night. Me likey Dragons.
July 10, 2002, 10:56 p.m. CST
I would have to agree with the previous comment that all of Harry's reviews sound the same. If he likes it he droans on and on about some other movie he liked that reminds him of it, then he droans on and on about the actors and movies he's liked them in, in fact it seems like all you do is polish everyone involved in making the movies ass! You probably loved Scooby Doo and said something like this about it, "The graphics on Scooby Doo were really great, not once did I not believe Scooby was a real fucking dog!" I'll still see this movie even though your review of it told me jack shit, and you could have really shortened this up by simply saying, "I liked it and I'd love to get Christian Bale and Matthew McConaughey in a three way!" Oh by the way, go to Hell Harry, Moriarty rules!
July 10, 2002, 10:57 p.m. CST
by user id indeed!
Yeah, well, that's just, like, your opinion, man. Me, I saw a beautifully done film that was NOT hackneyed but rather pretty touching, with action and suspense unlike any film I've seen since "Fellowship". The visual style's cold and haunting atmosphere perfectly matched the script's tone, the futuristic setting was brainstormed by about fifty futurists, scientists, and intellectuals (in other words, convincing), and the mystery plot, when combined with the science-fiction idea of premeditation, was a fantastic mix. The craftmanship shown was admirable to say the very least. The wire work was groin-grabbingly good.
July 10, 2002, 11:30 p.m. CST
by Lord Vetinari
is that supposed to be harry as goliath from the disney series "gargoyles"
July 10, 2002, 11:39 p.m. CST
Did you see him on "The Daily Show" that one time? He was promoting either "U-571" or "The Wedding Planner" and he was telling Jon Stewart a story about a goat (I won't get into too much detail about it because it's pretty sick). Is that what you are talking about?
July 10, 2002, 11:43 p.m. CST
I'm sorry I messed up the last part of your name.
July 11, 2002, 12:41 a.m. CST
by Osgood Sigerson
...Ian McDiarmid was in it. And it had a dragon. As for RoF, it seems good to me. Lately, I've been disagreeing with Harry's reviews. Harry says AOTC is great, well if it was I would have seen it more than once. I think maybe I will sit here clutching my classic trilogy VHS set and give up on the prequels entirely. Well, maybe not, but I'm really leery about the whole SW franchise now. But I digress. Anyways, then Harry doesn't think Minority Report is that great. So I say, "Gee, it must be good." Well, it wasn't good. It was poor. PKD could provide power to the state of California, he's spinning in his grave so fiercely. If someone makes A Scanner Darkly I will hammerpuke. Digressing again...As much as I wanted to like MR, I didn't. So if Harry liked RoF, maybe I will too. Which scares me.
July 11, 2002, 1:38 a.m. CST
I agree. Lucas is the first CGI porn director. It's not about the story, it's all about the action.
July 11, 2002, 5:39 a.m. CST
AOTC Good, BLADE 2 Good, MINORITY REPORT Bad!!!!!! How could Harry give Minority Report which is undoubtably THE best Summer film of the season so far an indifferent review and yet laud BLADE 2 and AOTC as works of almost unbridled genius? They were both OK verging on shit because neither of them paid particular attention to that old chestnut "storytelling". Both of these films are little more than sex-aids for FANBOYS. If ROF is an exception to this I'll be happy and I bet Road To Perdition rocks.
July 11, 2002, 6:29 a.m. CST
I think all you assholes that post talkbacks should just stop seeing anything but art films...Any movie with a fucking dragon in it is not going to affect you the same way as y tu mama tambien..I am going to take my son to see what seems to be a cool looking dragon movie(I think dragon are kick ass and so does my son..gofigure)I want to see a helicopter blows up a dragon and vice versa..Remember kids its just a god damn dragon movie!!!
July 11, 2002, 6:57 a.m. CST
The first big budget end-of-the-world sci-fi flick to be set in London since Tobe Hooper's LIFEFORCE is an absolute killer. Chock full of emotion, without the sickly sentimentality we usually associate with Hollywood, RoF is the thoughtful and unsettling experience we've been crying out for. Bale and McConaughey prove they have what it takes to be 'movie stars' and when the supporting cast scream their bollocks off you really feel their terror(especially true for the kids in the movie). Bowman's direction remains taut throughout, the pace of the film never dulling with an almost perfect running time. From the moment the first dragon appeared I felt myself having 'one eye on the sky' - the dragons being almost omnipotent, watching every move, responding with cunning, killing with precision. It's here where the comparison with JAWS lies; come into contact and you're toast (in RoF's case quite literally)! The script is passionate, without sub-plot (I hate sub-plots in action flicks) and gives the two leads some cracking dialogue (although my fave Bale monologue has to be Bateman's Huey Lewis and the News dissection) in-between the set-pieces. The SFX are inspired and may frighten some of the younger audience, but I found myself getting that same buzz I felt watching 'Jason and the Argonauts' or 'Jack, the Giant Killer' all those years ago. The feeling that evil will prevail, and that the heroes must overcome insurmountable odds to defeat it, dominates. This is no Blade 2, or AotC, or Spiderman, or anything else for that matter (except if they'd put Bruce Campbell in the lead and changed the dragons to deadites they might have had Evil Dead 4!). Reign of Fire - one on it's own and THE best action movie so far this year - it'll take a lot to pour cold water on this one because it is HOT!
July 11, 2002, 7:06 a.m. CST
First off, simply for bringing this pathetically over talked about subject into an irrelevant talk back: up yours, from all my heart. Second, yes, a convincing future cooked up by futurists...which was flushed down the crapper after the second reel. And a mystery plot mixed with Dick's vision? Yeah, I'd agree with you, IF IT HAD ACTUALLY BEEN MIXED. Super gluing a mystery plot at the end of a Sci-Fi plot that ran out of steam is not what I'd call "mixing." I'd sincerely glad you somehow made it through this infuriating load with your pleasure intact, but what kind of pathetic fanboy brings this crap up IN EVERY TALKBACK??!!? This is like the 8 year old who won't stop talking to his blatantly uninterested babysitter about how much he likes The Rock. And yes, I'm including the AOTC people in this, too, I'm just a little more numb to them by this point. Why am I bothering to respond? Maybe 'cause some part of me wished Spielberg would go back and reshoot the last 90 minutes of his almost 3 hour film, and make it less pandering. Maybe I just need a life. Both, actually.
July 11, 2002, 9:50 a.m. CST
You're cool and write like an intelligent person and all, but WOW do we not agree on movies or what. Aside from Minority Report, we couldn't disagree more. I loved Blade 2, hated AOTC. But whatever, this is a reign of fire article, and I think it looks like fun.
July 11, 2002, 10:05 a.m. CST
by Miss Aura
Couldnt agree more about Reign of Fire, I cant wait to see it also. Sorry, but Blade 2 didnt work for me same as AOTC did not work for you. We have different tastes and thats great because otherwise we would have Titanic fans all over the net and now that would be suicidal. P.S. Blade 2 IMO is bad, but TITANIC blows the super chunks. I just hope TTT can knock it off the top spot because as long as it is there, it shows the human race as a bunch of morons. I cannot forgive James Cameron to this day, he should give us all a public apology to redeem himself.
July 11, 2002, 10:22 a.m. CST
about Titanic, and I got a good chuckle out of your public apology line. Here's one thing to make it worse - I saw Titanic in the theater (he says, hanging his head in shame), and the theater's air conditioning was broken. Yes, me, my now-ex gf, 200 giggling teenage girls, no a/c, three hours of Titanic crap. It's a little glimpse of my personal hell. If I ever meet James Cameron, I'm telling him he owes me three hours of my life and several good night's sleep. I still get cold sweats thinking about that day...
July 11, 2002, 10:59 a.m. CST
July 11, 2002, 11:22 a.m. CST
an action packed sequel to A TIME TO KILL. that movie was really his best work and a great setup for one helluva ride. here's the story: its been 10 years since the famous "People vs. Carl Haley" case in Canton MS. Although the verdict was "not guilty" and great strides were made in Canton...the rest of the south has become outraged over the progression that has gripped the country. militia forces led by rebel leader and former KKK member Colin Blide have succesfully baracaded the southern states. every citizen who does not share their beliefs are killed or held hostage wich is the only thing keeping the U.S. army from invading. Blide has gathered together some of the highest ranking KKK members to act as spies and agents of death in this "new south" and one of their first assignments is to take out the lawyer who helped bring about this progression...Canton native Jake Brigants. when his wife and daughter are murdered...jake begins looking for a way to bring down the rebel leader and this threat to the south's progression. meanwhile...president bush realizes that we are on the brink of another civil war and that must not happen...so he secretly orders the CIA's best black ops agent to infiltrate the south and settle the conflict. his name is John Colt. He will be portrayed by Arnold Scharzanegger...Colin Blide can be Billy Bob Thorton and of course Jake Brigants will be Mathew Mac. it would be written and directed by james cameron. just think...man what a movie. they could bring back sandra bullock's charcter who is now a law school professor at Ole Miss so jake will have a love interest...the action and drama would all be there...it would be huge. c'mon...Warner Bros. has done far worse.
July 11, 2002, 11:26 a.m. CST
Wednesday, July 24, 7:30 P.M., Laemmle Sunset 5
July 11, 2002, 1:45 p.m. CST
Getting kinda lame saying that. Behold THE REAL CUSTER HAS SPOKEN.
July 11, 2002, 1:51 p.m. CST
Easily Flight of Dragons. Already discussed it in the other Dragon thread. But if you saw it as a kid it really sets up what your views od Dragons is for all time.
July 11, 2002, 2:04 p.m. CST
by Boris Grushenko
Now that movie was the shit. And the CGI!!!!! Sheeeeeeooooooot Skeeter! Did that dragon look real or what? And little Petey... you tellin' me than Bale and McConaughyshmamaunaughey are better actors than Petey Boy? And does Reign Of Fire have any cool musical numbers??? Didn't think so. How about this... "He has the head of a camel, the neck of a crocadile, and the ears of a cow. It's clear that friends can be different, yes, I understand you now. Cause It's not Easy, to find someone who cares, It's not Easy to find magic in Pairs"... blah blah blah... Now that my friends is what makes a good dragon movie, a moving song. Give it up to Pete's Dragon as the best Dragon movie ever made!!!
July 11, 2002, 2:12 p.m. CST
Not sure of your user id's but hopefully you can figure out who I'm addressing. Newbomb, I don't know what to say to you, man. How the hell can you appreciate Dragonslayer but not like the mother of all fantasy stories? That just doesn't make sense. You are a very confused individual. There would never have been a Dragonslayer without The Hobbit, just as there never would've been The Hobbit without Beowulf. Look a little bit deeper next time. The story and the characters are what makes rings so spectacular. If you were bored, it's because you weren't paying attention. Most movies have a little bit more to them than your average Arnold Swartzeneger picture. As soon as you realize this, you'll have a much bigger appreciation for film. And think before you speak. You strike me as someone who things Rings is cliche ridden, ignorant of the fact that Rings is the original. Only the gazillion re-writes that try to duplicate what Tolkien produced can be considered cliche. Speaking of cliches, the Bored of the Rings quip is a bit tired... You do realize that that was Mad Magazine satire don't you? It was written about 40 years ago. If you're trying to be an original, try a different angle. *** Fluffygreycat, or whatever your name is... Again, I contend, if you have a problem with Dragonslayer, you are showing your age. Dragonslayer was state of the art in special effects at the time it came out. Watched on its own merits, it's a very good film. Like Harry said, the stories great (a darker more apocalyptic version of The Lottery), the lighting, mood, and atmosphere were very effective, the music was good, and the effects were groundbreaking. What's not to like? If you were around and remember when it came out, the only conclusion I can come to is that you just don't like fantasy movies... In which case, why are you even on this talkback? *** Last bit. I agree, Legend is the best Unicorn movie so far. Know one does Unicorns like Riddly Scott. For that matter, if anything with a unicorn in it counts, then Bladerunner, The Director's Cut would get my vote.
July 11, 2002, 2:24 p.m. CST
Lawrence, lawrence of Arabia, he's an english guy...he came to fight the Turkish...meep meep meep meep.
July 11, 2002, 5:35 p.m. CST
Harry, Mr. Bowman cut his teeth on several of the best and series-defining episodes of Star Trek: The Next Generation, way before being lured away to the X-files TV show, then movie. He introduced us to the Borg for the first time, as well as Data's brother, Lore, his father, Noonien Soong, and two-time holodeck nemesis, Moriarty on that show! Watch the episodes he directed on that show, and you'll see the most inventive direction, awe-inspiring visuals and enthralling storylines of the entire series, literally defining its best moments. If I could choose a director to name as 'The Next' Spielberg, Burton, or Lucas, it would be this man! Watch him closely, I'll predict he'll climb the ladder to super success quickly!
July 11, 2002, 9:27 p.m. CST
I'm looking forward to this movie a lot. Although I must admit I was looking forward to it a lot more when I thought the dragons were intelligent... like, they had speech, etc. And more importantly I was more excited when I thought the reason the world was post-apocolyptic was because of a nuclear war, and mankind being down on it's luck after a nuke war was the reason dragons had this opportunity to come out of hiding and make a play for domination. The reason for both counts is believability... if these dragons are just animals, why would they seemingly be making targeted attacks against humanity? And, if humanity was at it's full current glory when the dragon(s) emmerged, how could they POSSIBLY defeat us? they'd get completely destroyed. So, I am jazzed for it tomorrow... but again, to sum up. Movie would have been better if the apoc was nuclear in origin, and/or if the dragons were of human level intelligence.
July 12, 2002, 1:03 a.m. CST
No potatoes, John Carter of Mars would make a kick-ass flick, but I've been asking God since I was ten with no results. Seek other channels.
July 12, 2002, 9:53 a.m. CST
by Mal Davies
I saw this film last night in Leicester Square. I had high hopes for this film. The poster is great. However, this film is awful. Abominably so. The dialogue is terrible, the acting atrocious, the story dull. THE GREAT POSTER is a LIE. You do NOT SEE THIS IN THE FILM. - And thats not a spolier. The filmmakers took a great idea and then showed you everything uninteresting about that idea. See this film if ONLY if you want to have a really good laugh at the sheer cheese of it all. Don't pay attention to Harry. Listen to everyone else. This film is really, REALLY bad.
July 12, 2002, 12:37 p.m. CST
I'm still seeing it though. Why? Road to Perdition didn't open here this week. And DragonSlayer is lightyears behind anything in LOTR, as far as acting, story, pacing, suspense and special effects go. Oh, and humour. And fighting. Not that it's a bad flick. It's just a bit cheesy.
July 12, 2002, 3:46 p.m. CST
Does somebody from the studio actually stroke you while you're writing these reviews to try to fool people into seeing godawful movies? That would explain a lot of the "ball-giggly" comments.
July 12, 2002, 4:11 p.m. CST
bigcrazyfrank: usa today only gave 1 and 1/2 stars but i think it will be better Prof Lehman: as long as they show everything they did in the preview it will be better than 1 and a half Prof Lehman: unless ofcourse it has windtalkers syndrome bigcrazyfrank: i fucking hate women reveiwers, thats who reviewed it for usatoday, fucking cunt Prof Lehman: i will only give this movie 4 stars if in the opening credits they have hewey lewis playing bigcrazyfrank: what Prof Lehman: nevermind bigcrazyfrank: i cant even begin to think about where you were going with that one bigcrazyfrank: omg listen to this cunt... bigcrazyfrank: The filmmakers hope audiences can set aside fears of terrorism, nuclear bombs and smallpox outbreaks and embrace the terror wrought by winged, fireball-exhaling dragons. Prof Lehman: american psycho Prof Lehman: thats where i was going bigcrazyfrank: i see Prof Lehman: omg what an incredibly stupid bitch bigcrazyfrank: this bitch doesnt even give a solid reason as to why the movie should be 1 1/2* other than 'the dragons strafe and whiz at Concorde speed, sounding more like supersonic jets than flame-breathing reptiles' Prof Lehman: thats a good reason, if your deaf and can actually watch the movie bigcrazyfrank: yeah bigcrazyfrank: this cunt is so dumb, here is her opening sentence "Single green, scaly male seeks like female for propagation, global obliteration and movie-star status." Prof Lehman: on a serious note Prof Lehman: if i knew this woman and where she lived, i would punch her bigcrazyfrank: me too, dude she doesnt even make sense, read this full sentence... bigcrazyfrank: Though much is made of their ancient origins, the dragons strafe and whiz at Concorde speed, sounding more like supersonic jets than flame-breathing reptiles. bigcrazyfrank: what the fuck does that have to do with their 'ancient origins' Prof Lehman: cause the dragons are french duh bigcrazyfrank: yeah and dragons are real bitch, thats why the dragons in the movie dont actually sound like 'real' dragons hahaha Prof Lehman: is the movie about terrorism? bigcrazyfrank: yeah, i think the name of the movie is really "dragons with computer chips in their brains controlled by bin laden" Prof Lehman: but aparently they are asking you to forget about all that bigcrazyfrank: its so hard to do, just last week my grandmother was eaten by a dragon Prof Lehman: you have to forget about that bigcrazyfrank: ill try
July 12, 2002, 5:10 p.m. CST
And not fire, but the big, fat cock of mediocrity. The only things worth watching were McConaughey's loopy but inspired performance, and the occasional cool dragon shot, everything else was lame, lame, lame and boring as hell.
July 12, 2002, 7:03 p.m. CST
It's been 6 years since "Dragonheart" came out and it's been too long since these directors have given up on showing movies with dragons in them. I like this idea. What if instead of fighting terrorists, we were fighting dragosn who breathe fire and eat for breakfast, lunch, and dinner everyday. I mean come on it's cool concept: Boy accidentally frees dragons to plague mankind, mankind is destroyed, dragons rule supreme, until guy comes with plan to kill them, plan works, but has a few casualities die, and everyone goes home happy without anymore beasts watching and waiting to pounce on their hides. You know "Halloween: Resurrection" is going to suck even with Busta Rhymes, Tyra Banks, and Jamie Lee Curtis, "Crocodile Hunter" is for the kiddies and the guys who like to dig around in the dirt with khaki shorts on, and "Road to Perdition" is one of those films you wait to see later (even though it's a good film). So, give the movie a chance, see it, and like it for what it is and quit babying and bitching about it when you haven't seen it.
July 12, 2002, 8:38 p.m. CST
Hi. I just saw ROF and these are some of my comments. 1. It is definitely a unique summer movie that initially was thought to showcase some real kick-ass humans vs dragons battles but instead it is more of a POV movie with some sporadic cool action sequences (esp. the archangel sequence). 2. Both the male leads are great and bring diverging but relevant strategies to the mix. 3. The action sequences, though few, are well executed. 4. The dragons cannot really be seen that clearly with the exception of the male dragon in the last battle. 5. Ending was a bit rushed. Question: 1. If Quinn woke up the alpha male dragon, how is it possible that the male could find and wake up other dormant hibernating female dragons? Following the movie's logic, once the male dragon went hibernating for millions of years, the female species would have either died out. Could use some help in this..thanks
July 12, 2002, 10:50 p.m. CST
and it was an okay summer flick. Decent effects, decent characters, and decent CGI. I'd have added a little bit more from a fan-boy perspective like showing the Dragons destroying London or fighting the military rather than the way it was told to us in a story (agree that the poster is way off - no Apache's in this flick). I'd also have played up the Dragon/Bale final confrontation... have the Dragon interact with him more... like they know one another. I wonder if this movie wasn't more intense before 9/11, i.e. if there are extended shots of cities being torched that were later exorcised by the director/studio. Really it was an okay flick. Listen carefully at times though... the english accents are a bit thick and dialogue gets lost as a result (when coupled with background noise).
July 12, 2002, 11:27 p.m. CST
After reading all the reviews prior to the movies release, i had very high hopes for this movie. First of all, where are all the dragons? we get to see one big dragon and thas about it, not like how the poster portrays dragonS vs apaches. Its worth a rental at best, this movie could have been so much better, but it seems they just cheaped out on having more dragons and cooler fighting sequences. The ending was just ok, after watching the first 2 thirds of the movie, i thought to myself that they were building to huge climatic ending, this was not the case, instead its an abrupt ending that kinda leave you wondering, wow i actually paid money to see this.
July 12, 2002, 11:49 p.m. CST
What kind of lame-ass "plan" did the Americans have in killing dragons? That was a painfully forced attempt to get some extreme-sport bullshit in the film. Nothing exciting about that. The whole film made no sense, even on its own terms. Give me "Dragonslayer" any day. The dragon in that movie was straight out of a Brothers Hildebrandt painting: there was actually some craft involved in bringing it to the screen. The dragons in this film, when you saw them, besides being technically sound (what isn't these days?), didn't have much of an impact. Don't blame the poor souls of The Secret Lab. Just a lame film.
July 13, 2002, 2:41 a.m. CST
Just got back from the threates; great summer flic. Don't expect to see legions of Dragons vs. army of human fight scenes. Instead, it's quality over quantity; there's suspenceful buildup to every action sequence. The acting was surprisingly good and the main characters very believeable. Fantastic modeling and animation on the dragons (already missing The Secret Lab). The only negative I have with the film is the ending was just screaming for a sequel. Well, at least it was sugar-coated ala Minority Report.
July 13, 2002, 3:03 a.m. CST
First and foremost the effects kicked my fucking ass, I mean, The Secret Lab is way totally hollywood's best kept secret and have hyyuge things ahead for them after this move....good god....if they made a GODZILLA move..... This it not ID4. This isn't even Battlefield Earth. No huge battles here so get over the damn movie poster, lol. It's a movie about a handfull of people trying to survive in a world dominated by dragons, and if you go into it thinking of it as such (as I did) then yeah, your gonna come out thinking it sucked. But if you take it for what it really is, you will learn to appreciate the hell out of it.....wow to Matthew McCaunahay or whatever and Christian Bale, they really made you FEEL this thing, Harry is right on about the celebration scene....but I do wish we had gotten more Dragons, considering the quality of the SFX.....I'm just a bit baffled why the scene where Christian Bale gets the egg got left in, I mean, if they had followed it up it would make sense, but they didnt so.....anyways, see it! A lot of you will hate it but hopefully those of you who arent complete idiots will appreciate it for what it is!!!!!
July 13, 2002, 5:49 a.m. CST
Yeah, I was thinkin' about that, too. The closest, plausible reason I could come up with was that Quinn didn't want to believe in Van Zan's story about the dragons breeding, also he still had childhood phobias. He wanted to see the dragon corpse and see that it was mortal. The egg was there to drive in the dragon breeding story and how it would be impossible for humanity to survive as long as the dragons were around. Damn, all the mysteries behind the dragons (alot of which were not directly answered) is just asking for a sequel. And I don't mean a straight to video sequel ala Dragonheart: A New Beginning.
July 13, 2002, 7:24 a.m. CST
by Bald Evil
I thoroughly enjoyed 'Reign of Fire'. It's unquestionably the best dragon movie I've ever seen, and while I wouldn't rank it among the best movies I've ever seen, it's a lot of fun. Until now 'Dragonslayer' has been the benchmark for dragon flicks, and 'RoF' toppled that. While 'Dragonslayer' had a fantastic dragon, it had a lot of downsides to it, as well... unfortunately, in this case it's more a matter of every dragon movie since then sucking rather than competing to dethrone it. 'Reign of Fire' triumphed by being a good movie, not just a good dragon movie. You could replace the dragons with aliens, dinosaurs, atomic vampires from Brazil, and it would still be a fun ride. But the dragons were great. I don't need every question answered and every loose end sewn up to enjoy a movie. How did a single male dragon repopulate the species? Don't know, don't care. Maybe the "male" dragons are hermaphroditic and are actually capable of self-fertilization (like some animals are when no females are present) as well as cross-fertilization. I didn't go to the movie to listen to a lecture in draco-biology, I wanted to see some dragons burning shit up and heroes fighting them. On reflection, my favourite scene in the movie wasn't even an action scene; it was the scene where Quinn and Cready were performing their version of "ESB" for the kids. That whole sequence captured a key element of humanity: we want to tell stories, and we want to believe them. Stories are the past, present, and future. More than the rest of the movie, more than any other "apocalypse" film, this scene captured the indomitability of Man. Burn it all down, and if anyone survives, we will remember and rebuild. Great scene. Harry gets a lot of shit for his reviews, but I'll say this much: almost every movie Harry likes, I enjoy as well. So I for one am glad that someone out there A) has such similar taste in movies as me and B) has a forum to give me a heads-up for movies I will probably like. Just because people don't agree with Harry doesn't mean he's wrong. The people who enjoy the same movies Harry does are damn glad this site is here!
July 13, 2002, 11:46 a.m. CST
by Banky the Hack
Okay, can someone respond to these? *SPOILERS* - The dragons seemingly preferred to burn people rather than eat them, yet the dragons were supposed to be starving? And I know that at one point a character said that "They live off of ash" or something...but that is a load of shite. Ash is nothing but carbon with a little phosphorous and other high vaporizing elements in it. How is a dragon supposed to live off of ash? And even if the ash thing is a metaphor, and the character meant that they live for destruction, why would they prefer to char people rather than eat them if they're starving? - Okay, so there's ONE male and hundreds or thousands of females. This one male was the one who hibernated in the void in the beginning. So, where did the females come from to repopulate the species? At least Jurassic Park had that bit about the sex changing dinos based on populationg dynamics. Quite possibly the biggest unbelivable plot device in history. - Where were they getting the fuel to fly that chopper? And how did they get their tanks and such across the ocean? I thought he said something about a cargo plane, but those would need refueling about halfway across the Atlantic, and I don't see how that happened. All in all, this movie was somewhat entertaining, but despite my ability to normally suspend disbelief, the plot from this movie simply would not let me. Booo.
July 13, 2002, 5:37 p.m. CST
and enjoyed it but was somewhat disappointed. Was hoping for Aliens and got Alien Resurrection if ya know what I mean. I think only a true geek will enjoy this film. In other words, you can leave the girlfriend/wife at home. I stuck around until the end of the credits to applaud The Secret Lab. :)
July 13, 2002, 11:11 p.m. CST
It makes "Dragonheart" look like shit now, but "Dragonheart" although had a dragon throughout the whole movie, here we have only glimpses, or short yet exciting action sequences of them in flight, burning people, and eating people. It's a good film because you're never bored, or growing tiresome of character developing, or introducing, or too much talking and dialouge. You're more treated to guys trying to survive the best they can. WARNING TO THOSE: I was a little disappointed to see that there's only three people that are snatched up and eaten, but the rest are burnt alive. I wanted more what "Jurassic Park" did. I want more of beast-munching, human-digesting creatures. The ending is also sad because someone important gets eaten and so does Quinn's friend, but as I said "They're all trying to pull through and survive the best they can." The helicopter scene is cool to watch, along with the beginning scene, and the ending one. This movie will be HOT at the box-office and it'll torch the competition. Because "Halloween: Resurrection" even though with Busta Rhymes, Tyra Banks, and Jamie Lee Curtis is still the same remade, redone version of the last and will suck, "Crocodile Hunter" should've stuck to television, and "Road to Perdition" is a good movie, but one you wait to see when the summer movies die down. Expect "REIGN OF FIRE" at #1 tomorrow!
July 14, 2002, 12:03 a.m. CST
ok...couple of things. I saw the flick tonight and it was fun. You idiots claiming the special effects sucked, you no not of what you speak and are whiney spoiled brats.If the effects were bad...then Super Mario is cutting edge. Also, plot hole people....get a clue. 1. "dragons can't eat ash" Who says? They are mythical creatures that , excuse me, have glads that mixed fluids for fire. THAT is impossible folks. Also, they DID eat people in the movie. if you paid attention, who would have noticed. 2. "How did they get gas for the chopper?" Same place they got the chopper and the plane they used to fly to England and where they got the freakin tanks. They did not say, but is it not reasonable there was an underground hanger or something they got into after doomsday? I hate plot holes too, but these were not as glaring as some i have seen in "Classic" flicks. It was a fun movie that actually had me shrinking back in my seat to avoid the flames.
July 14, 2002, 12:25 a.m. CST
by Spelunker Gregg
...Harry's reviews mean FUCK-ALL for me. C'mon...he boasts this grand, encyclopedia-type knowledge of film (one of god-knows-how-many-things he absolutely "loves"), and yet the pudgey bastard doesn't even know who the hell "The Secret Lab" is! FOR FUCK'S SAKES! And yeah...I have kinda' noticed that everything Harry reviews starts off with "Y'know...I absolutely love _____ ! I grew up with it! I have a _______ on my bookshelf, and a ______ on my TV set as well as _______ bed sheets that I still sleep in! So when I heard that ________ was being made into a movie I was a little nervous..." Know what makes me nervous? Harry's utter hatred of Dragonheart, which stands on it's own simply in terms of technical film making, and that vile piece of afterbirth, Dungeon's & Dragons. Yeah folks, don't listen to Harry.
July 14, 2002, 12:31 a.m. CST
by Banky the Hack
I did not say that the dragons did not eat people, I simply noted that they seemed to prefer to burn them, and please feel free to explain the single male dragon principle to me as well....thanks professor.
July 14, 2002, 3:02 a.m. CST
"This scene does not appear in the movie." The poster shows an elaborate aerial battle between helocopter gunships & dragons as London burns below. You might think it's a great climax that they wisely kept out of the advertisements, but it never appears in the movie. Instead, we are meant to believe that all of the world's military & scientific minds couldn't figure out a way to kill any dragons, or bother to study anything about their bioligy. just these guys with little-to-no resources who figure everything out and save the world with handheld weapons. Also, if civilization had collapsed already, how did "Time" magazine manage to publish a special retrospective issue chronicaling the sequence of events that led to said collapse and distribute it around the world after the fact? I would've found it more believable for a civilization to pull a last minute win to prevent their world from being destroyed completely (a la the ludicrous ending of Independence Day) instead of 3 guys with low-tech weapons defeating the most powerful creature on the planet after the civilation has already been decimated. Also, i don't think th line "How did they go from one to a million in a year?" from all the trailers was even in the movie. Things like that bug me.
July 14, 2002, 8 a.m. CST
I think I had more fun watching this than Minority Report. At least this movie didnt take itself too seriously. Banky the Hack: You are reaching a bit too hard for your plot holes. 1)Ash hole. Its a metaphor. 2) Burning first before eating? I like my food slightly well done. Im sure dragons do too. 3) One male. Probably had eggs laying around in his cave and he fertilized them. 4) where did they get the fuel? Have you ever seen anyone get gas in a movie? 5)Tanks across ocean. I dont believe a cargo plan would have to refuel. Who said they came from america with the tanks? Germany has one of the largest US military bases in the world. BTW, these are omissions not plot holes. I dont think one would need to explain where some gas came from in a GD dragon movie. It requires a little bit of suspension of belief. BTW, compare this to a another sci/fi fantasy movie like Minority Report which establishes rules like red ball/brown ball and eye scanners everywhere but then completly ignores those established rules when the plot requires.
July 14, 2002, 12:23 p.m. CST
When you're watching a movie about Dragons that destroyed the planet to sit there and wonder about things like where they find fuel for a helicopter or how the Dragons decimated the planet in the first place. Given that you're watching DRAGONS, you've had to suspend disbelief before even walking into the theater. I never personally wondered about the fuel issue (I assumed it was stored in one of the trucks in the convoy - which seemed a little big to have fit in any kind of military cargo plane - wink wink). Same with the Dragons eating ash... who knows they can't eat it - they don't exist. I enjoyed the flick. Sure I'd have loved to have seen Dragons and apaches duking it out over London (ala the poster), but that wasn't this type of movie. Clearly the poster is misleading and shouldn't have been there... just the Dragons flying over a decimated London would have looked good and been truthful. This movie was about the few survivors left trying to stay alive and finally having to face their demon. On a budgetary scale... much more would have cost a fortune more than the producers/studio would have wanted to spend. Recall that most people praise Jaws for the fact that you rarely see the shark and thus the danger factor is hyped up and you are scared when you do see the shark. In this movie, just to hear that falcon go nuts means danger and when the Dragons appear... they are pretty amazing. (Of course, Spielberg didn't show the shark because the dang thing didn't work, but filmakers that followed learned that less is often more).
July 14, 2002, 12:26 p.m. CST
boxofficemojo.com is reporting that MIB II will maintain it's top spot at the box office, with Road to Perdition 2nd and RoF in third place. Totals are $30M for MIB, $21M for RTP, and $16M for RoF. This is just an estimate based on Friday's box office. Further estimates will be out later today.
July 14, 2002, 1:11 p.m. CST
I'm surprised no one has mentioned the most outrageous special effects of this film - McConnahy's fake tricepts. Note the curvy tatoo on each arm that hides the seam very well. But watch for the latex to 'scrunch' at one point and reveal what it truly is. Bulking up is one thing, 24" wrestler arms is hilarious. But I guess it fit the character.
July 14, 2002, 1:18 p.m. CST
by Banky the Hack
I might add, Fluffygreycat, that often times deer are not on the hunt for human flesh as the dragons in this movie were....at least the non-zombie deer aren't. In fact, many non-zombie man-flesh-eating deer are exceptionally timid, and tend to avoid people, so maybe that's why you haven't seen any deer. Or you've got those whistle things on your head... In any case, this movie didn't work for me, but if you get your rocks off on it, more power to you. It was far from the best fantasy movie though, and was only fairly passable as summer movie fare, in my opinion.
July 14, 2002, 2:49 p.m. CST
I guess I know what the problem is. RoF is a dragon movie for grownups, which probably is a contradiction in terms but there it is. There is very little golly, gee whiz, stuff in this one, unless you have an esthetic appreciation of monsters capable of destroying human civilization as we, or anyone else, know it. This is a straight-forward apocalyptic vision like a lot of those old movies us old-timers used to see in the theatres as serials, except this one has some really true characterizations of how people under great stress react to that stress, how they attempt to cope with dangers far beyond their capability to handle, and how they try to keep things going when everything around them is falling apart. I liked it and I have a credential a lot of the other posters here don't. I actually have seen the movie. Yeah, really. What a concept. As to the movie, the concept is pretty clear. Dragons exist. They have destroyed modern civilization, and driven mankind back into a medieval setting. I gather from the evidence presented that this defeat resulted more from the time it took for western leaders to realize what it was that they were facing, and the inexplicably large numbers of dragons confronting them. If there is a weak link in the story it is that, and the writers do try to sluff over it by claiming dragons reproduce like fish, with one male dragon fertilizing huge numbers of eggs. Hmmmm... Where those huge numbers of eggs might come from is left open to question, unless there were lots and lots of dragons left trapped underground after the last cycle of burning (supposedly this takes place every ten thousand years or so) but that is never made clear. In fact, there is very little presented about the dragons lifestyle, other than the fact that they need ash to survive (the reason for the burning) and that they blow up real good. Since you have to be real close to blow them up, however, not too many people get to see that. The movie is basically about the two conflicting theories about how best to survive. The Americans want to take the fight to the dragons and hopefully end their species for all time. The Brits think it possible to hunker down and hang on until the dragons are all gone. It should be mentioned that when the dragon manages a sneak attack on the stronghold of the survivors (these beasties may not be able to count, but they are pretty smart--possibly smarter than orcas), the mechanisms put into place to protect the humans actually work, suggesting that there might be some chance of success for the "wait 'em out" folks. However, the fact that their location has been found also suggests that they will have more dragons nosing around in the future, dooming their prospects. The CGI effects were, IMHO, outstanding. My wife, no fan of dragons or fantasy or special effects (she actually nodded out during the Fellowship!) couldn't stop talking about how real the damn thing looked. The dragons looked as real as the people, which is no small accomplishment. And the characters ring true as well. When the hero's surrogate son decides to join the American strike team, they have a confrontation over it. Most films would have the kid go with the Yanks, get his ass roasted and be the motivation for the hero to get on his horse and kick some dragon butt. Instead, the kid thinks it over and stays with the guy he has learned to trust all his life. It struck me like a scene in a horror movie where one character says "lets split up and search for whatever" and another says "are you crazy or what?" The Hollywood movie convention gave way to something most of us can recognise as real character development. One last comment. Something was made of the end of one of the main characters in the final battle. I was waiting for it, having been made aware of what was to happen in the spoiler review, and it did happen like the reviewer said. However, what was left out was that the dragon would most likely have done him in anyway, and he was trying to buy a few more seconds for his allies. There was no way he could escape once the dragon had focused on him, a point demonstrated clearly in the first fifteen minutes of the movie when a fleeing victim is plucked whole from surrounding smoke and flames by the winged predator. I've told my friends to see this movie if they are willing to watch and listen and pay attention. If they are looking for D&D vs Star Wars they should go elsewhere. So, I'm no reviewer but I know what I like, and this is one of the few movies I've gone to since Fellowship that I haven't left feeling I've wasted my money.
July 14, 2002, 4:22 p.m. CST
by Shabba McDoo
Because the Reign of Fire I went to see today kinda' sucked. Weak plot, stale characters, misplaced dramatic close-ups, run-of-the-mill special effects and pretty boring dialogue...that's the movie I saw today.
July 14, 2002, 7:58 p.m. CST
About Reign of Fire: what a huge rip off. How stupid is this: 1. Supposedly there are millions of these starving dragons around, forcing the remnents of humanity to hide in burned out stone buildings yet the 'heros' show up with flying a helicopter seemingly utterly invulnerable to the dradons. Where are they getting the fuel, the parts and doing the maintenance for this thing? And how do they use it? When they detect a dragon nearby the helicopter lures the dragon near and then three idiots jump out and then lure the dragon to the first one while the other two shoot chain link fence on the dragon's wings - all this done in freefall, of course - all in the hope the dragon is going to fall out of the air? The whole thing backfires because they do the maneuver in the the clouds and supposedly the cloud cover is so thick the the idioits jumping out of the helicopter can't see the ground and the lead character face plants straight into the rock. And the dragon simply throws off the fence on it's wings so there really was no point to the whole maneuver. This was made even more ridiculous when the the charactyer on the ground simply shoots the dragon out of the air anyway. 2. Supposedly, "just like fish", all the dragons are female, except the male who flies around fertilizing the eggs the females ploop out. The male was the dragon found originally in the cave. Big unanswered question: so where did all the females come from? And they never answer how the dragons went from 1 to a million in just a year, like mentioned in the trailer. 3. The dragon-killers, who have supposedly been on the road killing dragons for years, from which one would hope they actually developed an effective strategy or two, eventually decide to attack the male dragon and end the problem once and for all. They approach where the male dragon lives, stand in a nice tight group, and the dragon flies over and in one 3 second pass incinerates every single dragon fighter but one. How did these idiots ever live through their first encounter with a dragon in the first place? 4. The dragon is offended by the attack and, almost like a cliche Indian scout, tracks the tire marks? back to the remote building the dragonkillers came from and wipes it out. Maybe it has a really developed sense of smell to compensate for it obviously not being able to hear because the helicopter certainly seemed to fly around without any problem. 5. The final showdown and, just like Jaws, three reluctant heros must face the lone beast. Where are the hundreds of other dragons we see sitting on London rooftops like gargoyles (and like we see in the trailer)? Who knows. Although they are starving and reduced to feeding on each other as soon as three succulant humans show up the females 'fly the coop' for some inknown reason. 6. Supposedly the earth is covered with millions of these things. So they kill the one big male. That still leaves millions of dragons. But the movies ends with all the dragons being dead, without any explanation. The male's death couldn't have had anything to do with it because the dragons were already without food so he wasn't really that necessary anymore because it's not as if he would still be fertilizing eggs. Is it because in a matter of the months between when they killed the male and the last scene all the dragons died from starvation? Well, what was the point of the movie, then? Presumably after all the females had starved the male would have gone into hibernation again and the humans would have reclaimed the earth without even lifting a finger. What did their deaths really accomplish? Rubbish. Reign of Fire is like the X-Files has been the last few seasons. One ridiculous act of illogical behavior after another, with attempts of half-explanation and just plain "fuck the audience and just say anything that comes to mind because we already have their money" attitude in between. I'm surprised more people aren't insulted by the blatently evil advertising campaign the studio schemed up for Reign of Fire. The poster is a complete misrepresentation of the what is includxed in the film. And the trailer's juciest line "How did they go from 1 to a million in just a year" is not only not answered in the movie it's not even included. No other industry on the planet could get away with this crap. Something tells me that the scam artists behind this movie used it as excuse to secretly divert a huge amount of money into their personal bank accounts. What little money they didn't steal for themselves they used to 'buy' great reviews from scumbags like Harry.
July 14, 2002, 9:30 p.m. CST
I'm at a loss as to how to explain the fact that you didn't understand how the dragons went from one to a million. It's clearly explained in a voice-over early on in the movie: they were ALL hibernating, not just the male. That's their lifecycle; wake, feed till there's nothing left, hibernate while the earth replennishes itself. And that's also the explanation for the absence of dragons at the end of the film. All the way through, Quinn is saying that the dragons are beginning to starve, that they (his community) only have to last a little longer, and then the dragons will go back to sleep and they can start to rebuild. So, you're right in your assertion that killing the male dragon wouldn't solve the current crisis, but it will ensure the eventual extinction of dragonkind.
July 14, 2002, 10:07 p.m. CST
Your explanation MAY be correct but I don't recall the story going exactly that way. There seemed to be more suggestion that one - the male - was discovered and, as the babe says in the trailer, they had no idea how they went from 1 to a million in a year. She wouldn't have asked that question if suddenly a million came out of the ground. And if that WAS the case, the whole issue of the one male fertilizing all the eggs was sort of a moot point because earth has an infestation of millions of dragons with or without the male. And regardless of where they came from, and a little more exposition whould certainly be welcome, nothing can explain the helicopter, the faceplant into the ground, the 'let's all hold hands while we fight the nasty dragon' scene the male following the tracks...or the deceptive marketing. I state again: no other industry could get away with this fraud.
July 14, 2002, 10:27 p.m. CST
OK I know that screen writers are not necessarily very smart. Nor directors for that matter. But; a. Van Zam drives around in the open oblivious to dragons. b. suicide skydivers??? C. HOW COME HE'S THE BEST THE GOV. CAN SN
July 14, 2002, 10:41 p.m. CST
OK I wasn't done. The computer sometimes acts before I am ready. I was saying. how come Van Zam is the best effort of the gov.? (it was the gov., as they still had a C5,which apparently had no concern about the dragons when flying to Britain. Why bring armor to Britain, surely they had a few vehicles left?? d. How does he find Quinn? When the dragon is shot down and they celebrate, why the searchlights and fires, they 'want' to attract dragons right? e. How do they know the male dragon is in London? f. After the male dragon burns the column he goes after the castle. How does he know where it is? There is so much more but lets just cut to the end. The male is dead and 'a few months later' all the females are dead?? What are they fucking butterflies? They eat ash, right? And there was like zillions of tons of the stuff in the world for them to eat and more to make if needed. Enough. This was so sickeningly bad in conception and finish. PLEASE have a movie with good logic, continuity and story, no matter how odd the premise, and it just might be a nice change in movie making.
July 15, 2002, 1:47 a.m. CST
by Spelunker Gregg
Okay...good call on the Ash thing, because I thought that too. "Look at all the ash around?! These things are starving?!" So my answer is this: The Dragons needed ORGANIC Ash. I know it sounds absurd, but it makes sense. Why? Because the Dragon eats only the ash from the burned-out crops & gardens. Yeah they'll eat live people when they're hungry enough...but they prefer them reduced to ash. Why? Fuck, man, who knows. It was a movie. Just my two cents on the whole edible-ash debate.
July 15, 2002, 1:50 a.m. CST
I dunno, this sucked pretty bad. It had no color for one thing. For another thing, it had one dragon...sure it was duplicated through the wonders of CGI and one was bigger than the rest, but they were nifty images, not dragons. They had no personality or individuality! The whole film's pretty much a testosterone/leadership competition between Christian and Matthew, and the story goes nowhere, really. LOUSY dialogue, thank God we can't hear half of it due to the noise and frenetic racket going on constantly in the few and far between action scenes. It was like watching the beginning of Independence Day up to where the saucers arrive, but then cutting to a Hollywood set of misty smoky scorched Earth overrun by aliens (who we hardly ever see). This would probably be a really cool double feature with Tri-Star's "Godzilla". --Murph
July 15, 2002, 5:16 a.m. CST
seriously, I could barely keep my eyelids open for the occasional dragon here, dragon there, where is PETE THE MAGIC DRAGON when we need him? The movie reminded me of THE POSTMAN where everyone was so dirty, dingy and dank! But with Dragons....They were weak!! The reviews on here were very misleading!
July 15, 2002, 7:44 a.m. CST
harry you should've been a poet, not movie reviewer, because lately you jest sucks . i don't understand it, you sounds like a very smart guy, and know about movie very much. but your last reviews ( starwars, blade 2, reign o'fire ) sounds like you were having orgasm out of your own imagination. or maybe you need more access from the big guys ? i think you have somekind of strategy goin' on or something. but please, don't sell yourself too cheap. we love you, we are here because we trust you. WE TRUST YOU, MAN ! we want a credible, sincere and fun reviewer that you were once, not a marketing guy from hollywood movie industry. there are already too many of them.we don't need them guys.
July 15, 2002, 12:58 p.m. CST
You loved armegeddon and godzilla and now you think Reign of Fire is great. Do you even know what a good movie is?
July 15, 2002, 2:13 p.m. CST
I have to agree with you...this is the best Dragon movie I have ever seen.... I've watched (and loved) DragonSlayer since I was a little girl...and I was delighted to see Reign of Fire.... I think you have to be a real big Fantasy/Dragon fan to appreciate the movie.... But it really moved me..... (and I enjoyed the hot males as well....Matthew...Christin....OW....dragonfirehotness)
July 15, 2002, 2:30 p.m. CST
There's a big diff. between 'plot holes' and playing fast and loose with the establishment of the a film universe's 'rules' None of the main points being touched on were inconsistent at all. (the gas, the ash, the trans atlantic flight, the breeding not only cAN be but either ARE explained or alluded to appropriately) I just read in a previous post the only thing that kinda took me out of the moment.. it was that damn Time Mag! Granted it can be explained if you really want to... but I couldn't help but think - Eden is burning and those mf'ers at Time still have to go to work!?! That sux. Personally - I thought that ROF was worth the price of admission for the Male Dragon vs. The Rag-Tag Armored Column scene ALONE. A-mazing work... absolutely stunning.
July 15, 2002, 2:53 p.m. CST
excited about films. I think in his excitement he gets his perception all confused and disoriented, is there a film besides Scooby Doo and Minority Report that he doesn't like? The guy goes overboard on everything. He gets me all fucked up in the process, it all started with Blow, which by all my accounts blew. Then there was the review he wrote on Sum of All Fears, Jesus was I dissapointed. Now comes Reign of Fire. What a mess, I mean the dragons looked really good, but, there is only so many times you can see them flying around blowing fire all over the place. There were way too many plot holes and contrivances to forgive and nothing was worse than sitting through all those dreary scenes with those depressed british Alien 3 rejects. I like Christian Bale and Matthew Mcaughnahy, but man they both should of lightened up a little, one was way too serious the other was way too, ummm, scary. I think that it would of been better to focus on the beginnings of these things, how they destroyed the cities, end on a big low. Then have a sequel (which by certain accounts seems impossible) with an Aliens premise. forget all this postman community shite. Or just use the dragons and make a really cool medieval flick. Anyway this film was a real let down.
July 15, 2002, 3:59 p.m. CST
by daughter of time
You summed up everything so beautiful, there is hardly anything left to add. This is a movie for grown-ups about how a remnant of surviving humans behave when their civilization is destroyed, and about contrasting styles of leadership. It is not a movie about dragon battles any more than "Das Boot" is a movie about submarine battles. My friends and I found it consistently engrossing as a look at humans under severe stress in a fantasy scenario. We cared about the people, and appreciated that their actions (for example, the decision you mentioned) were not derived from action-movie cliches. If anyone's idea of a "quality" movie is one with maximum explosions and body-count, then by all means stay away from this one. A Disney movie it is not - for all the right reasons.
July 15, 2002, 5:16 p.m. CST
This prevailing opinion that this film is about more than dragons is ridiculous. You are stretching to find some kind of depth in a very thin story. If this film was about the trials and tribulations of being probably the only survivors of an apocalyptic event and trying to keep the human race from becoming extinct it would not be rated PG 13 thats for sure. There could of been more creative scenarios that these characters could be put into that made you care for their survival. Really, how can anyone think that these were richly drawn out characters with anything remotely interesting to say or do.
July 15, 2002, 5:19 p.m. CST
Only 2 dragons died. They didn't shoot any missiles from jets, or shoot any tank guns.. No grenaides, no RPGs, nothing.. It was so goddamn BORING and NO ACTION. The story was even dull. It was all arguing and no action. How could you even compare this to Dragonslayer? There is no way in hell anyone could watch this flick twice over. They had maybe 20 people in the movie. Where were all the huge battles with tanks blowing dragons up, etc.. It wasn't there. It was just dull and stupid. Yeah, two guys jump out of a helicopter to their death and minutes later dumb_kid_05 is saying "I WANNA BE AN ARCHANGEL!!!" yeah okay.. Sure. Whatever. And the species depending on ONE male dragon? Gimme a break! How dumb of a plot can you get? This movie is a renter, and should have gone direct to video. Harry, I respect a lot of your reviews, but this movie was a pile of sh*t and you know it.
July 15, 2002, 5:52 p.m. CST
Ok, dragon/s appeared in London, I can believe. How did they fly clear across the Atlantic ocean before America could garner a defense? Anyone heard of carrier groups, F-14's, F-18's, Apache's, Cobra's, etc... Hell, anti-aircraft guns would take these beasties out at range. That's what this movie should have been about, America taking back Europe from the dragons. Anyway, on another point, didn't the black guy that was an archangel live? He would have been in the helicopter when the male torched the column. Why was he not in the final showdown???
July 15, 2002, 6:24 p.m. CST
prince_fufu brings up a good point - what happened to the black guy - but almost nothing about this insulting mess makes sense so trying to find an explanation to a minor detail like a character's sudden disappearance is like trying to find muscle in McConaghey's latex bicepts. The posters here who talk about it having a deeper meaning or there being something magical about the dragons surely must feel light-headed after taking a shit.
July 15, 2002, 10:51 p.m. CST
It had kind of a cool Road Warrior-ish setting and Christian and Matthew were very good, but the action scenes were just......not cool. I know that I shouldn't be comparing the movie to Road Warrior but for some reason I feel it brought it on itself. That opening with the shots of newspapers and TIME magazine and the cowering communities in a fortress just force me to make the comparison. So to the people who have yet to see the movie, I guess my point is this: IF YOU HAVEN'T SEEN ROAD TO PERDITION, MINORITY REPORT OR INSOMNIA, GO NOW! REIGN OF FIRE CAN DEFINITELY WAIT. IN FACT, RENT ROAD WARRIOR (MAD MAX 2) INSTEAD.
July 15, 2002, 10:54 p.m. CST
July 16, 2002, 1:59 a.m. CST
but this movie blew. I walked in not knowing much about the film. I like the whole dragon genre and I don't know if any previous talkbackers have mentioned this but.... Am I losing it or did Quinn and his mom release 1 male dragon only. Didn't they say later in the movie that 1 male dragon was splewing over female dragon eggs. Where the fuck did a female dragon come from or did I take a piss during that part. Someone please correct me if I'm wrong. And as previous talkbackers have said before. What the fuck happened to that black guy? He just disappeared as well as that other guy that was hurt when the column got destroyed or did that guy die, who knows? The dragons were cool but the rest was a bore. Thank god there is no sequel potential. I was praying that no Godzilla type endind was coming up. This movie would have been so sweet if they showed the battle between all of those dragons and the military. The dragons seemed pretty vulnerable. They should've not been so dominant. I mean for korns sake. Also what the fuck was that kamikaze shit that MC did at the end. Stupid. I was pissed when he didn't show up again. I was hoping he would show up out of nowhere and kick some ass. Bales accent was so thick that it sounding like he had marbles in his mouth and the guy needed a fucking shave.
July 16, 2002, 4:41 a.m. CST
Watching this movie reminded me of a blue balling cheerleader. My pulse steadily rose as the encounters, dragon and otherwise, became more frequent and high fevered. I drooled at the scene of the convoy's destruction, and the dragon's revenge. As I watched, I realized that I was gripping the edge of my seat in anticipation of an apocalyptic battle between the nigh invincible dragon and the humans with nothing left to lose. But...within mere minutes, the male dragon was dead and the heroes lamely dropped off a few lines that basically said, "We saved the world and everything wrong is now right." The story was wrapped up so quickly that I first thought the end credits were another narrative. It was as if the film makers were personally slowly teasing my passions to heights that only the best woman can do, and then metamorphosed to the impatiently rapid petting of a first time girl who wants nothing better than to leave the room (or the silver screen in this case).
July 17, 2002, 12:04 a.m. CST
Any one else notice Bale's Quinn looks too damn much like George Lutz of Amityville Horror?
July 17, 2002, 11:29 a.m. CST
Saw this last night. Cool movie up until the last half hour. Seems like the writers kept digging themselves in deeper and deeper. They setup this whole backdrop for the story and developed the characters, only to find they had 1/2 hour to resolve the film. So, they basically throw out all the logic and realism and offer up a quick tidy ending. Blehhhhh. If they had to end it that way. It would have been better if they made Mathew and his group stealth hunters. I mean It would make more sense. Come on, them rolling into London with 2 tanks, assult vehicle and a helicopter, WTF. If that @#%$ would of worked the dragons wouldn't have wiped out the earth in the first place. On a more positive note Mathew was prob the coolest character in that type of movie since Van Diesel in Pitch Black.
July 17, 2002, 8:29 p.m. CST
I went into the movie today expecting dragons and humanity's struggles against them. No more, no less. --------->What I got was a dark, brooding, and demoralizing tale about two groups of humans trying to deal with the dominance of this ancient creature. One is trying to survive based on digging holes in the ground, and the other is there to live by killing the bastard dragons or to die by trying. ========I loved it!=======Bring me the DVD now! Rob Bowman rules as a director. He did Star Trek TNG, X-Files, and took them to new heights.--------------->All you overanalyzers need to vent your frustration out somewhere else. All I am reading from you people is "I don't get it...How did the dragons spawn to increase their population...why does McConaughey look fake...blah...blah...blah...." Give up. You didn't like it. Game over. Too bad. Move on to the next movie you are going to overanalyze and make me laugh by letting me read your pathetic posts. You should _______-------KNEEL-------_______ before Z0D
July 17, 2002, 9 p.m. CST
and I'm no talking about any of that Harry Potter shit. I'd much rather have seen an apocylptic(I know thats spelled wrong)vision of Griffins ruling the earth, instead of Dragons. Althoug I did enjoy Reign of Fire(the FX kicked ass) The whole dragon movie thing has gotten worn down, especially by fuck ups like D&D.
July 17, 2002, 11:13 p.m. CST
Confess, you gotta be Bowman's bum chum to say he's taken anything "to new heights" except your ass.
July 18, 2002, 1:52 p.m. CST
Can you imagine The Secret Lab and Stan Winston teaming up on a 'Griffen Flick'? Just the thought of a cgi rendered Griffen a'la the Male Dragon in ROF or the Raptors in Jpark makes me want to let out a yelp of glee. Speaking of which, has anyone else caught the newest Spy Kids 2 trailer? Verrrry Harryhausen.
July 18, 2002, 4:19 p.m. CST
Anyone who bothered paying attention would have heard that the male in London was not the only dragon left hibernating. There were plenty of females underground, with plenty of eggs to be fertilized. Once the male was released you get millions. And the thing about beating america after flying across the atlantic, the male didn't immediately fry london. As soon as the male was released, it took about a month before anyone realized what was wrong. They didn't believe it a first. Without photos and just news reports, would you? The single male was busy flying around releasing the others, and in the process frying villages and starting a media frenzy that would eventually lead to the discovery of a new species, right before it all blew up in their faces. People were more interested in the science than stopping them. Think of it this way, their cockroaches. Anyone who has a roach problem knows that killing a few or more doesn't stop them from coming back out. In order to destroy all of them in your house, you need to destroy the house itself. Thus, the nukes come in. And even after your house(or in this case your country) is destroyed, theirs still some stray roaches left over. In the movies case, the dragons survived, and mankind lived on the brink of extinction, and that brings you up to date on the whole film. Those who have taken biology should know that apes travel in social groups with one male, and the rest female. Much like the dragons in the film, theirs one male, until one of the eggs hatches female. its all about genes here people, once you understand that, you understand the movie, and you don't spend your time on this site bitching and complaining. You got to listen to the beginning of RoF to understand what goes on. These creatures didn't just live underground all their lives. They roasted the dinosaurs, and when it was all over and there was no more ash to feed on,they went into hibernation. I'll admit, their are a few mistakes, but hey, have you seen any fucking film without them? Every film has at least one mistake in it. Those that pay attention, get it. And if you didn't understand a fucking word I just said, then go back to school boys and girls, and get a real education instead of spending your time bitching over a movie!
July 18, 2002, 5:31 p.m. CST
I shudder every time I hear the line "this is the movie we've all been waiting for" because it's margin of error is so great. I've already forgotten AOTC and Spiderman... my obsession as of late is over Lilo & Stitch (brilliant). What I am thankful for is some very careful lines that Harry mentioned in regards to the movie... to watch Quinn's reactions in the two prayers, amongst others. I went in expecting a survival movie... a sort of "Anne Frank's Diary" remake. And it paid off, I went in with the right attitude and was well pleased. I loved Van Zam, fantastic insane military punk... Matthew amazed me... and dang! he's buff! And, gotta say it: the "one sweep" looked absolutely beautiful with the tracer fire glittering the sky and the dragon doing what dragons do best. Beautiful, beautiful, beautiful. The "get em at dusk" thing didn't quite pan out, huh? But I can forgive the inconsistancies. I liked the film, I was in the right mood for it and I recommend it to anyone who's feeling a little jaded about life and wanting to see some destruction. (My girlfriend liked it too and it was the start of a really good night). Thanks again - Bubcus the satisfied
July 18, 2002, 7:10 p.m. CST
I loved this film for what they did but this could have been BIG like ID4 if they had shown some of dragon takeover (the fx were very good) or at least shown in a flashback. The poster made it look like that was going to be seen in the film. A prequel could do that but I don't think enough money will be made on this one for anyone to try it. They forgot the main point of this idea, and went to the aftermath.
July 21, 2002, 4:15 a.m. CST
Harry's just explaining his point of view so that you, the reader, understands where he's coming from. If you're not coming from the same p.o.v., you can take his review at a grain of salt. I've been reading AICN for probably about 4-5 years and it hasn't changed that much or "become sad". It hasn't become something worse than it was before. Perhaps it's just your perspective has changed. All anyone's review is is their opinion and I appreciate when someone explains to me WHY they like something or WHY they don't because of their p.o.v. If the stuff they don't like doesn't bother me, I can brush off the review as simply not coming from the same standpoint as me. I saw the movie today and I just read Harry's review and I agree with just about everything he said. To each his own, man. I don't know what people who bash the movie were looking for, but it seems to me people are just not looking for a good time at the movies very much anymore. They're looking FOR something that's rarely attainable (whatever it may be - High Art maybe) and are invariably disappointed most of the time 'cause they don't find it. I agree with zengamer because I was TOTALLY into this film and my friend also wasn't looking forward to it that much and ended up really liking it. Well, you can choose to sit there from your higher point and look down on Harry and those like him and just shake your head about "how sad" he is or the site has become because they enjoy things that you can't seem to muster up any joy or wonder for. Never got why people seem to pity those who get more enjoyment out of life. I suppose its a form of jealousy. I don't know why else you'd bash someone for getting enjoyment out of something that you didn't. This is not just for you. Your response is the just the one that prompted me to write. It goes for most of the people on this board because they regularly have anything good to say about anything. They bash everything and only seem to get enjoyment at how witty or intelligent they think they are because THEY can see how much crap everything is. THAT is what I find sad.
July 21, 2002, 1:06 p.m. CST
The single male dragon thing is like certain fish. Many fish do not couple like mammals do. The females have the eggs (sometimes tons of them) and then the male comes and fertilizes them after the female has laid them. So, they're outside her body when it fertilizes them. That's the theory behind the one male dragon in the movie.
July 21, 2002, 10:29 p.m. CST
I got roped into this one today.. but I said. Heck o.k. Guess what, I was not disappointed. The movie is never hammy, Matthew and Christian were really solid, and it seemed real. Very cool. The movie was not tring to be a firecracker. It was thought out and the leads were done nicely. Very cool. I liked it a lot.
July 21, 2002, 10:32 p.m. CST
I got roped into this one today.. but I said. Heck o.k. Guess what, I was not disappointed. The movie is never hammy, Matthew and Christian were really solid, and it seemed real. Very cool. The movie was not tring to be a firecracker. It was thought out and the leads were done nicely. Very cool. I liked it a lot.
July 23, 2002, 4:08 a.m. CST
this movie, i thought, really was pretty decent--definitly enjoyable for pure entertainment value, and suprisingly also kinda emotionally involving as well...there was only ONE thing i really hated about it, and its nit picking, but this kinda thing really bothers me: the song at the end when the credits role--it was so inappropriate for how the movie leaves you feeling at the end, and actually for the whole tone of the movie in general--i felt like i had just finished watching Spiderman!!! I really believe that the first song of the credits should be something that not only doesnt distract you from how the movie leaves you feeling at the end, but actually enhances it and makes it resonate even more...my perfect shining example is American Beauty--that a cappella version of Because just seals in the haunted reflectiveness the viewer goes through after the end--its 1oo% satisfying and just right for the mood...in other words, the antithesis of Reign's closing song...but like i said, it WAS a good flick and this is just nit picking, so go see it, even if the song does suck.
July 26, 2002, 7:07 p.m. CST
Well, I'm late getting in on this...just saw the film and have to back Harry on the piece in general. With so many summer 'blockbuster' type films that supress character and plot in favor of CG masturbation and product placement, the formula for this picture is extremely refreshing. (Which is not to suggest that it is anything other than formulaic.) Excellent work by Bale; astonishing work by McCounnaghey (You really can't overact in a film like this), a nice mesh between special effects and plot development...lean, mean physical script and just the right touch with dialog that could easily have missed the mark. I'm putting Reign of Fire on my suprise hit list, regardless of whether it can sustain the summer audience numbers. IF there is a god who watches over these things, it will be a middling hit...strong enough to boost the careers of the major players, encouraging them to keep up the same high quality, not so strong as to suggest to some hollywood turnip-head that we need a sequel. Reign of Fire goes on the same shelf with Pitch Black, Mad Max, and few other guilty treats.
July 27, 2002, 7:01 p.m. CST
All the adjectives Harry uses are his way of getting across to everyone how he smells and what a tub of lard he is. Never sit next to him in a Austin theater.
July 28, 2002, 10:07 p.m. CST
Just saw this one yesterday, and all the things I thought about it made sense. The characters were in the good to very good range for an action film; very British end-of-the-world. However, the world-building, if it had been a little better, could have created a strong franchise. Let me explain: dragons as dangerous as these--are they are BADASS, there's no doubt about it--need to have a solid believable base to make the magic work. Example: they're starving because the viruses and bacteria they carry with them killed off most of the higher mammals, and dragons are built to eat big (they originally fed on brontosaurs), so no wonder they hunt humans with such a vengeance.
Aug. 8, 2002, 3:36 a.m. CST
I just got a copy of this movie from a site called Movieshop and I was confused as hell when I realised it statred in Northumberland or somewhere in 2020 AD - I thought the film opened with Quinn and his mother finding the dragon and all hell breaking loose. Also the music at the start sounds like it's from Predator 2 ! I was totally into the two main characters though ! but could someone tell me the original ending please ?
Aug. 13, 2002, 3:44 a.m. CST
All I can say is- too much human melodrama*** NOT ENOUGH DRAGONS!** DAmN!!I didnt lure my brother (who didnt want to see this at all in the first place) to see some sappy subterranian psychodrama about a bunch of scummy european survivors' inter-personal struggles. The appearance of the Americans on the scene livened things up a little, for a little while anyway... Then back to the sappy melodrama. The camera-pans really suck, they try and spoon-feed you into feeling emotional about these characters, too much. See the hardened leader alpha-guy with a tragic past bite his lip over and over and grit his teeth in anger/determination every 3 minutes. See the cute ragtag children assemble and recite some kind of pitiful chant of cowardice. See a brutish American challenger to the alpha-male square off with him in a truly forgettable "mano-to-mano" battle for head-dog status. Watch the inevitable love affair blossom between the "pretty woman" and the dirty alpha-male. All too typical and cliched for me. Hey, wait a minute... WASNT THIS MOVIE SUPPOSED TO BE ABOUT DRAGONS WIPING OUT CIVILIZATION??? The beginning of the flick was ok, when the dragons were unleashed. Well, ok I only saw one coming up the mine shaft. Alas,the ravaging of the earth I was dying to see, the battles between armies of man and the ancient dragons, never really took place. Except in a series of newspaper articles and headlines that float by for a couple minutes. Talk about a letdown. Talk about being embarrassed for talking someone into seeing this piece of shit who didnt want to. There was a few nice dragon moments later on, but far too few and far too apart. Lets put it like this 90% cliched human melodrama and pitiful survivalist movie, 10% dragon encountering and fighting fun. And the initial retarded skydiving-method the Americans supposedly knew how to do(which they never successfully pulled off in the movie)was just flat out RiDiCULOUS! I, like Harry, blew off initial reports of cruddiness to the uneducated meanderings of those who cannot appreciate good dragon lore. I hate to admit it but i agree with the critics, this movie is not worth the admission price. Wait til it comes out on video and fast-forward to the 15-20 minutes worth of cool dragon footage you get.
Aug. 18, 2002, 10:54 p.m. CST
I saw RoF during its second or third week in the theaters. I am a dragon-guru, and made all my friends wait to go see it with me. Though RoF was an AWESOME movie, I was disappointed by the amount of actual dragon-human interaction. I mean, the plot of the movie is about dragons taking over the earth, but the whole movie is after the dragons take over the earth. Seemed kind of odd to me, and maybe I misinterpreted the plot. I believe their should be a prequel to it depicting the actual takeover of Earth by dragons.
Aug. 26, 2002, 7:59 a.m. CST
Hey Harry!! What's up with you, man? I, living in the centre of Dublin knew about this film a long time ago. The set for the castle was only ten minutes walk away from me so I was there nearly every day they were filming at that set... and even then I was Seriously excited about the prospect of a bloody good dragon movie... Like you I love Dragons and have been seriously disappointed by hollywoods treatment of them, only Mr. Harryhausen still holds them magical for me and as a short film director wanted to see what I wanted to see... What the poster and advertisements promised, The dessimation of Earth. I wanted to see London fall, I wanted to see New York fall, I wanted to see every city on earth fall and I wanted to see the Governments of the earth Fail in their bids to a) Save mankind and, b) fail in destroying the dragon threat. Sadly all I was greeted with was a sketchbook of Newspaper and time clippings. To say, as an avid moviegoer and maker I felt cheated by Reign of Fire is an understatement. Heck Even Babylon5's season 4 episode "End Game" blew the socks off Reign of Fire, and that's only one episode. Now, to take the perspective of the cowardly (at first and for most of the film) Bale(who did a fantastic job with the rest of the cast) isn't all that original. To show the audience how the dragons are relased then jump 20 years is an insult. Even Lucas knew not to do that back in '76. And when the Dragons do appear... you don't see dragons.. you see one. Where's the rest of them??? if most of the civilizations of the earth have mostly been eradicated leaving only handfuls of humans dotted around the landscape why aren't they constantly under threat??? They're dragons for pity's sake, they're a near unending force "For every one we destroyed another hundred took it's place" Where??? where were they?? This was a cheat of a film. An insult. sorry.
Aug. 27, 2002, 6:37 p.m. CST
Thats my opinion, and I'm sticking with it. Matthew McConaughey in this role could kick Vin Diesel's XXX ass!
Sept. 6, 2002, 12:20 p.m. CST
Sept. 6, 2002, 1:23 p.m. CST
If I read one more review of this film with the words 'oh dear the pottential'' or some shit like that Im gonna knock down that guy over there, I mean have u ever thoughht that maybe some of us did'nt want a brain dead Summer Blockbuster with 'franchise pottential' mass destruction Id4 type movie and would prefer a well made very well acted character based gem of a film that this actually is? Yes you may blame the Posters, the Trailers and the hype that precedented this movie I think they actually did intend to dupe you into thinking it would be a sort of Apocalypse Now with Dragons and shitt but there are people like myself who were pleasently suprised that it was not, ok it was'nt the best movie ever made but it was a damn good movie and certainly the best dragon movie I've ever seen. With good performances from all involved especially Matthew McConaughey,his character Van Zan is undoubtedly one of the baddest mofo's in film in a long time. So take my advice people 'dont believe the hype' and go see this movie. End of.
Sept. 13, 2002, 1:12 p.m. CST
I think you put it all in perspective man. I love dragons, and would have loved to see them in action!