User reviews

With the name Disney attached to a sword and sorcery/fantasy romp, many genre purists might be filled with immediate consternation as they visualise in horror the possible 'cute' connotations.

Fortuitously, the understandable apprehension that this may well induce actually proves to be entirely unfounded however, as this movie is about as far from Pete's Dragon or any other Disney fare as is humanly imaginable!

What we do have here, is an excellent movie with top notch production values, awesome special effects, a fine cast, and a very dark story.

The dragon itself is without doubt the best ever committed to celluloid (a much better design than the CGI one in Dragonheart) and proves to be hugely menacing and destructive as it incinerates everything in it's path.

The actors to, all put in excellent performances and it's particularly great to see such a fine piece of casting in the form of the late great Sir Ralph Richardson as the wizard Ulrich. In fact for such a role there has surely never been a more appropriate choice of actor other than of course, Peter Jackson casting Sir Ian McKellen to play Gandalf in the Lord of the Rings trilogy.

For fans of sword & sorcery and fantasy movies in general, this really is an absolute must see!

Dragonslayer was in my opinion a very good movie. Without being too camp, it manages to be very entertaining, and along with NeverEnding Story, Princess Bride and Legend this is one of the better fantasy films I have seen. The film benefits from some very stylish costumes and sets, and the breathtaking scenery helps as well. The music score is highly atmospheric, and filled with beautiful and haunting themes. The film has a good plot with some nice twists, themes and turns, a decent script and good characters. I will admit one or two of the supporting characters are thinly sketched compared to the wizard Ulrich, and there are parts when the film suffered from pacing problems. But overall I really enjoyed Dragonslayer. I forgot to mention the acting. Peter MacNicol is a likable enough lead with his spontaneous boyish charm, Caitlin Clarke and Chloe Salamon are stunning as the female leads, and Ralph Richardson without a doubt steals the movie as Ulrich. Also, how can I forget the dragon? Plain and simple, best designed dragon in any fantasy film, the movements, the design, the creepiness everything, flawless. Even better than Draco in Dragonheart, despite Sean Connery's majestic voicing. All in all, a couple of minor flaws, but it is most enjoyable, and one of the better fantasy films out there. 8/10 Bethany Cox

Dragonslayer came out when "Dungeons & Dragons" was getting to be a big thing where I live, so there was a lot of interest. It was even adapted into a book by Wayland Drew (in a rare instance when a movie preceded a book).

Two things I like mainly. First, of course: Vermithrax. I rather hope that Dragonslayer is never remade, for there's no way the digital animation done these days could do this magnificent creature justice. New isn't always better.

It's also nice to see a film which doesn't stereotype Pagans and magicians as evil. In fact, the film treads the whole good-evil line rather lightly; Ulrich displays a certain respect for Vermithrax, even while planning the dragon's demise.

I find it easy to be swept up in the lovely mystery of Dragonslayer: a mystical film from 1981 (a more mystical age).

Infinitely superior fantasy movie from those days where the cinema was the real cinema, Dragonslayer has a very clever plot using all elements and formula to reach a success, an Old Sorcerer played by Ralph Richardson has a fabulous and convincing acting, the young hero has a natural charisma, the villain is bad than ever, the girl is beauty and one most funny character is Sydney Bromley as an old gentle Hodge who is unfortunately was killed in the travel, by the way all cast is marvelous and finally the Dragon is unique well made using the tools and techniques allowed on those time, the atmosphere of fear is terrific, the final battle is great example to new ones!! fantastic fantasy!!!

Resume:

First watch: 2011 / How many: 3 / Source: DVD / Rating: 8.5

This film blends witchcraft and wizardry , adventures , battles and is extremely fun and amusing . A sorcerer's apprentice (Peter MacNichol) is sent to kill a dragon which has been devouring girls from a nearby kingdom . An older magician (Ralph Richardson) is the mentor of the rockie sorcerer . The young boy dreams becoming a valiant sorcerer and join forces with a girl (Caitlin Clarke) to vanquish a horrible dragon . The young wizarding apprentice suddenly finds himself the only person who save the kingdom from a free-breathing dragon .

This fantasy movie packs action , witchery and and sorcery with impressive battles . Likable performance by a young Peter MacNichol , though is the first film released under the Disney name to have full frontal male nudity , as when Peter MacNicol jumps into the water, his legs swing wide giving the audience a quick shot of his genitals . Funny acting by the veteran Ralph Richardson and enjoyable support cast . The story has many familiar dragon motifs found throughout Western culture , in particular Saint George and the Dragon, in which maiden sacrifices were made to appease a harassing dragon. Saint George's tale also includes a sacrificial lottery resulting in the surprise condemnation of a princess , Saint George is also frequently depicted with a magic blessed lance or a sword . Smart screenplay by Hal Barwood dealing with fantasy medieval , dragons , necromancy , fantastic kingdoms and many other things . Entertaining and fun movie with acceptable special effects bringing the dragon to life . Work on dragons made by CG sometimes seem authentic , but is also noted its computer realization . First film to use go-motion, a variant of stop-motion animation in which parts of the dragon were mechanized and the movement programmed by computer . During shooting, the computer moves the model while the camera is shooting, resulting in motion blur, which makes the animation more convincing . The only thing that let it down from this perspective , was that some of the parts in between the dragons fighting were a little dull . Colorful cinematography , shot on location in Wales , though the final scene was shot in Skye, Scotland and many town locals were employed in the film as village extras. Thrilling as well as spectacular musical score by the classic Alex North , some of the score by Alex North was "recycled" from music he'd originally composed for 2001: A Space Odyssey that went unused . This co-production between Walt Disney Pictures and Paramount was efficiently directed by Matthew Robbins and it was more mature and realistic than most Disney films of the time .

The picture belongs to Fantasy/Dragon sub-genre ; other important films dealing with Dragons are the following : ¨Dragonheart¨ by Rob Cohen with Dennis Quaid , Dina Meyer , Jason Isaacs and Julie Christie ; ¨Dragonheart , a new beginning¨ with Chris Marterson , Figueroa and Harry Von Gorkum ; ¨Dragom Storm¨ (2004) by Stephen Furst with Maxwell Caufield , Angel Boris , Tony Amendola and John Rhys Davies ; and other latter day movies and belonging to this Dragons sub-genre are ¨Reign of fire¨ (2002) by Rob Bowman with Christian Bale, Matthew McConaughey , Izabella Scorupco , and Gerard Butler ; ¨Eragon¨ (2006) by Stephen Fangmeier with Edward Speleers , Robert Carlyle , Sienna Gullory and John Malkovich .

I'm not sure there's more than one compelling reason to see this film, but what a reason! As an SF/fantasy buff, I've seen my share of dragons on film, but there has never been one like Vermithrax Perjorative. The old beast simply looks, moves, sounds, acts, almost smells as one would imagine a dragon would. The filmmakers paid painstaking attention to detail in creating VP. Other film dragons look like animated clay figures, or lizards with wings glued on, or CGI effects (impressive, but still obviously computer-generated). This one looks like the cinematographer actually caught a dragon on film. The rest of the film is entertaining enough - not exactly Wellesian drama, but captivating nonetheless. Sir Ralph is marvelous, even in his twilight. And the fact that the dragon doesn't show until the end serves to heighten the suspense, ala Jaws or Alien. But, oh that dragon!! Well worth the price of admission. Can't wait to see it on DVD.

Surprisingly, I missed this movie when I was a kid. I saw Krull instead, to bad because this movie was better.

It was very entertaining if not somewhat predictable. The special effects were quite good and mostly held up to todays standard. I wished Ralph Richardson was in it a little more than the 20 minutes he was. And the old man who played the servant was a riot! He wasn't on screen long enough either.

One part I liked was showing the end of paganism and the beginning of Christianity. It was well done and didn't make Christianity the bad guy like the evil Bishop in the great film Ladyhawke. And they called sorcery what it is, "the black arts."

All in all it was enjoyable watching.

Fantasy movies such as this are non-existent these days. Gimme back the days of The Dark Crystal, Jim Henson and the Gremlins. For a family movie this is also very straight-faced too. There is not much humor in it, but that only adds to the overall weird tone.

The story is of a wizard apprentice called Galen (a very young Peter MacNicol) who goes on a quest to slaughter a Dragon terrorizing the people of Urland (Ireland maybe?). There are long moments of quiet and a strange atmosphere brewing around the whole movie. It looks and feels quite unique.

No doubt this is owed a lot to the fabulous widescreen compositions, visual effects that range from not bad to surprisingly good and stunning scenery and locations. Indeed the mood of this film is something I've never come across in a fantasy film. Plus for a film that is rated a simple PG, there was quite a lot of graphic gore, violence and even slight nudity. Surprising, but it adds to the boldness of the production. You would never get a family movie like this these days. I will take Dragonslayer over Harry Potter anytime.

Filmed in Panavision, the 2.35:1 anamorphic picture looks really great in most scenes but in others there is a small problem with the black levels. The soundtrack has been remastered in Dolby 5.1 and it is surely loud and forceful. Unfortunately there are ZERO extras. Which is a shame, because for a film like this, I really want more.

I remember waching this movie as a kid, and I always remembered it a simple story of the people in need for a wizard to take down a dragon. I also have always remembered the dragon as the most asthonishing creature I ever seen in a move. Now, that I got to see it again, I found myself surprised by two facts: 1) The plot is fairly simple, but the connotations on it are far out complex. It beats me its a dragon and wizards tale in a cristhian world. It plays for interest contrast, the most would be the priest who is telling the dragon is no beast, its Lucifer himself (and shortly after been burned by him/it). Another scene shows a priest preaching the faith of the lord and asking him to destroy their sworn enemy, the dragon. 2) The dragon is by far the best stop animation creature ever created and as a creature itself is better than other modern incarnations of the beast like the ones seen in "Dragonheart" and "Reing of fire". Phil Tippet really outdid himself doing this dragon. Each scene the dragon apears is compeling, gripping and unforgeteable. In comparision, I enjoyed a little bit more Dragonheart because of its richer characters and more mythologic aproach to the dragon, but Dragonslayer is a real classic on wizards.

Though a critical and commercial disappointment upon its release, 'Dragonslayer' has had quite a reputation renaissance in the years that followed, currently sporting an %85 fresh rating on Rotten Tomatoes, and a 6.7 rating here on IMDb. With numbers like that, I purchased a used copy of 'Dragonslayer' with rather high hopes. Too high as it turned out.

'Dragonslayer' features some incredible special f/x; particularly the creation of Vermithrax the dragon, but its paper thin characters get lost within a story that is told without even an ounce of energy or flourish.

After the death of his wizard master, young Galen wants to kill a giant dragon that terrorises people all over Urland. To secure a peaceful living, people have to sacrifice virgins to the horrible fire-spitting beast. How can Galen, who still isn't even a real wizard, beat the dragon?

This movie coming from Walt Disney, I was worried it might be too lighthearted to be a really good fantasy film. Luckily, I was wrong! There are surprise deaths of cast members and even some scenes of gore, helping to create just the right kind of atmosphere. The special effects here are really excellent and hold up very well to today's CGI spectacles. Also, the Dragon looks absolutely incredible. The movie probably would have benefited from a more remarkable musical score, the kind of which a Basil Poledouris might have composed. Still, this is a must-see fantasy film, almost in the league of "The Lord of the Rings".

I remember seeing this movie on cable over and over when I was a kid, and I never tired of it. The middle ages atmosphere is excellent, with some very nice touches. I especially like the way the hierarchical society is portrayed; how everyone defers to the king without thinking. It is much better than movies in which people act and speak just as they do in modern times, only with the historical costumes and sets around them.

However, the real star of this movie is the dragon, which was created by George Lucas's prestigious ILM outfit. Despite the fact that it was made using stop-motion techniques, it is still very convincing -- especially when it breathes fire (which it does quite often!) The dragon's movements are always smooth and life-like, and this is aided by a truly frightening design for the dragon's face. The tiny, smouldering red eyes convey an intense fury that makes the villagers' fear of the dragon quite understandable. One can also tell that a lot of effort went into giving an impression of sheer size with this monster.

There are no silly-looking shots in which various elements are mismatched in terms of scale (such as a supposedly enormous creature breathing flames that look as though they are produced by a match). Even when the dragon splashes into a lake, the volume of water thrown up looks huge (no individual drops are visible, which is a mistake that FX artists still make eve today). The result is one of those rare sci-fi/fantasy movies which ages well. Even though the techniques used in this film have been supplanted by new ones, it is still easy to sit back and be awed by what is happening on screen.

"Dragonslayer" was one of the best-looking films of the 1980s, and the DVD transfer looks nice too. This dragon is aloof and unreadable, the way dragons should be; it looks pretty good even by today's standards. There's a good basic story set in medieval Britain. The tomboyish Clarke is an intriguing presence and Richardson has some fun in the sorcerer role. Unfortunately, there's too much B-grade acting and some of the plot makes no sense even for a fantasy. (Why don't all those virgins just escape their dragon problem the old-fashioned way?) Treating Early Christianity as an upstart, and not always too effective, form of magic is interesting. It was a nice idea to make the King a politician, rather than a piece of furniture. The old sorcerers seem to be dying out, without a credit, and the upstart religion is getting turned into a political tool. Small children might not find such stuff interesting, but they will probably have the bejeezus scared out of them by one scene involving a young girl and the dragon. I did, and I'm 30.

Dragonslayer is a great fantasy film. The special effects hold up fairly well even today. The dragon is just a model and it looks fantastic. I was only 9 years old when I saw this film and it has stuck with me ever since. There are great performances and the direction is tight. The set design is also done well. Dragonslayer has a great atmosphere and you won't forget the image of the dragon rising from the water behind our hero anytime soon.

I kind of liked this movie for the atmosphere and special effects, the Dragon is very well done and impressive, even considering the movie originates from the early eighties.

Yet the main character is a bit of a tedious person and I found it a bit hard to feel lots of sympathy for him ,let alone identify and feel with him. Furthermore, the movie could be a bit more exciting, the feeling of terror is a bit lacking and the tension isn't built up very well, perhaps partly because Disney didn't want it so. For children from ages 8 and up though, this is an exciting and nice movie, although there are better movies in this genre like Dragonheart, Willow and Legend.

I rate this movie a 6 out of 10.

I saw this when it came out, in the theater, in 1981. It was a sort of surprise hit that summer. This is a movie with plot. It's about a young man and woman meeting challenges, death, redemption, the death of magic and the birth of Christianity, and the hypocrisy of gov't. And it's all disguised as a PG movie about a dragon which is terrorizing a hamlet of decent people in the Dark Ages.

HIGHLY recommended. PG, but does have one foot gnawing which today would probably give it an R or X rating given the gutlessness of parents everywhere :). This is an early movie by Industrial Light and Magic, or ILM as it's known nowadays, and I believe was funded by Disney. Despite that it's got a gritty edge. Check it out, for youths and adults

I liked this movie when I saw it, decades ago, but it does have one giant, glaring plothole:

The story concerns a kingdom where virgin girls are being sacrificed to appease a dragon. Our hero attempts to protect two young virgins: one who has disguised herself as a boy in order to avoid being caught & sacrificed, and the other a misguided princess on her way to be sacrificed. The hero goes to extraordinary lengths to keep these two girls safe, but it never occurs to him (or, it seems, to the potential victims) that if the young woman has to be a virgin to be sacrificed to the dragon, there is a very simple way in which a young man might remedy that situation. (And that is especially true in the case of the tomboyish girl, who apparently is in love with the hero.)

Even in the days of knights & dragons, I think that everyone would agree that it would be better to lose one's virginity to an attractive, well-meaning young man, then to be eaten alive by a monstrous, fire-breathing dragon. And yet no one ever even brings up the possibility of simply making love to eliminate the horrific danger. This may be because this movie was a Disney production. But it is a particularly dark Disney production which includes the gruesome death of one of the lead characters, rampant violence-by dragon, and even a brief glimpse of nudity (during a skinny-dipping incident in which the hero discovers that the girl in disguise is not a boy after all). So it seems downright peculiar that the proverbial elephant-in-the-room is never even addressed.

Other than that, it's a pretty good fantasy movie for it's time, although darker than you would expect from a Disney film. If you can avoid lingering on that glaring plothole, then enjoy...

"Dragonslayer" is a dreary and gloomy fantasy that isn't nearly as much fun as it should have been. It needed a stronger sense of pacing, and more engaging characters. The much talked-about special effects are generally very convincing, although the dragon's face appears to be a bit stiff in close-ups. There are some interesting sequences (the lottery, the climax), but for some reason I never found the movie really exciting. And kids will probably like only a few parts of it. (**1/2)