Genres

Visitors Review

sarastro7 2012-05-25 17:31:22

Pretty dull

Wow! That James Purefoy looks exactly like Thomas Jane!That's the most profound thought I took with me after having seen therather underwhelming George And The Dragon. For a fantasy comedy, thestory was very dull and the effects unspectacular.The problem wasn't the acting. James Purefoy makes a good knight, andhis various side-kicks are not bad characters. I even thought PatrickSwayze in this role was a pretty good idea, too. Flat-chested PiperPerabo also had some nice potential. I even liked the kid.But the story and everything that happens, and the *way* it happens,was just "eh". Not interesting. Compared to another recent fantasycomedy, Ella Enchanted, which was actually funny, this movie comes upterribly short. I'm sorry for the decent actors who were in thisyawn-inducing trudgery.4 out of 10.

secretsquirrel55 2012-05-25 04:17:27

Cute funny movie

I just watched this movie entitled as Dragon Sword (26 Aug 2006) on theSCI-FI channel. It had a lot of references to other movies in it...Star Wars, George of the Jungle, Back to the Future (skateboard scenein the beginning) It also had several well known actors in it that Iwasn't expecting to see. Some of them could have tried a little hardermaking their roles more believable. The fight scenes were quite fun towatch, and it looked like they were having fun making them. I likedthis movie, it reminded me a little of the comedy stylings in thePrincess Bride. Not that it was anywhere near as good as the PrincessBride. It would be fun to watch with someone who had seen all thereference movies.

Andy V 2012-05-17 13:14:44

No Oscar material but quite entertaining

A brave knight goes on a quest to find a missing princess, who -howsurprising- is very stubborn but also very beautiful. He finds himselfhelping her to protect the egg of a dragon, living in constanthesitation between destroying it and continuing to protect it. Throw ina greedy prince and a bunch of villains and you have a nice romanticand 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 dragonmovies like Dragonheart or Reign of Fire. The storyline was howeverquite entertaining. A happy end tends to leave you behind with a smileno matter how bad the acting or how lousy the costumes. So I guessthat's why I appreciated this movie in a weird kind of way.

nikolay_p_pavlov 2012-05-16 18:02:56

why... can not... the pain... it's the antichrist

This is the one movie that represents all that is bad in the moviebusiness. The actors are pathetic and the script is awful. The specialeffects, if there are any, are so badly done that it would have beenbetter to do it with cartoons instead. Besides that it's great! I thinkthe creators of the movie meant it to have humor, but the only time iwas laughing was when I saw Patrick S. with long hair and the colorfulcostumes that every one had. The scenes at the end were good but theywere not a part of the movie. In the end you will ask yourself "why didI waste my time and money with that crap when I could have watched theplants growing or the clouds moving". I don't think that I am somecritic or anything but this is a truly lame movie! DO NOT WATCH! DANGEROF STUPIDITY OVERLOAD!

2012-05-11 09:36:16

Amazing Cast-Terrible Movie

George and the Dragon was quite a disappointment, considering the makeup of the cast: Patrick Swayze, Michael Clarke Duncan, and Val Kilmer among others. There are no words to describe how AWFUL (!!!) this "movie" was from beginning to end, but let me try anyway so as to give people a fair chance to avoid it and thus try and prevent their day/evening from being ruined: the film deals with the return of an English Crusader, who decides to visit the king and ask him for an acre of land to live off. During their meeting, the king informs him of his missing daughter and the former crusader takes it upon himself to find her. Little does anyone know that the princess does not really wish to be found and that she is guarding something rather unusual... It seems as though the actors/directors/producers went to the countryside on vacation separately, while there they met up with each other at the hotel lounge over hot chocolate, and then decided, on the spot, to make the best of their stay by doing a quick, impromptu, and easy film on the side for some extra cash/spending money. The word "amateur" in describing their work has to be the understatement of the year! The major setback is in relation to the acting (or lack of it). The acting-oh my- the acting is beyond words... School plays (and pre-school for that matter) have better acting! It is truly sad... The big names are unrecognizable! It's as if they're just fooling around or are under the influence of illegal substances. Another weakness is in relation to the very poor dialogues and the weak plot/storyline for which the writers and director are to blame. To mention just a few of these "beauties": 1) A medieval priest making his escape from the gallows on a skateboard... 2) George the Crusader, relieving himself on the beach and then pulling up his zipper, which includes the sound of an actual zipper... I did not know how advanced people were in the Middle Ages... 3) George's elderly father (who by the way does not have legs) riding a straw horse into battle! 4) Tarik, the Moor, repeatedly snapping his fingers on people's foreheads as a joke... 5) Patrick Swayze's and Michael Clarke Duncan's heavy American accents in the midst of Medieval England... 6) PATHETIC special effects AND battle sequences! (One has to see it to believe it) 7) S L O W moving plot, characterized by unabated B O R E D O M... The only positive aspects of the "movie" are the setting/location (with the scenery being beautiful!), and the costumes, which are pretty good (though nothing great). So it's a weak plot, a great setting and a wonderful cast, which when put together fail miserably. The potential for a great movie was definitely there. In short, it could have been so much better if the actors had actually acted, and the writers/director had the ability to... write and direct! A shame really... Rent or buy at your own risk. You have been warned!

2012-05-11 03:39:31

Honor on my shelf

With all the foul language and immorality coming out of Hollywood today you will appreciate movies like this one. I wish they made more of these type of movies today. You just have to go back in time to get the clean ones that don't run out of dialogue and start cussing and use sex to keep you watching. Its good to see the good guy is good all the way through. Usually a hero from our modern movies doesn't have any integrity to be a hero because of his character is worse than the villain. I hope anybody who sees this review will buy this movie It will be a honor to have it on their shelf.

Boba_Fett1138 2012-05-06 23:58:33

The storytelling makes the movie nearly unwatchable but still there is plenty to enjoy.

Unlike the title suggest, this movie hardly features any dragons andthe movie should perhaps had been titled; "George and the Dragon Egg".Still the movie further more features all of the adventures ingredientsyou would expect. Swordfights, princesses, traveling, villains. Themovie is a fairly good adventure family for the entire family. Themovie features some violence but the fun musical score by Gast Waltzingmakes sure that the movie remains always light and fun to watch, nomatter how serious or scary the movie ever gets.The story is rather weak and simple and the way it is told makes thingseven worse. Everything is told so formulaic and predictable thatnothing ever comes as a surprise- or across as well written. It makeseverything that happens in the movie feel disjointed and also quitemessy. The character treatment is poor and at least halve of thecharacters that are introduced seems to be redundant for the movie. TomReeve obviously is not a very experienced director yet and I'm not toosure if the real talent for it is present. He often works as a produceror second unit director of B-action movies. The kind of stuff DolphLundgren, Rutger Hauer and Christopher Lambert star in. This productionis definitely a step-up from those movies but Tom Reeve didn't handledthis opportunity very well.Appearantly the movie cost $32,000,000 to make but it doesn't reallyshow in the movie. Sure, the sets and costumes all do look nice butwhat the movie lacks are some truly impressive and large scalesequences or even some spectacular action sequences. It makes the moviereally low budget looking. Looks like they spend most of the budget onthe cast.The cast is surprisingly enough filled with some big names but yet thecasting gets no thumbs up from me. James Purefoy is a good actor and hemostly showed that in the HBO mini-series "Rome" but he's not good andcharismatic enough to play the main heroic character of this movie. Thesupporting cast is far more impressive with actors like Patrick Swayze,Piper Perabo, Michael Clarke Duncan and Val Kilmer in a small cameo.But unfortunately for most of them also goes that they're miscast intheir roles. Piper Perabo plays her character with an overdone Englishaccents that doesn't suit her. It makes you wonder why didn't cast areal English and good actress instead. Also Patrick Swayze feels reallyout of place in this movie but he at least seemed to be enjoyinghimself playing in this movie. The highlight of the movie is perhapsthe Val Kilmer cameo.Still the movie entertains enough to consider this a watchable enough,at least if your expectations for it aren't too high. The movie doeshave its good and adventurous moments but it all is not quite good andimpressive enough to consider this a real truly great genre movie.5/10http://bobafett1138.blogspot.com/

2012-05-06 10:59:44

A wonderful, feelgood movie

I loved this movie. It has everything you need for a great "feelgood" movie - an amazing cast, well done comedy, and an exciting plotline.This is probably the only light-hearted fantasy I've seen in years. It was a much-needed vacation from constant death, gore, and overdone acting. In fact, this movie had basically no gore at all - in one scene when the priest is slashed the red liquid that pours out of the wound turns out to be wine from a satchel!This movie made me feel like I was watching the great "Dragonheart" for the first time all over again. It had this great little tune to go along with it just like Dragonheart, as well.I'd never really seen much of James Purefoy until now - and I'm surprised that he wasn't the star of all of those other great movies like "A Knight's Tale." He played this part very well, and I'm sure he could go really far with the role of a knight.The comedy was great and by no means offensive or excessive in any way.The acting in this movie wasn't notable - but by that I mean that it wasn't overdone. The actors didn't seem like they were full of themselves the whole time. In fact, they actually acted natural, as if they were actually trying to entertain the audience and not attempting to outdo Shakespeare.Purefoy, as I stated above, was a joy to watch, and who doesn't like the beautiful and lovely Piper Perabo? The costumes in this movie, and especially hers - were refreshingly simple. You could really see the actors and not just their makeup. Now I admit that Patrick Swayze wasn't fit for the part and his accent seemed pretty heavily American, but the way he played the part still helped the audience identify more with the protagonists. I still appreciated Swayze's effort to play a fantasy role -he played the part as good as anyone, really. The other actors were actually really good - Duncan was funny and friendly, and the priest and nuns were just as funny and likeable as James and Piper.I don't remember when was the last time I actually got all the way through a fantasy movie with a smile on my face (besides the Lord of the Rings). They're all so dark and overdone that it's a disgrace. A few laughs and friendly dragons isn't going to hurt anybody - I feel much happier after seeing that some people still appreciate the good things in literature and legend. Fantasy isn't about showing the most gore or making the most convoluted plot, but creating the most awe-inspiring environment around the viewer. This movie definitely did that. It was almost better than "Dragonheart."

Kenneth 2012-04-30 01:43:34

Packed with charm

True! It's a low budget film and the visual effects are clearly a throw back to late 80's and early 90's; however, for a kids story it has charm and entertainment value.

gee-15 2012-04-29 09:07:13

Not bad

I had been reading about this movie for a while and thought the idea ofa humorous retelling of the legend of George and the dragon had somepotential. However, the film was never widely released. Then I waswatching Sci Fi Channel on a boring Saturday and suddenly this movieappeared (under the generic name of "Dragon Sword"). I quickly realizedthis was the "George and the Dragon" movie I'd been wanting to see.However, I didn't have very high expectations.But ultimately, it's not that bad. It has some major problems. The plotbecomes a bit incoherent at times. The editing is NOT good. The specialeffects are NOT good (and I'm not really that picky about such things).However, the actors lift it slightly above mediocrity. James Purefoy isfun to watch as the war-weary knight who just wants "an acre and twohead of cows" and finds himself on a rather odd journey. Piper Perabois cute as the spunky princess (though they never adequately explainwhy she is so obsessed with dragons). Their relationship follows theusual path of such movies: antagonism followed by mutual attraction.The supporting players are pretty good as well.Keep your expectations low and you'll enjoy the movie. It could havebeen a lot better but it's pretty high quality for the Sci Fi Channel.

skyhouse5 2012-04-29 09:49:46

On the contrary . . . just enough "dragon" . . .

But, mayhap, not quite enough "George." After all, it would seem theintent here was to upstage the "saint" and, in the process, demystifyand dedemonize the "dragon," who, after all, is but a winged serpent,much less to be feared than the snake-oil peddlers ever in our midstand at our bosoms. That said, the wild and woolly offtakes on the hoarytheme seems to this viewer more than amusing and less than misspent. Asfor not quite enough "George," more of him might have provided a morefocused and pointed disambiguation. Moreover, if there is, today, amore persuasive and more engaging actor than James Purefoy, I, for one,would be delighted to witness the portrayal or performance. Given thechance, as in his Marc Antony in the HBO "Rome," this thespian couldwell play Adam in the Garden of Eden and upstage both serpent ANDapple, whoever the Eve. That said, I thought the hatchling wascharming, and Adelaide adequate. Just enough of both to make oneanticipate George R. R. Martin's "A Dance With Dragons," if the manwill ever complete same. Methinks he's come a cropper with the fullexfoliation of his incredible and estimable "Ice and Fire" series. Andwhy has no one even attempted a cinematic projection of this immensesci-fi saga?

2012-04-28 18:54:23

Amazing Movie Despite A Few Weaknesses

I will admit, this movie has a few weaknesses, but those should not stand in the way of the strengths. "George and the Dragon," which also appeared on the Sci-Fi channel under the title "Dragon Sword," REALLY reminded me of the dragon stories I used to read and watch when I was a kid and young adult. However, it's told in a way that appeals to adults as well. It follows the quest of George (James Purefoy), a knight who just returned from the Crusades. George is the ideal crusade knight: battle savvy, honorable, and loyal. After visiting his family, George's father sends him on a quest to find the dragon that George's father tangled with years before. George, who believes dragons are extinct and his father was just telling a fairy tale, finds his own quest. The king's daughter, Princess Lunna (Piper Parabo), has gone missing, and her father offers George a fortune to help find her. Despite the opportunity for wealth and fortune, George only wants an acre of land, two cows, and rest from over fifteen years spent fighting overseas. Meanwhile, the princess finds a quest of her own - to protect a dragon's egg.The most important thing to realize is that this is very much about the characters instead of the dragons. It's about the struggles of the characters and the way they handle those struggles. It's also about honor and friendship. The movie does have an amazing cast, and I'm not talking about the "big names" here like Val Kilmer and Patrick Swayze. I'll admit, this definitely did not represent their best acting - at all. I'm talking about an amazing cast, like James Purefoy and Piper Parabo, who are able to pull off their roles despite the weaknesses of the movie. These characters have a wonderful on-screen relationship as they banter back and forth, and James Purefoy excels in this role. It's not hard to see why he got the part as the Black Prince of Wales in "A Knight's Tale." In fact, if you liked him in that role, definitely catch him in this movie (which was released three years after "A Knight's Tale"). Be warned, however: the beginning of this movie gets off to a bit of a slow start. In fact, the beginning almost seems like a cross between "Dragonheart" and "Monty Python" thanks to the skateboarding monk and a few other . . . moments. Some of the fight scenes were lacking, but others were actually impressive. Despite the slow start and some of the low-budget fighting sequences, the film is completely worth it. It takes off and manages to stand out as an awesome fantasy movie that comes from a genre notorious for ridiculous content.This was a great popcorn movie. It told an entertaining and touching tale of courage, friendship, and honor (despite some of the occasional . . . goofy moments). Overlook those and the rest of the movie has a lot to offer! It is a great movie that the entire family can enjoy.

polingsj 2012-04-26 17:04:47

funny and highly entertaining

I absolutely loved this movie! It was a light highly entertaining film,one that you can sit down and watch at any time. James Purefoy wasabsolutely amazing. I have always been a big fan of his, but he reallyshines in this film. He is the epitome of what a leading man should be.The entire cast was splendid, especially the parts of the skateboardingpriest! The only character that was slightly disappointing was PatrickSwayze's character. I had not seen Patrick in a film for a long timeand I was slightly disappointed with him in this. He didn't seem toreally become the character he was playing. He seemed awkwardthroughout the film. Like the character did not really suit him. Butaside from that I loved the film. It was so nice to see a movie wherethe whole family can sit down and watch it. There was no cussing, nosex, no gore. It was an action packed, romantic, wholesome familymovie. On a little side note and responding to a review I had readearlier, this movie is in fact based on a children's book. It is titledSaint George and the Dragon and is by Margaret Hodges. I used to lovethis book when I was little and having seen it come to life on the bigscreen made the movie all the more special. I would recommend it toeveryone who enjoys a funny sci-fi thriller with a happy ending.

Amy Adler 2012-04-26 05:31:16

Despite a meandering plot, George succeeds on the strength of its beautiful setting, nice cast and numerous action scenes

George (James Purefoy) has just returned from the crusades, with aMoorish friend, Tarik (Michael Clarke Duncan) with him. It is George'sfondest wish to return to his village and acquire a cottage, a smallplot of land and a wife. Not so Tarik; thus, they part company.Meanwhile, the king (Simon Callow) is in distress, for his beautifuldaughter, Princess Lunna (Piper Perabo) is missing. No one knows thetruth, that she has been kidnapped by a dragon for "company". Uponarriving at his father's house, however, George learns that his fatherwants him to "slay" the last dragon, if there is such a creature,before he, George, settles down. Dad gives George a "dragon horn", onethat only the fiery ones can hear, to help locate the beast. Notwanting to disappoint his papa, off goes George. But, his search isconstantly interrupted. First, Princess Lunna's arrogant suitor(Patrick Swayze) is searching for the beautiful princess, too, so thathe can solidify his future riches and stature. He seems to find Georgea rival for the young woman's affections. And, second, Princess Lunnais guarding a dragon egg, after its mother dies, and she doesn't wantany dragon slayers finding her or her treasure. She ESPECIALLY neverwants to see her handsome former suitor for she detests him. From hillto valley to monastery to cave, who will find the princess? This is avery handsome film, with a nice cast and plenty of action. That's good,for the plot zigs and zags like a bee searching for honey. Its veryhard to keep the story straight, so only older children will probablyenjoy it. The actors are fine, with Purefoy making an excellent heroand Perabo giving the princess spunk, brains, and beauty. As the main"heavy", Swayze does a good job while Duncan makes the most of hissmaller role, too. Callow and Joan Plowright add some nicesophistication to the movie as well. One could say, naturally, that themiddle ages never looked as nice as this but most will be enchanted bythe stunning art direction. There is also some modern twists for theold St. George legend so be prepared for some changes to thetraditional versions. In addition, there is a good deal of violence,although it is of the mild variety, so heed this warning if it isimportant to you. But, in short, if you have a fantasy loving familywho clamor for magical movies, this one should fit the bill.

klchu 2012-04-26 11:35:08

Bored of the Rings

This movie started with some promise: big name cast, good looking sets,but then it fell apart.Most of the time it can't tell whether it's a serious movie or acomedy. One minute they're talking about how there's no joy in killingand the next there is a fight scene set to funny music and funnybanter.Some of the acting is pretty bad, mainly from Patrick Swayze and PiperPerabo. She also gets some groaner lines like, "When I marry, it willbe about love." Ugh.But the worst thing about this movie is that it's just boring. Notenough action, not enough humor, not enough plot, not much of anythingreally. Just a lot of clichés and cheesy moments.Also, a movie with "Dragon" in the title should contain a lot moredragons than the few (and pathetic CGI dragons) that appeared in thismovie.Can't the SciFi channel show *any* good movies?

acts2120 2012-04-25 23:41:57

kid friendly family film

There was a lot to complain about in this film - the editing wasawkward, 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 wereso much fun, and the movie made the point of not taking itselfseriously.I saw this movie on Sci-Fi channel, and didn't realize it was any thingother than a made- for-TV movie, and so thought that many elements werebetter 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 reallygood 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, andwould have liked to see have seen his character more fully developed.Patrick Swayze was very, very weak - he didn't seem interested in whathe was doing, unless it was a fight scene. An English accent wouldn'thave killed him either.But I had fun with the movie - I laughed out loud more than once, andreally, really enjoyed the jokes. I thought that they kept thetongue-in-cheek quality at just the right level.

IrishCJH@aol.com 2012-04-25 20:47:06

Cute movie. Great fun.

I had been looking forward to seeing this movie through weeks ofadvertising and I was not disappointed.The story was well written, with several interesting twists. The movieis a mix between legend and farce and is very well done. It is fastpaced with just the right mix of seriousness and playfulness.James Purefoy is excellent. His voice, his looks, his charisma areeverything a knightly hero should be. His acting is extraordinary andhis comic timing was superior. I had enjoyed him in his small role in"A Knight's Tale" and wondered if the promise he showed in that moviewould carry over into others. His acting surpassed my expectations. Theother actors and actresses play their roles well, too. They made anunbelievable story believable... well, almost.The direction was not heavy handed, maintaining the lightheartedspontaneity of the movie. Costumes were great, sets were lovely, scriptwas fun.All in all, this is a movie I would recommend to my friends.

dvoightlander 2012-04-25 07:38:37

Lovely little film!

This is such a sweet little film - it's too bad that it is having suchhorrible distribution problems. I think lots of kids would enjoy it,and it's quite watchable for adults, too! Especially since JamesPurefoy is wonderful in it. After his performance in "Vanity Fair," aserious and heartbreaking dramatic role, it's nice to know that he isjust as capable of making a funny, lighthearted film as well. Everyone else is grand as well, except for Patrick Swayze, who justsort of walked through his role. Even the simple, scaled-down fairytale type dialogue just sounded awful, falling out of his mouth likeclumps of half-chewed food. Of course, the CGI dragons aren't exactlyas slick as you'd like them to be in 2005, but the cinematography isbeautiful, and the editing is fast and keeps the pace rolling along ata good clip.Did I mention that James Purefoy is wonderful? And the outtakes at theend are great!

2012-04-23 04:09:04

Cute--with an interesting ending

Definitely glad I didn't buy the film, but it was great for a watch. With all the CGI available now, I was really disappointed we saw so little of the dragon herself. The human action just wasn't enough to keep me intrigued all the way through.

TrevorAclea 2012-04-22 10:05:21

Too much George, too little dragon

The barely-even-released George and the Dragon is better than itstroubled post-production history implies, but despite beingconsiderably more competent the best that can really be said of it isthat it's harmless. Aside from some miscasting and weak performances –take a bow Michael Clarke Duncan, Joan 'Pantomime Dame' Plowright and aWTF-are-you-doing-here Patrick Swayze looking like Medieval Texastrailer trash – the biggest problem is that there's too much George,too little dragon. James Purefoy's pleasant enough in a Pierce BrosnanTV-movie sort of way, but there's a notable lack of dragon slaying (hespends most of the time protecting an unhatched dragon's egg) and fartoo many ideas borrowed from other films, not least Val Kilmer'sunbilled cameo as the Dread Pirate Roberts – sorry, El Cabillo –sporting another of his collection of bad Irish accents. The highlightis a horse defecating continually through a love scene in the endcredits out-takes.