Rating: 
Summary: Worth Seeing for a Finale That Delivers
Review: Watching Ian McKellen in action as Gandalf in the LOTR makes me nostalgic for another great Sorcerer...Sir Ralph Richardson in Dragonslayer. The effects may be 80's but they still play well today. Watching Sir Ralph in action against Vermithrax Pejorative still excites. Ride the LOTR, Harry Potter wave -- this movie is worth your [money]. For any Fantasy movie fans, it is a must own.
Rating:
Summary: One of the best fantasy films I have seen
Review: And face it, there just aren't all that many great fantasy films around; "Dragonslayer" stands out, especially in the 80s era, where fantasy films were often a silly sword-and-sorcery affair. It is a dark tale of a sorcerer and a dragon that he must destroy, a fantasy story in the most classical sense of the word. The special effects might look just a little out-dated, but they still hold well for audience today. The acting is just a little contrived (with the exception of the sorcerer, performed by the great British actor Richardson), but the focus is not as much on the characters as on the atmosphere and the tale itself. What I like best about this films is that it is not quirky or childish, but has an atmosphere that holds true to the darker world of old fairy tales. I would love to see this movie come to DVD.
Rating:
Summary: Classic Medieval Wizard versus Dragon type movies
Review: Way before there was The Lord of the Rings "Movies" or the Harry Potter, "Movies" there was The Dragonslayer. A few weeks ago I had rented The Fellowship, and took my 11-year-old twins to go see the Two Towers. After the movie was over, I was in sort of a nostalgic feeling. I told my daughters that in 1981 when their daddy was a boy, about their age. (11) Every one in the world was into Star Wars, or other Psy Fi films. I was hocked on Dragonslayer. Dragonslayer is a classic in the Medieval Wizard versus Dragon type movies. The Dragon effects are awesome, even for the 80's and still look good today. And after my daughters watched it, they were hocked as well. So if you have that little Wizard or Sorceress in your life, ( or you are that Wizard or Sorceress) and they/you can not get enough of the Lord of the Rings, or Harry Potter Movies, well while they/you wait, for the next installments, this is one of those great movies that will fill their yearning heart. Excellent Movies, I love it, my kids love it. Also check out the movie Krull.
Rating:
Summary: Greatest fantasy film ever!!
Review: I like this film because of the setting, the acting, dialog, acting, and especially the action scenes. I also like the dragon. It's a good movie to watch. I highly recommend this.
Rating: 
Summary: Quite a dragon.
Review: This was definitely an enjoyable movie. The Dragon is the most impressive I've seen. No CGI could compare, and the ILM design creates the most frightening creature I've seen in a movie of this kind (That I can recall). For fantasy I'd rank it somewhere not too far below Willow and above DragonHeart easily. Sean Connery is a cool guy, but a dragon movie needs a cool dragon--not a cool voice. Also Dragonheart was too sympathetic, Dragonslayer cuts out the BS and showcases a respectible set of action sequences with a really cool spear and, like I said, a kick butt dragon.
The key action sequence that really makes the film is actually not the climax, but instead when our hero enters the Lair and we see the beast for the first time. The lake of fire and the revealing of the dragon is very well done, back when I was younger I would rewind it to watch over and over again.
Also the darkness of the movie, at least one step above Willow and Dragonheart but below the ones I tend not to enjoy such as Excalibur and Krull (If I remember Krull well enough), suits it well. Dragonslayer needs that darkness just so the wonderful dragon fits in.
Dragonslayer is worth the while, and I am lucky to be one of the few young people who have heard of it. And forgetting everything else, the move has Ian McDiarmid in it, and any friend of Star Wars is a friend of mine.
Rating: 
Summary: This is the worst movie ever made
Review: Every aspect of this movie is HORID AGONY and to keep myself from loosing my sanity I'll look at these aspects one by one. The Acting:Each and every performance in this movie is painfully laughable and reminds me of the school plays I"ve been to. The Special Effects: these Scream low budget and I mean REALLY LOW BUDGET like maybe $350.27 for all of them The Costume Design: somone commented on this being realistic as compared to FOTR, well They either have never seen FOTR or need Glasses. All the armor is so obviously Plastic and the costumes also have a very low budget feel (I think The films entire budget went to the director) The Sound: the sound effects are Horrible and the music is even worse, I cant remember hearing worse Crap in all my life The Script: Bad beyond all compare The Characters: Horribly presented without any depth and some dont even have names In Short this is boring stupid and a violation of all that is sacred in epic fantasy.Some Good alternatives might be, Dragonheart, The fellowship of the ring, and Willow.
Rating:
Summary: Great fantasy
Review: The dragon in "Dragon Heart" doesn't hold a candle to this. The miniature created in this flick makes me believe it's real. Great story and acting. This movie really needs to be on DVD.
Rating:
Summary: Great Movie That Could Have Been Perfect (mild spoiler)
Review: First, I want to say that this movie, despite its flaws is the best sword & sorcery, demons & wizards movie ever. Better than Willow, Conan, Dragonheart and Fellowship of the Ring. The dragon is amazing. I think of this monster as a flying, firebreathing version of Jaws since you don't see much of the beast until halfway through the movie. The special effects are as good as anything you'll find from the 1980s and better than a lot of the stuff you see today. I'm not a CGI-basher by a longshot, but the model used in this movie is a thousand times more convincing that the CG beast in Dragonheart, which like so much CGI stuff, looks cartoonish. If someone could go back and remove the matte lines, it would put most modern special effects to shame. The cinematography is beautiful -very David Watkin-ish. The costumes are very authentic-looking early Dark Ages garb. The armor and weapons look like real-life, functional equipment from that era -not that ridiculous-looking Conan the Barbarian/ Lord of the Rings, five-foot horns and wings on the helmets, spiked armor junk that looks like it was stolen from Gene Simmons' closet! Production design is also first-rate. The script is clever without being pretentious. Most of the acting is flawless. Ralph Richardson is brilliant in one of his last roles. Peter Eyre is on target as the Neville Chamberlain-like king who has a similar policy of appeasment. Best of all is Jack Hallam as Tyrian, the king's enforcer -one of the best movie villains I've ever seen. Albert Salmi and Ian McDiarmid are also very good in their small parts. The problem is that the main character, Galen is played by Peter MacNicol. MacNicol is a fine comedic actor, but is badly miscast in this movie. Caitlin Clarke as a peasant girl, Valerian (and Galen's love interest) also presents a problem. While everyone else in this film is either British or speaking with a British accent (like the American, Albert Salmi), Galen and Valerian talk like Americans. This might seem like nitpicking to some, but when everyone in a movie speaks a certain way except the main characters and no explanation is given (Valerian's father is obviously English in the movie), it has the same effect as the "555" telephone numbers: It stops cold any attempt to suspend disbelief. So does the use of a body double for "Valerian's" nude scene. It's so obvious, why bother? Also, I found Alex North's score to be annoying. I normally don't pay attention to film scores unless they are either VERY good or VERY bad. This one was like fingernails on a chalkboard. It didn't fit the movie at all and became a distraction. Despite these minor flaws, I think this movie is the best of its kind. I have two minds about the possibility of a remake. On the one hand, certain things could be improved. On the other, I can't think of any actors who could fit the roles played by Richardson, Eyre and Hallam so perfectly. In any event, this is as good as it gets for fantasy movies.
Rating:
Summary: Surprisingly good!!
Review: I am unimpressed by most of those 80s sword-and-sorcery flicks, but this one is a wonderful exception. It has so many key elements that are lacking in most of its ilk: performances, plot, competent direction, and humor!
Rating:
Summary: THE SISTERS WHOM?
Review: It's that great line Ralph Richardson has when asked to help the menaced villagers .... "Have you tried the Meredith Sisters?" One can only imagine what the sisters are like - alas they are only mentioned - once - in this very superior 'Dragon' movie. Well acted and well-written it moves with grace and elegance - no false moves here! When a 'demonstration' by Arch Magician Ulrich [Richardson] fails [or does it?] - the lot falls upon the young and relatively inexperienced Galen [Peter MacNichol, pre-'Sophie's Choice'. There are plenty of nasty moments too:- the, now angered and ageing, fire-breathing dragon, the vivid and quite graphic confrontations, and the rather innocent villagers ......
even slight 'gender-bending'! Superior to 'Dragonheart' it's this version that stays! Would be fun though to revisit - with the Meredith Sisters intact!
| 
