“Reign of Fire” Reactions *Spoilers*

I thought it kicked ass. The effects were excellent, the characters were thin but believable and the action was intense; the scene where they take down the first dragon was great. My only compliant was that it was a tad short. I would have liked if they included a half hour segment at the beginning where we get to see the dragons tear the cities apart instead of just a few pages in an old TIME. I guess I was just happy to watch a movie without any glaring flaws. I was sick and tired of action movies that were rife with plot holes (Minority Report), inconsistent fx (Spider-man), bad writing (Attack of the Clones), or just plain weak and predictable stories (Men in Black II).

compliant = complaint :smack:

cainxinth, with all due respect (really):


That was one of the worst movies I think I’ve ever seen. My two year old could have written a better plot (and some of the videos she likes to watch have better characterization).

A) They eat ash? I suppose they like their foods with all the nutrients burned out.

B) If they sleep for 65 million years how do they survive? That’s quite the stasis field they’ve got. And even though they apparently breed in the MILLIONS quickly they leave nothing in the fossil record.

C) The entire armed forces of the WORLD can’t defeat them but a bunch of yahoos can?

D) The dragon effects were done better YEARS ago in Dragonheart.

E) The writing was trite and predictable. The ‘1st Kentucky irregulars?’

F) ‘A tad short’? The damn thing was an hour forty five! Agh!

G) If they turn everything to ash and then eat it that would change the atmospheric conditions. And that would show up. I think it would effect species to see the Oxygen partial pressure drop from 20% to say, 5%.

H) Thermonuclear weapons don’t get the job done but 3 ounces of C-4 on a crossbow bolt does?

I) I’m getting a migraine.

As my pal who went with me said…“I will never forgive you for dragging me to this movie.”

Simply put, ugh. Don’t see it. If you already saw it…head for therapy. If you see anyone involved with producing it: slap them. If it’s a scriptwriter, slap them twice. If it’s the producer: shoot them.

This is a bad movie.


I actually enjoyed it. Went in with low expectations, got them exceeded. And I’m sorry, if you think the dragon in Dragonheart were better than these, you’re the who’s insane. Also, they never said that the nukes didn’t kill any of them, they killed quite a few. There was just more. When the movie kicked in, most of them had died because of lack of food.

One problem I had with it: There was the scene where Christian Bale goes in with a torch to the dead dragon, and pulls out an egg. This was a big deal scene, yet it was never mentioned again. Apparently, they cut something.

Despite the poor reviews from the Washington Post and Roger Ebert, whose opinion I generally trust on science fiction and fantasy films, I’m going to go see Reign of Fire today for three reasons:

  1. Matthew McConaughey, shirtless
  2. Christian Bale, shirtless
  3. Mid-air dragon fight

I’m surprised the Christian Bale character didn’t dwell on the fact that he was the cause for the end of the world. Of course, that means there would have to be a plot. But like, “I didn’t tell you guys this, but when I was a boy I woke the dragons up. Now I must be the one to kill the male dragon and end this maddness!” Of course he ends up doing just that, but it’s not like he volunteered for it.

The ending reminded of Jaws: insane animal killer is eaten by monster; shove explosives in monster’s mouth; monster explodes.

as far as I can tell…no, not at the moment.

Charcoal is carbon, perhaps that’s all they need.

Some bacteria can survive in a non living state for millions of years and reproduce exponentially, so its not unheard of in the natural world. Also they are supposed to be more intelligent than humans so maybe we didn’t find them because they didn’t want to be found.

As diku mentioned, the armies killed a bunch but not all, and they didn’t know that it was pointless to kill the females as long as the solitary male survived.

I disagree.

I didn’t mind the writing. I thought it was rather humorous too.

An extra 15 or 30 minutes to see the Dragons rip our cities asunder would have been appreciated by me.

They did cause two ice ages before, maybe the next one was right around the corner.

This is the same as C)

Try meditation and a cup of tea.

I liked it!:wink:

I liked it too. Though how did they know there wern’t say, 2 males? Or 5? Or 20? Or even 1,000? Fish are like that (female lays thousands of eggs, one male fertilizes them all), but even the fish have more than one male per species.

cainxinth, bacteria are substantially different from an animal that size. You can’t make valid comparisons between the two.

I really enjoyed the sound and special effects. Plot wise it was terrible. There are so many holes in the story that there’s more hole than story, twisted and evil. If all you’re looking for is something with nice special effects to kill some time, this is great, but if you’re looking for something marginally intelligent go somewhere else. So, for clarification: Special Effects = GOOD, Plot = Horrible Abyss.

I was pointing out the example of bacteria to show that it is not impossible for a living organism to survive 65 million years in stasis. We are talking about intelligent, ash eating dragons here, who’s to say they don’t exhibit other unusual traits.

Any you might care to mention?

I’m not trying to crusade for this flic or anything, I just didn’t notice any glaring plot holes myself.

  1. Where did Van Zan get the tank?
  2. Where did he get the gas for the tank, helicopter, and other vehicles?
  3. Assuming he could find fuel and ammo for .50 cal machine guns, why couldn’t he find tank shells? Or does he just enjoy using a shotgun against a dragon?
  4. Where did all the other dragons come from? Was there a bunch of unfertilized eggs down in the hole with the male?
  5. Why hadn’t London been taken out with a nuke, thus killing the male? It was the point of origin for the dragon invasion, they destroyed it, so why wasn’t the city reduced to a glass crater? They approved the use of nukes.
  6. Why is there only one male dragon? From an evolutionary point of view it makes no sense to have one male for millions of females, and from a simple luck point of view it makes no sense that after twenty years of breeding at enormous rates (as is stated) only females are born.
  7. If two explosive arrows can kill the single, large, male, how is it possible that the combined military might of the human race can’t wipe them out the first week they start pouring out of London?

I liked it. Granted, it’s not a Memento-style cerebrial type of film, so you won’t hear it’s name mentioned come Oscar time unless it’s for technical merit, but it was a nice way to waste a couple hours. I kinda liked the fact that they didn’t put too much effort into explaining why the dragons were there (to the people fighting them, did it matter? They were there, and that’s all they really needed to know). I wound up taking the opening narration with a grain of salt because how the hell did Quinn (as narrator) know they had been around since the dinosaurs and that they eventually wiped them out? You could just say they came out of the ground due to some nasty magic, and that would do for an answer quite well, because the end result is they’re there. Move along people, nothing to see here.

And I think the main appeal for me, aside from the dragons, is that it’s a summer action movie without Bruce Willis or Will Smith shooting up the set and cracking wise.

The dragons should have had more screen time. The people, less. This is a flaw that plagues almost all monster movies.

A lot of potential that went to waste, I think. As long as they wanted to hold to silly attempts to sound scientific, I would have explained the inexplicably generous amount of fuel the Irregulars clearly had access to (since their only concern was manpower, not supplies) like this: they’d converted the engines to run on dragon firejuice, which they harvested from the ones they brought down, and from one in captivity that was lashed on a flatbed, its wings and legs and tail having been amputated, its spine severed, its jaws detoothed and tendons cut so it was non-operational. That would be the one they’d periodically milk, like snakes for venom. Now that would have been neat–and helped establish Van Zan as more of a psycho.

I’m also a little puzzled as to how the dragons were “invincible” yet could be killed by harpoons, but no matter. And the Single Male Dragon plot point was silliness itself, but I suppose things go over better with audiences if victories can seem more important.

For what it was, though, I enjoyed it; it’s not as if the dragons-destroying-the-world genre is very crowded with contenders.

Yeah, I thought that quite a shame too. This could have been a real fun ‘summer movie’, but it just fell apart for me. I will give the flick credit for being the first I’ve seen in quite a while where the lead villain (so to speak) actually dies the first time the heroes kill it. This was also the first flick since A Knight’s Tale that both the Mrs. and myself watched and both found ourselves wondering “Is this thing ever gonna end?”

Most of the plot holes and inconsistencies have been listed, but a couple I’d like to look at a little closer:
If the Dragon(s) (the movie wasn’t all that clear about whether they all came from the male, somehow, or if they were unearthed in several spots, or all came outta that one hole in London) hibernated for 65 million years, despite the fact that they were starving to death when they went underground, why, then, in 2020, when faced with the same situation, didn’t they just go back to sleep? (I know, then there’d be no movie. More’s the pity.)
The Dragon egg removed from the body of the dead female. Umm, first of all, how did he know it’d be there? And why did he dig it out, aside from the possibility of setting up a sequel? (I beg you, spare me the madness, send me on my way.) I’m with diku, someone dropped the ball in a big way during post-production editing, or something.
One last whine: Why was that bit with the dragon spitting in the kid’s eyes included? Did I miss my seat on the foreshadowing bus that the dragon’s venom was failing him, or was it just another shot missed by the editors? I did see the thing spit out a gout of flame that only half ignited during the big finale, didn’t I?

While I’ll give credit where it’s due, SFX-wise (the dragons were real purty to watch) did anyone else wince at the painfully obvious blue-screening (or whatever process was actually used) when Van Zan is standing atop the tower, with the overcast sky behind him? It reminded me a bit of those hood-POV shots in older films, where the street scene shown behind the car is clearly filmed, and not actually there. (Am I expressing myself clearly here?)

And out of left field: Did anyone else (who avoided all spoilers for the film before seeing it) expect something more like a Godzilla movie from the ads/trailers for this thing? Y’know, F-16s and Apaches vs the Dragons, that kinda thing. For that, I probably could’ve unplugged my brain at the door, and enjoyed the movie. Eh. YMMV.

Now, as long as Eight-Legged Freaks doesn’t take itself real seriously, I’ll have a good time.

I’m a big medieval fantasy enthusiast and I was very disappointed.

The special effects were excellently done; however, the plot was horrible – it was more than horrible – I just can’t think of a word at the moment that describes how terrible it was.

If I were making the movie this is how I would’ve done it:

  1. The “split” would be a few months after not twenty years.

  2. The story would focus on the world succumbing to the might of the dragons. Would go into excruciating detail about the physiology of the ‘monsters’ along with the inner workings of government all over the world handling the crisis in their own way. (i.e nuclear bombs, shelters, etc etc)

  3. The Humans would have lost. (Sorry)
    Guess I expected half-Jurassic Park, half-Dragonheart, and an all-out movie that packed pound after pound of action.

What I did enjoy was quips of information about the dragons. The information about it was the dragons who killed the dinosaurs instead of a meteor was fascinating.

And ** Skeezix ** my grasp of the situation was that dragons secrete two seperate chemicals. When the dragon first awoke he tried to incinerate the boy but since he’d been dormant for so long, only the other gland didn’t work. Guess when you’ve been asleep for millions of years it takes a second try

  • Honesty

…that all it takes for a vehicle to become proof to dragon fire is for there to be a lawn sprinkler to be mounted to the top of it. And this is a threat that the world’s collective armed forces couldn’t overcome?

Damn. I love monster movies, I’ll admit it, but this is going too far.

I saw the trailer for this movie, and I thought, “Huh. Dragon monster movie. Unusual.”

Then I read this thread, and I thought, “Crap! Turns out it sucks.”

So you’re saying the whole dragon-physiology angle was handled in a completely ridiculous fashion? Hmmm…will this ruin the movie for me? I’m a grad student with a background in vertebrate biology, specializing in reptiles. I’m just as willing to suspend my disbelief as the next guy, but I have to admit that in a sad and peevish way, glaring mistakes regarding basic vertebrate physiology infuriate me. If I go to see this movie, will I become blind with rage?

I ask because the b/f and I will be going to see this. I need to know whether or not I will be able to sit quietly through the movie, compiling notes for the rant-to-come on the carride home, or whether I will break down into insane and desperate laughter and begin chewing on the seat cushions and setting small fires.

Any suggestions? It would help if the movie did not take itself seriously, as I suspect Eight-Legged Freaks will not. But I get the feeling this is a completely sober, albeit misguided attempt at ‘magical realism’.