George and the Dragon

A brave knight goes on a quest to find a missing princess, who -how surprising- is very stubborn but also very beautiful. He finds himself helping her to protect the egg of a dragon, living in constant hesitation between destroying it and continuing to protect it. Throw in a greedy prince and a bunch of villains and you have a nice romantic and adventurous fairy tale.

This movie was nice to watch and enjoy, but just as easily forgotten. In terms of special effects, you cannot compare it to other dragon movies like Dragonheart or Reign of Fire. The storyline was however quite entertaining. A happy end tends to leave you behind with a smile no matter how bad the acting or how lousy the costumes. So I guess that's why I appreciated this movie in a weird kind of way.

There was a lot to complain about in this film - the editing was awkward, the fight scenes poorly shot (they were well choreographed, but poorly filmed), and the special effects were mediocre.

Still, I'd watch this movie again, simply because the characters were so much fun, and the movie made the point of not taking itself seriously.

I saw this movie on Sci-Fi channel, and didn't realize it was any thing other than a made- for-TV movie, and so thought that many elements were better than average. James Purefoy and Piper Perabo were wonderful - and had a good chemistry. Piper was absolutely delectable as a spunky, confident woman. Certainly not 'period,' at all, but then the really good princesses never are.

James Purefoy was equally enjoyable - he seems very much the natural, whether on horseback, wielding a sword, or doing a classic double-take. He makes every scene his own with great charm.

Michael Clarke Duncan, while having a small role, was enjoyable, and would have liked to see have seen his character more fully developed.

Patrick Swayze was very, very weak - he didn't seem interested in what he was doing, unless it was a fight scene. An English accent wouldn't have killed him either.

But I had fun with the movie - I laughed out loud more than once, and really, really enjoyed the jokes. I thought that they kept the tongue-in-cheek quality at just the right level.

I rented this one for some evening's mind pablum and my wife and I enjoyed it thoroughly. OK. It's not St. George and is full of anachronisms, goofs and puns and is more slapstick than sandals and slice 'em up. But, the cast is delightful and even the villains are having a good time. If you're familiar with the several versions of George and the Dragon, there are lots of good puns and carry-overs to amuse it but the amazing thing is it works. It doesn't lapse into stupidity or overdone, ham-bone theatrics. The pace is quick, regular and interest is maintained throughout the story. I plan to show it to my grandkids as it is a jolly romp through one of our grand old myths.

They always say never judge a book by its cover. Well, the truth is we all do, even though we know better. Some do it more than others. Me? Well, I guess I'm no different.

I saw this movie listed on my "You might like this" list at one of the DVD websites, and, after scoffing at it here and there, wondering what kid of film would have such unimpressive DVD cover art (technically very good, but nothing unique) for a title I'd never heard of? After a while I became curious, dismissed it, then became curious again, until I finally broke down a bought a copy.

It was pleasantly enjoyable for what it was. The sets, costumes and even the acting were respectable and entertaining. The truth is this is a kids' flick, so you can't really expect true-to-history swordsmanship and all that went with it. It's meant to tell a tale of knights and chivalry to youngsters who are into that sort of thing. And the film does so successfully.

I have no great love for the film, but I appreciate it for what it is, and even then I think it's A quality flick in terms of historic children's' fair. Respectably shot, though somewhat skidding a rough gray area of prosaic and inspired lensing, the film achieves a certain artistry that might be compared to some of the black and white classics in terms of shot composition. But maybe that's getting too high- falutin' for film meant for younger ages.

There's some contemporary pop culture references, and the acting is a little over done, but again it's all aimed at younger audiences.

The one interesting aspect was to see Patrick Swayze in a historic/fantasy film. One is so used to seeing him in films dipped in Americana that it almost almost seemed out of place for a middle aged Texan to be donning chain mail and strapping on a sword. But, he's an actor. That's his job. He can be anybody. Does he succeed? He sure does. He's in the same thespian league as the rest of the cast.

It's an entertaining little film that should put grins on young boys and girls alike on a lazy weekend. If my adult side had a serious criticism, well, I'll just keep those to myself :-)

Not a big favorite of mine, but something that shows that a film in this genre can succeed. It's a film that despite being aimed at younger viewers, shows that there's more than enough story material that can be eeked out of a period that's very unfamiliar to most people. In fact this film didn't need all the theatrics and SFX had it been aimed at an older crowd. It shows how this kind of stuff is truly interesting to people... dragons or no.

With that in mind, give it a chance.

Enjoy with the family :-)

This film looks as though it had major production problems with cast (disapearing) and hence a revised plot line?? After what I imagine is a bit of a bodge job on the script the cast has persevered with a lot of humour and gusto to present a story which although it has many flaws also has a charm that makes up for this to the credit of Purefoy, Perabo and Duncan who throw themselves into making the best of it I suspect. If you like a comedy along the lines of A Knights Tale combined with a bit of Robin Hood Prince of Thieves then this is pretty much what you are getting, a good old romp with some hammy over the top theatricals thrown in.