2004 George and the Dragon
This was the official website created to promote the 2004 movie, George and the Dragon.
The first crusade to free the Holy Land has ended. A mass of weary knights, squires, soldiers of fortune and priests are making their way home across a Europe that has changed forever. An age of legends and mystery is about to unfold.
George, a handsome English knight, unsettled by the horrendous bloodletting he witnessed in Palestine, desires to hang up his sword and settle down to a quiet, peaceful life. On returning to England, George heads north where he’s heard the land is good and the population sparse and of a kindly King named Edgaar.
He finds King Edgaar in a terrible state. His beautiful daughter, Lunna has recently disappeared. In return for a small plot of land, George agrees to search for Princess Lunna. With Edgaar’s faithful servant, Elmendorf, George sets out.
George discovers both the princess and the truth behind her strange disappearance. The quest now set before them ends in a love, a lie and a legend that has lasted a thousand years.
The family friendly adventure film George and the Dragon tells the tale of a knight who, upon returning home after an unsettling period fighting the Crusades, agrees to find a king's missing daughter in order to possess some land in a quiet area of the world. Soon he learns that in order to return the princess, George will be forced to outwit a dragon with the help of his loyal friend Elmendorf.
Rating:PG (for action violence)
Genre: Action & Adventure , Comedy , Drama , Science Fiction & Fantasy , Romance
Directed By:Tom Reeve
Written By:Tom Reeve , Michael Burks
In Theaters:Mar 28, 2004 wide
On DVD:Apr 17, 2007
Runtime: 93 minutes
Studio: First Look Home Entertainment
RottenTomatoes Tomatometer Audience 47%
June 21, 2014
*** ½ bl4ket4ylor
Goofy fun. Clean, silly, but doesn't take itself too seriously. Okay to watch with the family, but not made just for the kids. Not great cinema, but fun to watch.
June 1, 2013
*** ½ Frances H
Cute, slightly tongue-in-cheek, but clean enough for kids and parents version of the Saint George and the Dragon story. This film was certainly better than Disney's Dragonslayer that I took my son to way back when and was horrified that what was touted as a kid's movie was so grisly and the princess was eaten! They actually showed her chewed off legs! But this movie was just fun for everybody. Very Enjoyable.
February 24, 2013
* ½ Anna Q
I've seen this!! It's HORRIBLE. Tragical, really. Piper Perabo is a princess? And Val Kilmer is in it...but uncredited. He didn't want to be associated with it, I guess.
January 18, 2012
Entertaining tale about the king's daughter and a dragon. This is basically a comedy but it does not get too carried away. I enjoyed it. This movies does not have any wizards or other such characters in it. Its basically an Old English knights and dragons type of tale. I thought it was well done and not too cheesy. Its a step above a made for TV flick.
December 11, 2011
*** Bobby J.
I liked it. George was awesome.
December 8, 2011
*** Minya A
Definitely was not expecting to like this film as much as I did. It's cheesy and it has its flaws, but it's quirky and fun - something the whole family can enjoy. Particularly liked the end-credits with the hilarious blooper reel.
December 2, 2011
*** Don S
This began incoherently; it seemed to be a series of vignettes that had little connection. As it went on, it came together pretty well. The dragons were awesome, but there was not enough of them in the movie. The acting is barely decent - Swayze overplays it hugely, Perabo looks great but lacks presence. It appears the director didn't know what effect he was looking for, campy fantasy or action with a fantasy backdrop. He wound up throwing everything at the wall and went with whatever stuck. Not great by a long stretch, but it was worth the watch by the time it ended.
George and the Dragon (2004)
21 Feb 2014
Posted by dullwood68 in Movies
D: Tom Reeve / 93m
Cast: James Purefoy, Piper Perabo, Patrick Swayze, Michael Clarke Duncan, Bill Treacher, Jean-Pierre Castaldi, Rollo Weeks, Paul Freeman, Caroline Carver, Simon Callow, Joan Plowright
After fighting in the Holy Wars, knight George (Purefoy) returns home to seek a quiet life and settle down on a small parcel of land. To this end he seeks out King Edgar (Callow). But the King’s daughter, Princess Luna (Perabo) has been abducted, and in return for the land he wishes, George agrees to help search for the Princess alongside her betrothed, Garth (Swayze). While the rescue party, accompanied by faithful retainer Elmendorf (Treacher) and adventure-seeking youngster Wryn (Weeks), look for the Picts they suspect have taken Luna, the truth is far stranger. Luna is actually holed up in a cave looking after a dragon’s egg, having been abducted by the mother (who she calls Adelaide for some reason). Luna is determined that the egg will hatch and when she is rescued by George, she thwarts his repeated attempts to destroy it. An uneasy alliance is formed between them as George agrees to help Luna get the egg out of harm’s way long enough for the baby dragon (who she calls Smite for some reason) to hatch. As they travel they must contend with the machinations of Garth, several bands of Picts, and an approaching band of mercenaries led by the dastardly El Cabillo (an uncredited Val Kilmer) who have heard there is a reward for the Princess’s safe return. Cue sword fights, chases, a comic priest (Castaldi), an easily swayed Mother Superior (Plowright), and a brief appearance by Bill Oddie as an innkeeper, not to mention an adequately rendered dragon and its offspring.
Despite being a Euro-pudding of a movie – Germany, the UK and Luxembourg were all involved in the movie’s production – George and the Dragon is a light-hearted romp that doesn’t take itself too seriously, has a surfeit of knowing performances (Purefoy has the movie’s measure completely), a winning line in obvious, hokey pantomime humour (watch out for the woman fixing her thatched roof when George arrives at the village where his father (Freeman) lives), and a convincing medieval feel courtesy of the (largely) Scottish locations. Enjoying themselves as much as Purefoy, the rest of the cast give their all, and the script by director Reeve and Michael Burks is geared to provide each character with enough screen time to shine in their own right, as well as entertain the audience.
There’s nothing new here, obviously, but it doesn’t matter. It’s a simple tale simply told but with enough verve and skill to offset its modest budget. Reeve, better known as a producer, keeps the various plot strands and storylines clearly outlined, and frees his cast to inject the kind of earnest frivolity this kind of movie thrives on. The photography by Joost van Starrenburg shows off Scotland and Luxembourg’s scenery to great effect, and the physical and special effects are integrated seamlessly (well, except for the shot of the dragons splashing about in a lake).
On the minus side, Perabo’s allowed too many modern day inflections and references in her performance, and Swayze looks ill throughout; his wig doesn’t help either. And that’s about it. Nitpickers may find other things to complain about but that would be doing the movie a major disservice. It’s not the best movie ever made but George and the Dragon is fun, entertaining, and a more than pleasant way to spend ninety minutes.
Rating: 7/10 – an entirely enjoyable surprise of a movie that’s much better than it looks; for once, a “guilty pleasure” you can tell all your friends about.
Originally posted on thedullwoodexperiment website.
George and the Dragon (2004) Directed by Tom Reeve
Posted by: Frank Veenstra
(Review originally written at 16 December 2006)
Unlike the title suggest, this movie hardly features any dragons and the movie should perhaps had been titled; "George and the Dragon Egg".
Still the movie further more features all of the adventures ingredients you would expect. Swordfights, princesses, traveling, villains. The movie is a fairly good adventure family for the entire family. The movie features some violence but the fun musical score by Gast Waltzing makes sure that the movie remains always light and fun to watch, no matter how serious or scary the movie ever gets.
The story is rather weak and simple and the way it is told makes things even worse. Everything is told so formulaic and predictable that nothing ever comes as a surprise- or across as well written. It makes everything that happens in the movie feel disjointed and also quite messy. The character treatment is poor and at least halve of the characters that are introduced seems to be redundant for the movie. Tom Reeve obviously is not a very experienced director yet and I'm not too sure if the real talent for it is present. He often works as a producer or second unit director of B-action movies. The kind of stuff Dolph Lundgren, Rutger Hauer and Christopher Lambert star in. This production is definitely a step-up from those movies but Tom Reeve didn't handled this opportunity very well.
Apparently the movie cost $32,000,000 to make but it doesn't really show in the movie. Sure, the sets and costumes all do look nice but what the movie lacks are some truly impressive and large scale sequences or even some spectacular action sequences. It makes the movie really low budget looking. Looks like they spend most of the budget on the cast.
The cast is surprisingly enough filled with some big names but yet the casting gets no thumbs up from me. James Purefoy is a good actor and he mostly showed that in the HBO mini-series "Rome" but he's not good and charismatic enough to play the main heroic character of this movie. The supporting 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 in their roles. Piper Perabo plays her character with an overdone English accents that doesn't suit her. It makes you wonder why didn't cast a real English and good actress instead. Also Patrick Swayze feels really out of place in this movie but he at least seemed to be enjoying himself playing in this movie. The highlight of the movie is perhaps the 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 does have its good and adventurous moments but it all is not quite good and impressive enough to consider this a real truly great genre movie.
DRAXBLOG MOVIE REVIEWS
SEPTEMBER 22, 2005
George and the Dragon (2004)
A Film Review
Copyright Dragan Antulov 2005
Hollywood was often accused of spreading simplified and incorrect perceptions of world's history among world masses. The arguments for that claim could be found in various aspects of today's popular culture, but few point to the severity of the problem as some European filmmakers' tendency to tailor their visions of European past and culture towards Hollywood standards. One of such examples is GEORGE AND THE DRAGON, 2004 medieval fantasy comedy written and directed by Tom Reeves in Luxembourg.
The plot begins after the First Crusade, when hundreds of European knights return to their homes. One of them is George (played by James Purefoy) who must leave his friend and former Muslim foe Tarik (played by Michael Clarke Duncan) in order to return to England and buy small piece of land from King Edgar (played by Simon Callow). The sovereign has other problems, because his daughter Princess Lunna (played by Piper Perabo), who was just about to marry powerful warlorld Garth (played by Patrick Swayze), disappears, apparently being abducted by the last dragon on Earth.
The plot by Reeve and Tom Burke quickly dispenses with any attempt of historical accuracy and instead mixes elements of ancient Christian legend of St. George and the Dragon with simplified "politically correct" version of Crusades and some modern-day New Age environmentalism thrown for good measure. This disregard for history, on the other hand, allows Continental European locations to pass for England (or generic West European country) while the characters can be simplified and believable at the same time.
The very simplicity of the characters and plot makes GEORGE AND THE DRAGON one of few action spectacles suitable for the youngest audiences. Those who want more from films than simple stories can enjoy in some unusual performances from the relaxed actors who obviously had great deal of fun during the production. James Purefoy, British actor who was often talked about as potential James Bond, is very entertaining in his semi-comical portrayal of archetypal hero, while Patrick Swayze brings few unintended laughs in uncharacteristic role of villain. CGI dragon, on the other hand, leaves much to be desired, but this could be said about many other aspects of the film. However, GEORGE AND THE DRAGON could nevertheless be recommended as passable entertainment if the viewers' expectations aren't particularly high.
RATING: 5/10 (++)