Dragon Fighter (2003) (V)

Director:

Phillip J. Roth

Writers:

Micheal Baldwin (screenplay)
Phillip J. Roth (screenplay)

Release Date:

4 January 2003 (USA)

Genre:

Sci-Fi | Thriller

Tagline:

There can be only one dominant species.

Plot:

Workers in an underground lab fight for their lives against a cloned dragon they created.

Plot Keywords:

Dragon | Scientist | Fire | Helicopter | Person On Fire

Cast

Dean Cain	...	Capt. David Carver
Kristine Byers	...	Dr. Meredith Winter
Robert Zachar	...	Dr. Ian Drackovitch
Marcus Aurelius	...	Dr. Greg Travis
Robert DiTillio	...	Kevin Korisch
Vesela Dimitrova	...	Bailey Kent (as Vassela Dimitrova)
Hristo Shopov	...	Capt. Sergei Petrov
Chuck Echert	...	Cookie
Kelly Wilborn	...	Dying Mother
Hector Kleist	...	Knight #1
John Barnsall	...	Knight #2
Chad Boyer	...	Knight #3
Matthew Coe	...	Knight #4
Matt Harris	...	Knight #5
Darius Kerns	...	Knight #6

MPAA:

Rated R for language.

Runtime:

85 min

Country:

USA

Language:

English

Color:

Color

Sound Mix:

Stereo

Certification:

South Korea:15 | USA:R

Filming Locations:

Sofia, Bulgaria

Company:

Angry Dragon Entertainment

Trivia:

The split screens were added in the edit as an attempt to make the "talking heads" scenes more interesting.

Goofs:

Plot holes: There is a fusion explosion in the lab, with power half the Hiroshima bomb. After it's exploded, rescuers find another lab just 30 meters below explosion point. The lab is still quite operational, and even the second dragon is alive and well.

Movie Connections:

Featured in "Troldspejlet: (#29.11)" (2003)

mild appeal of B movie that isn't pretentious

This is a formula B science fiction movie, and the director made no bones about it. It is about a dragon who is restored to life by a scientific team. Everything done is stuff you've seen many times before. It is a weak script, with no real characters. In fact, it is full of stereotype characters and situations. The director attacks this by just making it a formula movie, with no attempt to fool us, and that gives this movie a mild appeal, but it isn't something you're likely to remember a while. It is best seen while you're cooking, cleaning, working out. Sort of mindless fun. It has its place in entertainment, but it certainly isn't something you sit down with friends to watch, unless you're all just drunk and don't care. The mass rating of 3.2 is probably fair. I don't think it is as crappy as most people, but I am surprised that some people in the postings thought this was spectacular. That really eludes me, as I see no attempt to even make this a memorable film.