All Comments about...

Reign of Fire 2002

While the movie has the potential to be a good action movie and starts quiet good, is looses its momentum rather fast and gets a standard Hollywood action flick with nothing unique to offer. I will not watch it a second time!

loading replies
6

Shout by whitsbrain
VIP
5
BlockedParent2022-01-15T16:51:34Z— updated 2022-01-23T15:25:37Z

This apocalyptic tale of dragons that destroy mankind falls short. I would have rather seen the actual war between the dragons and all of mankind. Instead we see a small community plus a rag-tag band of dragon hunters clash over whether to simply survive or go down swinging against the dragons. Now I realize a full scale battle over the Earth is going to be a little more costly movie budget-wise than what we got for a finished product so let's point out the good stuff we did get. The best thing about "Reign of Fire" is the insanity of Matthew McConaughey as Van Zan. His confrontation near the end of the movie with a mighty dragon is one for the ages. He brings an intensity to Van Zan that Christian Bale can't hold a candle to playing his character Quinn. The direction by Rob Bowman is decent and it does look a good bit like many of the "X-Files" episodes he helmed. The special effects are above average CGI especially the final clash with the boss dragon. The rest of the movie is mildly entertaining but it's nothing that will stick with you for very long.

loading replies
6

Shout by UnsungGhost
BlockedParent2021-09-09T05:52:34Z— updated 2021-12-31T16:42:44Z

This takes place in a post-apocalyptic world where dragons have nearly wiped out humanity. For an early 2000's film the CGI is quite good. The story is captivating and it has some pretty good acting. But there's something that seems to be missing.

I think the biggest downfall is actually that the runtime is too short. It could have benefited from becoming a miniseries, because many of the heavy moments are quickly glossed over. There's just so many different story beats that get cut down to 5-10 minutes, and there's not a lot of exposition. And the ending is almost non-existent. However, that also means the audience is pretty unlikely to get bored from so much happening in a very short amount of time.

loading replies
5

Shout by Keldian
BlockedParentSpoilers2021-08-27T00:47:57Z— updated 2021-08-28T19:31:25Z

What an absurd ending. 3 of them head out to a trashed London finding it infested with dragons, but just as they get there all the dragons conveniently fly away never to be seen again, except for the specific one they went there to kill. Once that's done, no worries, problem solved–the millions of remaining dragons in the world have mysteriously retreated.

And why would there only be one male? They reproduce thanks to him, but only females hatch from the eggs? Makes no sense biologically, and also means the species is doomed to extinction since the male would die sooner or later anyway.

loading replies

alright movie with gucci cast.
Good score cuz it contains the most epic scene i've ever seen in my entire life. You'll know it when you see it.

loading replies

The other reviews are quite right in that the finale of the film suffers from predictability. I think this is one of those occasions where a larger budget would benefit the film greatly.

The CGI and the ending could have been improved notably.

But what is here is a cracking film. In the mold of a Mad Max sequel and borrowed by the underrated cult classic Doomsday, there is a great depiction of a post-Apocalyptic world. Full of heart and small details.

The cast are excellent and this is one I've returned to a few times over the years and always enjoyed.

7.5/10

loading replies

Starts promising, looks very well crafted, good cast and mixes the medieval with the modern day setting quite well.. Yet at the end I can't help finding it a shallow finale..

loading replies

:heart::heart::heart::heart::heart::heart::heart: - This film is a little bit underrated it's a great action film in 2002

10:heart:- Masterpiece :100:
9:heart:- Excellent
8:heart: - Amazing :ok_hand:
7:heart:- Great :sun_with_face:
6:heart: - Good :thumbsup:
5:heart: - Average :head_bandage:
4:heart: - Bad but watchable :octagonal_sign:
3:heart: - Bad :sob:
2:rage:- Awful :face_vomiting:
1:face_with_symbols_over_mouth: - Bull Shit

loading replies

Rated a Connor 10, normal 9

loading replies

A classic movie that falls into the category of telling you about the interesting movie you wanted to watch, while delivering something far less interesting and enjoyable. Solid effects and knows it's better to hide poor CGI behind clouds/dust etc to actually make it look somewhat decent, but the entire movie is about the aftermath of what could have been the better World War Z type movie of the war itself.

That said it's not terrible, it's fine in every sense of the word, some decent action, and should keep you occupied for a couple of hours but by that same token you could spend it watching something better :P

loading replies

Held up to second viewing. Apocalypse action entertainment with a dragon twist. CGI Dragons still look good.

And Van Zan jumping at dragon with axe is image that stays with you even when you forget the rest.

loading replies

"Only one thing worse than a dragon... Americans."

Who doesn't like a story with dragons?! As a kid I was so annoyed I couldn't go watch this in theaters, but now that I have finally seen it I can say that I probably would've not cared for it much then. It feels a little slow, but I enjoy that more now. Bald and crazy Matthew McConaughey is a vibe and the dragons look pretty good for 2002.

loading replies
Loading...