46 reviews
The first 45 minutes of Dragon Fighter are entirely acceptable and surprisingly watchable. The characters are believable and interesting. The cloning lab looks really high-tech. After that, it all collapses. The characters start behaving idiotically, and a new subplot is introduced from nowhere about a fusion reactor (and this is supposedly "present day") going critical, the only plot justification of which is that it is required to kill the dragon - only it doesn't. The finish is incredibly weak. One wonders what made a movie that started out so well turn so wrong.
All the characters except Dean Cain are played by Russians. This results in some weird situations and details, like the character being played by Vessela Dimitrova being called "Bailey Kent" despite her heavy accent (and despite her, on one occasion, inexplicably switching to *Spanish*!).
Because of the decent start, I considered rating this movie a 5, but it really was more disappointing than that, so I only give it 4.
All the characters except Dean Cain are played by Russians. This results in some weird situations and details, like the character being played by Vessela Dimitrova being called "Bailey Kent" despite her heavy accent (and despite her, on one occasion, inexplicably switching to *Spanish*!).
Because of the decent start, I considered rating this movie a 5, but it really was more disappointing than that, so I only give it 4.
The bad out takes from "Reign of Fire" strung together, without any real story.
Dean Cain tries to be a real actor, and fails again.
In the end the dragons quit in disgust.
BARF!
Dean Cain tries to be a real actor, and fails again.
In the end the dragons quit in disgust.
BARF!
I caught this movie on Sci-Fi before heading into work. If you've any interest in seeing Dean Cain dive and avoid being enveloped in flames at least a dozen times, this movie is for you. If that doesn't peak your interest, well, I'm afraid you'll wish that YOU were the one about to be enveloped in flames, because this movie is pretty bad. The acting, to begin with, is awful, awful, awful. The characters are all completely obnoxious, and the dialogue is worse than your typical Z-grade, Sci-Fi movie. Towards the end, the movie began to remind me of 'Hollow Man' (complete with escape via elevator shaft), except with a Dragon, not a naked, invisible man. Unlike other similar flicks, however, this one wasn't even awesomely bad...it was just plain bad.
- monkeysontoast
- Jul 21, 2006
- Permalink
I like B movies and seeing the guy on the front of the cover that used to play superman and the UFO films logo had warned me not to keep my hopes up. As an extra twist they made the dragon on the DVD box appear as the DRAGO dragon from dragon heart, what a ripoff.
Anyway, warned that this was gonna be a B movie I braced myself for a laugh or 2 and an entertaining view and yes all the elements were there. Bad FX all around, crappy storyline and uninteresting characters. I can all live with that but this flick took itself way too serious. So after some 90 ish minutes I watched most of it on fast forward and was served a cool little..big , no little whoops bigger dragon ( the volume shifting was a pain, dragon itself was reasonable.) The 24 thing with the split screens to hide uninteresting padding dialogue wasn't any help either.
When you rent a UFO films made product you know you are gonna watch a B movie, so production values aren't important. However an interesting story, an interesting hero and love for the product is very important. This is an uninteresting crap film that has been made for pocket change with no love for the genre whatsoever. Not worth a watch.
Anyway, warned that this was gonna be a B movie I braced myself for a laugh or 2 and an entertaining view and yes all the elements were there. Bad FX all around, crappy storyline and uninteresting characters. I can all live with that but this flick took itself way too serious. So after some 90 ish minutes I watched most of it on fast forward and was served a cool little..big , no little whoops bigger dragon ( the volume shifting was a pain, dragon itself was reasonable.) The 24 thing with the split screens to hide uninteresting padding dialogue wasn't any help either.
When you rent a UFO films made product you know you are gonna watch a B movie, so production values aren't important. However an interesting story, an interesting hero and love for the product is very important. This is an uninteresting crap film that has been made for pocket change with no love for the genre whatsoever. Not worth a watch.
I mistakenly kept myself awake late last night watching this thing. About the only thing I could say good about this horrid film is that it could be used by film schools to show how not to make a movie. No proper character development, wait, I'm not even sure they were characters. Set-ups were hokey and inane, and the overuse of split screens was wasted since sometimes they couldn't even synchronize with alternate shots. If I could give this a zero or minus rating I would. Sadly, it isn't even worth the time for a few laughs.
It's just a sad example of money wasted by Hollywood, and now I waste my time even thinking about it.
It's just a sad example of money wasted by Hollywood, and now I waste my time even thinking about it.
This is a formula B science fiction movie, and the director made no bones about it. It is about a dragon who is restored to life by a scientific team. Everything done is stuff you've seen many times before. It is a weak script, with no real characters. In fact, it is full of stereotype characters and situations. The director attacks this by just making it a formula movie, with no attempt to fool us, and that gives this movie a mild appeal, but it isn't something you're likely to remember a while. It is best seen while you're cooking, cleaning, working out. Sort of mindless fun. It has its place in entertainment, but it certainly isn't something you sit down with friends to watch, unless you're all just drunk and don't care. The mass rating of 3.2 is probably fair. I don't think it is as crappy as most people, but I am surprised that some people in the postings thought this was spectacular. That really eludes me, as I see no attempt to even make this a memorable film.
OK.... I just have 3 words - cheesy, cheesy and CHEESY! The only redeeming feature of this movie is Dean Cain. Other than that - it's CHEESEBALL SUPREME!!!!
The movie DOES have some promise in the concept - an underground lab creates a real live fire breathing dragon - basically giving us more of "Jurassic Park" meets "Reign of Fire"..... There are some great possibilities, but they just don't follow through.... The special effects are decent - even though you KNOW the dragon is CGI, it doesn't horribly LOOK like CGI....
I wouldn't lay the blame on Dean Cain (although he IS one of the producers), I'd lay more of the blame on Phillip Roth - the director and writer. It's HIS job to make this film.... and, unfortunately, he failed.
The movie DOES have some promise in the concept - an underground lab creates a real live fire breathing dragon - basically giving us more of "Jurassic Park" meets "Reign of Fire"..... There are some great possibilities, but they just don't follow through.... The special effects are decent - even though you KNOW the dragon is CGI, it doesn't horribly LOOK like CGI....
I wouldn't lay the blame on Dean Cain (although he IS one of the producers), I'd lay more of the blame on Phillip Roth - the director and writer. It's HIS job to make this film.... and, unfortunately, he failed.
- LeathermanCraig
- Jan 23, 2004
- Permalink
- nogodnomasters
- Apr 18, 2018
- Permalink
Pretty standard B-movie stuff. Seriously, anyone who watches "Dragon Fighter" with Dean Cain and a bunch of people making their first movie should know better than to expect real quality or even moderate intelligence. B movies exist to re-work formulas that are popular. If you give them even token analysis, you'll wind up ruining the movie for yourself (and perhaps writing some self-important, slanderous review on IMDb).
I liked the female lead, Kristine Byers. She had charisma and I thought she was notably attractive. It was a memorable B-movie appearance. Unfortunately, I don't see where she has made any movies since. I'll watch for her again.
I liked the female lead, Kristine Byers. She had charisma and I thought she was notably attractive. It was a memorable B-movie appearance. Unfortunately, I don't see where she has made any movies since. I'll watch for her again.
- ralexander-2
- Aug 2, 2006
- Permalink
Don't take it too seriously, and you'll have fun... the actors do their jobs very well, despite tough conditions, and lax direction. What you have here is essentially -- a number of good actors, notably Dean Cain and Hristo Shopov, both very accomplished with work in VERY good films, fulfilling their jobs as ACTORS in a less-than-Academy Award level stuff. It's a classic case of "doing the job..." As Michael Caine said: "why do you make all these movies...?" Answer: "Because I'm an actor..."
- Jake_barnes
- Mar 2, 2004
- Permalink
- lordzedd-3
- Jun 1, 2007
- Permalink
There have been plenty of unknown movies or movies given bad reviews that I really liked. This was not one of them.
It was overacted and used camera techniques that made me feel like I was watching a soap opera. It was ludicrously predictable and took most of the movie to get going then left you asking "that's it?". Once I decided not to take the movie too seriously and watch it from a purely corny point of view it became more enjoyable. This is one movie that would have wound up on MST3000 if it was still on.
It was overacted and used camera techniques that made me feel like I was watching a soap opera. It was ludicrously predictable and took most of the movie to get going then left you asking "that's it?". Once I decided not to take the movie too seriously and watch it from a purely corny point of view it became more enjoyable. This is one movie that would have wound up on MST3000 if it was still on.
- cindie_1974
- Jun 22, 2003
- Permalink
I really wanted to like this movie, and i was entertained to a point. But, there are tons of things very wrong with this movie.
There is a very annoying split-screen style that occurs every so often during the movie, showing different camera angles of the scenes. Inventive yes, but i found it quite distracting and just plain annoying to watch it in that fashion.
Another thing is the cloning of the "Dragon" so rapidly. How could something go from a single DNA strand into a multi-ton beast within a few hours? Let's forget that it is basically scientifically impossible, but where was it going to get so much raw organic material to produce that level of exponential growth? This isn't the first time in a movie that they've leaped over the seemingly obvious scientific facts, hoping that the dummies out there wouldn't care or notice.
The ending was equally as troublesome, military airplanes shooting down the Dragon? That reminds me of what happened in the horrible movie "Retillian". At the very end we see soldiers (or scientists) exploring the underground facility which was blown up by a Nuclear core meltdown that was 53% of Hiroshima, right after our heroes escaped. When the soldiers go in, the facility only appears to be mildly damaged...how they could even go into it at all is beyond me.
Anything positive about the film? Well, the beginning of the movie that takes place during medieval times is decent, and the Dragon CGI effects are fairly believable except for a few scenes. The acting is admirable, but that in and of itself fails to help the weak plot.
This is far from the worst film i've ever seen, but i wouldn't recommend it or give a seal of approval. It's worth a single viewing for fans of sci-fi movies, but for everyone else...just forget Dragon Fighter.
There is a very annoying split-screen style that occurs every so often during the movie, showing different camera angles of the scenes. Inventive yes, but i found it quite distracting and just plain annoying to watch it in that fashion.
Another thing is the cloning of the "Dragon" so rapidly. How could something go from a single DNA strand into a multi-ton beast within a few hours? Let's forget that it is basically scientifically impossible, but where was it going to get so much raw organic material to produce that level of exponential growth? This isn't the first time in a movie that they've leaped over the seemingly obvious scientific facts, hoping that the dummies out there wouldn't care or notice.
The ending was equally as troublesome, military airplanes shooting down the Dragon? That reminds me of what happened in the horrible movie "Retillian". At the very end we see soldiers (or scientists) exploring the underground facility which was blown up by a Nuclear core meltdown that was 53% of Hiroshima, right after our heroes escaped. When the soldiers go in, the facility only appears to be mildly damaged...how they could even go into it at all is beyond me.
Anything positive about the film? Well, the beginning of the movie that takes place during medieval times is decent, and the Dragon CGI effects are fairly believable except for a few scenes. The acting is admirable, but that in and of itself fails to help the weak plot.
This is far from the worst film i've ever seen, but i wouldn't recommend it or give a seal of approval. It's worth a single viewing for fans of sci-fi movies, but for everyone else...just forget Dragon Fighter.
- a_jshurmon
- Jan 14, 2012
- Permalink
This movie is some of the worst crap I have ever seen. I literally got a sharp pain in my head while watching this movie. The CGI was awful, and the story was just a waste of ink. Dean Cain's character was Mr-Super-Intuitive-I-can-figure-out-anything, except he can't seem to work his own helicopter correctly. The biggest problem was the split screen camera work. I felt like I was watching the Brady Bunch or something, only it wasn't different people in the boxes, just close ups and different views of the same thing. I can only figure that the actors really needed the money, because this movie wasn't worth the film it was shot on.
Yesterday I saw the movie Flyboys and my girlfriend told me it was the worst movie she's ever seen... Since I thought it was pretty awful as well it got me thinking - which film was the worst film I had ever seen and this was the only film that came to mind.
Unfortunately it was a couple of years since I've seen it but I remember the horribly miscast Dean Cain as cocky military man (pretty boy Cain doesn't do cocky very well). The strange deal with the CGI-helicopter when it would probably be cheaper to rent a chopper than to hire some CGI-guys to make it, but my guess is that they found the chopper as a free sample for some CGI program or the producer's son liked to play with his new computer. And how did it look?? Awful. And when the dragon charges through the corridors of the complex then reuse the same shots over and over - looks VERY cheap.
Avoid this movie - it is truly awful...
Unfortunately it was a couple of years since I've seen it but I remember the horribly miscast Dean Cain as cocky military man (pretty boy Cain doesn't do cocky very well). The strange deal with the CGI-helicopter when it would probably be cheaper to rent a chopper than to hire some CGI-guys to make it, but my guess is that they found the chopper as a free sample for some CGI program or the producer's son liked to play with his new computer. And how did it look?? Awful. And when the dragon charges through the corridors of the complex then reuse the same shots over and over - looks VERY cheap.
Avoid this movie - it is truly awful...
When I rented this I was hoping for what "Reign of Fire" did not deliver: a clash between modern technology and mythic beasts.
Instead I got a standard "monster hunts stupid people in remote building" flick, with bad script, bad music, bad effects, bad plot, bad acting. Bad, bad, bad.
Only reason why I did give it a 2 was that in theory there could exist worse movies. In theory.....
Instead I got a standard "monster hunts stupid people in remote building" flick, with bad script, bad music, bad effects, bad plot, bad acting. Bad, bad, bad.
Only reason why I did give it a 2 was that in theory there could exist worse movies. In theory.....
- doctorsmoothlove
- May 24, 2020
- Permalink
there are those movies that are bad they are funny, then there are those where you scream "i want that one and a half hours of my life back"...thats pretty much what this is.
dean cain tries to be an actor but fails. the sfx are really bad (repeated scenes and rocks that look like falling paper) and the fake plastic guns that have torches taped on them...the split screen effect used to show multiple things happening at once is just terrible.
this movie cant even be used as one of those simple night entertainers, its just that bad
if i could go negative ratings, i would
dean cain tries to be an actor but fails. the sfx are really bad (repeated scenes and rocks that look like falling paper) and the fake plastic guns that have torches taped on them...the split screen effect used to show multiple things happening at once is just terrible.
this movie cant even be used as one of those simple night entertainers, its just that bad
if i could go negative ratings, i would
- FilmCreature
- May 20, 2006
- Permalink
First, I love horrible direct to video SciFi movies. Dragon Fighter has all of the typical SciFi standards (crazy scientist, hot chicks, bad cgi, absurd dialogue, predictable plot). Dragon Fighter is not one of the greats bad SciFi greats(that's reserved for Frankenfish), but this film does have a few things that separate it from the pack.
*Dean Cain. Yes, he can actually act and is actually quite likable. Despite having to speak some ridiculous dialogue, he does his best and makes it work.
*Editing. During the more boring parts of the movie, they do some fancy editing to show the scene from multiple angles. This actually keeps the movie moving along in a much more interesting way.
While the deaths aren't particularly creative, this movie did a reasonably good job of entertaining me. Give it a whirl if you love this kind of crap as much as I do.
*Dean Cain. Yes, he can actually act and is actually quite likable. Despite having to speak some ridiculous dialogue, he does his best and makes it work.
*Editing. During the more boring parts of the movie, they do some fancy editing to show the scene from multiple angles. This actually keeps the movie moving along in a much more interesting way.
While the deaths aren't particularly creative, this movie did a reasonably good job of entertaining me. Give it a whirl if you love this kind of crap as much as I do.
- bellinghop
- Nov 5, 2006
- Permalink
It's hard to praise this film much. The CGI for the dragon was well done, but lacked proper modelling for light and shadow. Also, the same footage is used endlessly of the dragon stomping through corridors which becomes slightly tedious.
I was amazed to see "Marcus Aurelius" in the acting credits, wondering what an ex-Emperor of the Roman Empire was doing acting in this film! Like "Whoopie Goldberg" it must be an alias, and can one blame him for using one if he appears in this stinker.
The story might been interesting, but the acting is flat, and direction is tedious. If you MUST watch this film, go around to your friend's house and get drunk while doing so - then it'll be enjoyable.
I was amazed to see "Marcus Aurelius" in the acting credits, wondering what an ex-Emperor of the Roman Empire was doing acting in this film! Like "Whoopie Goldberg" it must be an alias, and can one blame him for using one if he appears in this stinker.
The story might been interesting, but the acting is flat, and direction is tedious. If you MUST watch this film, go around to your friend's house and get drunk while doing so - then it'll be enjoyable.