Matthew Robbins textures his film with muted brooding colors for the coarse-flavored peasant environment to the more brightly-colored dragon sequences. As a whole the acting is fair, but limited by the material giving the actors a hard time when deciding to switch direction. Chloe Salaman is okay as the film progresses so does her performance improves with material that gives her character some emotional turmoil to showcase. Peter Eyre is both hilarious and pathetic, as a king who can think of nothing more forceful than bleat. Whenever he's on screen he has one mindset I'm angry. John Hallam plays the obligatory rival with no redeeming value. She's able to conceal an important trait of her character physically and verbally, but once that trait is revealed she plays naturally in a routine love interest going through the rocky, a dragon is trying to kill me motion.
Caitlin Clarke is fair playing against gender type with her character. Richardson dies in two scenes in the film coming across as an old man bad role play of a cheesy fantasy board game. Ralph Richardson performance is artificial with his limited screen time. However, he fails to make the hero compelling with his clumsy transition between comedy and drama. MacNicol looks and acts exactly like his character should even if he is the star of the film he always fits with the cast without standing out. He is barely more masculine than the female lead and probably a few octaves higher. Peter MacNicol is not a capable, commanding presence. Much like the actors that play them, they aren't compelling as if their performances were meant for different films. Then there are the human characters that are a mixture of cheeky comedy, satire, and seriousness minus a balance. It's not the inherent quality of the belief (or tool, or skill, or invention) that determines whether it's good or bad, it's how it is used. This plot point correlates some religious ideals. As mention earlier the "Virgin Lottery" (brought to you by Disney) is challenged making a statement against Authoritarian. It characters bog down some of it more complicated religious and politics subjects. Maintaining it's overall dark tone with deaths being prevalent throughout even for major characters you expect to survive. While also doing away with some narrative points in its genre that prevents it from being part of the norm.
Seeing the influence the dragon has over the kingdom holds your attention and so does the dragon when he appears on screen. Leading to characters to pursue any option possible from a gaining helping from a bumbling sorcerer's apprentice to a so call."Virgin Lottery" (brought to you by Disney) to sacrifice to the dragon. Giving the world a true sense of danger as the dragon unprecedented timing of attack raises fear. It build up is done right in sparingly showing the dragon and creating its image as this big menace that is seemingly invincible. Now the way the film is set up is also it biggest downfall. It has some intelligent ideas and semi-subvert dark take on an overuse formula, but it's characters and actors hold it back from greatness.ĭragonslayer is about a young wizard apprentice sent to kill a dragon which has been devouring girls from a nearby kingdom. It says something when the best remember element of the film is a special effect that isn't on screen for much of it duration leaving a bigger impact than anything else with longer exposure. For starter, it's a more realistic take on a typical fantasy story, contains partial nudity, some blood and gore, and no memorable characters. Dragonslayer is an interesting film in Disney ridiculously large catalogue of family films.
0 kommentar(er)
