SnoopyStyle
In the kingdom of Urland, King Casiodorus selects a virgin maiden twice a year in a lottery to be sacrificed to an ancient dragon. Valerian (Caitlin Clarke) leads a group to find Ulrich (Ralph Richardson), the only one alive rumored to have killed a dragon. Soldier Tyrian challenges Ulrich to prove himself but the test kills him. His apprentice Galen Bradwarden (Peter MacNicol) with the special amulet intends to complete the quest himself. He discovers that Valerian is actually a girl pretending to be a boy. Tyrian intends to stop anything that could disrupt the way of life and kills Ulrich's elderly servant Hodge. Hodge tells Galen to spread Ulrich's ashes over a lake of "burning water". Galen seals the dragon cave entrance. Thinking it safe, Valerian reveals herself as a girl to the village. Tyrian arrests Galen. In the dungeon, princess Elspeth comes to see Galen and he reveals the popular rumor of the rigged lottery. She rigs the lottery against herself and is sent to be sacrificed.This is simple high adventure. Peter MacNicol may not be the pretty young face that the hero is suppose to be. He does have a good nature about it. Caitlin Clarke is a great heroine. Her story is compelling. The princess is great and so is Tyrian. On top of that, Vermithrax is a great scary dragon. He doesn't show his face until the last act like Jaws. This is one of the great dragon movie.
PhilipJames1980
Recently I rented this movie through Netflix because I had not seen it for many years and wanted to see if it lived up to my nostalgia. And I have to say that Dragonslayer (1981) is still a special movie to me.There is not much plot in the movie that is not described in the title. Peter MacNicol plays a sorcerer's apprentice who, when his master is killed before fulfilling a promise to slay a dragon, must attempt to slay the dragon himself.Because it was released at the start of a run of sword-and-sorcery movies produced in the 1980s, Dragonslayer is different from almost every other movie in the genre that followed it. In fact, it is almost unique in movie history.I actually believe that Dragonslayer has more in common with Jaws (1975) than it does with other 1980s fantasy-adventure movies.Director Matthew Robbins, no doubt influenced by Steven Spielberg's directorial techniques in Jaws, introduces the dragon slowly, in fleeting glimpses, before finally revealing it in its entirety after more than an hour of screen time.There is, for example, a great shot from behind a character's head as he slowly rises to his feet with the dragon in front of him, with the dragon's head only just visible around his own.The director also makes clever use of camera angles to suggest that people are constantly in fear of death from above, crouching and even crawling along the ground in apprehension of awakening a sleeping dragon.Like almost all the sword-and-sorcery movies of the 1980s, Dragonslayer is also a triumph of production design. Production Designer Elliot Scott creates a world in which a fire-breathing dragon does not seems out of place. The sorcerer's castle is appropriately dark and dreary, the people live in a village that appears to be little more than sticks and rocks put together, and the dragon's lair, full of fire and steam, is an unforgettable sight.The screenplay has perhaps just the right amount of plot in it, yet I cannot say that it impressed me as much as the direction and production design, because it seems more like a series of clever ideas than a coherent screenplay.I do not want to spoil the movie for those who have not seen it, but I thought it was a clever touch for the hero to use a shield made of the dragon's own scales for protection against its fiery breath. Also, when the hero ventures into the dragon's lair, the dragon is hiding in the last place that you would expect a fire-breathing dragon to hide.Like many other movies of the genre, Dragonslayer does suffer from a bit of an identity crisis. Is this a movie for adults or for children? Obviously few people over the age of twelve care about the slaying of a dragon, yet the unrelenting grim and serious tone of the work suggests an ambition to be more than just a "kids' movie." This tone is maintained so completely that the jokey, lighthearted ending seems out of place, compared to everything that has preceded it.The screenplay also suffers from some awkward moments of transition, as when the hero, after battling the dragon, appears outside the dragon's lair, with no explanation as to how he escaped or survived. The myth of Saint George and the Dragon, which provided most of the source material for the screenplay, suffers from the same abrupt transitions, if I remember correctly, yet the screenplay should have improved upon the flaws in the source material.I also cannot praise the movie as an actors' showcase, especially since Sir Ralph Richardson, obviously the best actor in the movie and giving one of his last performances, is on screen the least amount of time. The other performances are merely serviceable, nothing more.I would give this movie 7 out of 10, because if you are a fan of fantasy movies then the movie is definitely worth seeing at least once. If you are not a fan of fantasy movies, then you might give the movie only 5 out of 10, as its good points would not be as meaningful to you.I have to admit that I have no idea how people today, accustomed to Lord of the Rings and other lavishly produced computer-generated spectacles, would view this movie. I would like to think that the movie has held up better than many other movies that rely upon special effects, thanks to its production design, and Alex North's atmospheric musical score, yet maybe this is not enough for viewers today.Perhaps the greatest praise that I can give this movie is that, at least for me, it is memorable and unique.This movie should always have a place in movie history, if only for its special effects. It was released the same year (1981) as Ray Harryhausen's last special effects movie, the original Clash of the Titans, and introduced a new stop-motion technique, "go-motion," which would be the special effects-industry standard for the next twelve years, until Jurassic Park was released in 1993 and made all stop-motion effects seem obsolete.It would be easy to dismiss Dragonslayer as merely a footnote in the history of fantasy and special-effects movies, but I would prefer to think that, when viewed today, it still succeeds in transporting the audience to another time and place and makes them believe the impossible.
FlashCallahan
A King has made a pact with a dragon where he sacrifices virgins to it, and the dragon leaves his kingdom alone. An old wizard, and his keen young apprentice volunteer to kill the dragon and attempt to save the next virgin in line.....the Kings own daughter.This is one of those movies where the poster sells it to you, and i', talking about the poster that comes with the title here on IMDb, and it was a trait that many films in the eighties had, fantastic poster, terrible film.For the most part, we have Peter MacNicol spouting silly sub-par Tolkein dialogue and getting scared when he sees lady bits.For a hero, hes a moaning little boy, and I can understand why the actor is embarrassed to put this on his CV, he isn't any good.The rest of the cast are just the typecast characters you saw in endless films like this in the eighties, Hawk The Slayer, Krull, Ladyhawke, you'd be forgiven if you think you've already seen it.But, what saves this from being a one star movie, is the Dragon, we wait a long time, but when we see it, it's brilliant. It's very impressive to look at in 2013, so heaven knows what audiences thought in 1981, it's a pity go motion wasn't used more.If for some reason, you can see just the dragon footage, see it, but it will make you want to watch the rest of the film, which just consists of old men walking through Wales.A boring film, except for the Dragon.
