MovieChat Forums > Dragonslayer (1981) Discussion > Terrible movie - at least 5 stupid and i...

Terrible movie - at least 5 stupid and illogical things

posted 17 years ago by youaresquishy
52 replies | jump to latest

There are at least about five things in this film that are illogical and make no sense. None of these are disbelief-suspension issues--they are stupidity issues.

For example:

(1)(a) The entire village holds a big celebration for the protagonist after he magically causes a landslide that puts a bunch of rocks in front of the dragon's lair, because, apparently, everyone is absolutely certain the dragon has been killed, despite the fact that all that has happened is that the protagonist has used a spell to create a landslide, and despite the fact that there is absolutely no evidence that the dragon has actually been killed by the landslide, no evidence that the dragon has even been injured by the landslide, and no evidence that it wouldn't be a simple matter for the dragon to remove enough rocks from the entrance to its lair for the landslide to represent any more than a minor annoyance.

(1)(b)Even the protagonist himself is certain that he has killed the dragon, despite the fact that he apparently has psychic powers, as we learned when he remotely viewed a member of his party being killed despite not actually seeing it with his eyes.

(2)(a) The princess clearly commits fraud on the lottery and publicly admits to having done so, yet the results of her fraud are allowed to stand by the only person whose vote that matters, her father, the king, who just a minute before, thought that the lottery was legitimate and was nevertheless about to nullify it merely on grounds that his daughter's name was drawn even though in a completely fair way. The reason--because the princess said she wanted the result to stand, and this somehow vetoes what the king wants. Who cares what she says though?

(2)(b) And why would anyone other than a suicidal person go through such efforts to ensure she is killed by a dragon, no matter what the circumstances? There is no indication that the princess is suicidal.

(2)(c) And doesn't anyone care about the good of the state--presumably having a princess would avoid the turmoil of a succession squabble after the king's death. The princess is apparently the only child of the king. Everyone should be interested in ensuring that she does not die. None of this makes any sense.

(3) The protagonist's love interest clearly commits fraud on the lottery by pretending to be male her whole life. After she admits to having been female, the king should have at least considered forgoing the lottery one year and making her the sacrifice, as a penalty, putting her in jail, or, at the very least, putting her name in the pot a few times to increase her chances. She should have one lot for each year she skipped out, at the very least. Instead, she is given the same treatment as everyone else, and it is as if her fraud never occurred. All of this, with no outcry, despite the fact that everyone knows that the princess' name is never put in the pot and everyone is clearly upset about that, even though, presumably, she's the future ruler.

(4) A tiny nonmagical shield made by a peasant girl protects the protagonist against a torrent of fire so large that was blown at him for so long that it would have easily disintegrated a 10-story building. There is no way any kind of shield could protect someone from that sort of onslaught. The fire completely engulfed his entire person for several seconds, and was quite intense and hot. He used no spell to protect himself. He should have suffocated AND burned to death.

(5) The wizard tells the protagonist to destroy the amulet, and that he would just know when to do it. Nevertheless, when the time comes, the wizard tells him to destroy the amulet. The wizard should have just said, "I'll tell you when to destroy the amulet, but if I'm out of earshot, do it when it gets really bright." The wizard is trying to make it seem like a big mystical thing by telling him that he'd know when the time came to destroy it, but it really isn't a big mystical thing.

Regardless of all of the above, the lead actor Peter MacNicol is a total cheeseball, and that alone would've ruined the film.

What a terrible film. None of this is a matter of disbelief-suspension, which is what silly people say in response to someone pointing out problems like this. Disbelief-suspension is what you do in response to the fact that there's a dragon, or magic. You have to suspend your disbelief in dragons and magic to watch movies like this, and everyone knows that. All of the above are matters of logic. These are serious flaws in this movie.

This is probably the worst fantasy film I have ever seen. I am having trouble thinking of a worse one. The 6.8 rating here at IMDb that this currently has is laughable. This movie deserves no higher than a 2 or 3 from anyone.

[–] rolandofthewhite 17 years ago

The only thing that really bothered me was that the Dragonslayer spear was able to slice through a solid block of iron but didn't slice through Tyrian's sword.

Shouldn't you be worried about your life, instead of that usless peepee of yours?

[–] 17 years ago

[deleted]

[–] 17 years ago

[deleted]

[–] godcharles 16 years ago

Only an idiot would over-think a movie like Dragonslayer. Go play with your
ATARI 2600 !!!!

[–] TheSolarSailor 16 years ago

Only an idiot would over-think a movie like Dragonslayer. Go play with your
ATARI 2600 !!!!

If you aren't interested in thinking, then get the hell out of the thread. Ignorant replies like yours do nothing for anyone. There's quite a few dopes in this thread that can't handle criticism of a film they like and start calling names to anyone who dares speak against it. Funny enough, the only trolls I see here are the ones who fail to bother discussing anything and instead respond with chips firmly on their shoulders. You guys are like a stupid mob..."kill the guy, he dared speak ill of our precious!!!!"

* * * *
If electricity comes from electrons, does morality come from morons?

[–] TheSolarSailor 16 years ago

youaresquishy, while I do think you are trying a bit hard to prove the film to be terrible, I do agree that it has it's problems. I remember not caring for it back in the day because it was somewhat boring, but I also had fond memories of the dragon itself. I bought the DVD the other day and revisited it for the first time in many years. I still think it is rather boring and drags it's heals, but once the dragon scenes begin, I found myself enjoying it. They did an incredible job on Vermithrax Pejorative himself and the go-motion alone is worth watching the film from time to time.

Even the protagonist himself is certain that he has killed the dragon, despite the fact that he apparently has psychic powers, as we learned when he remotely viewed a member of his party being killed despite not actually seeing it with his eyes

As I already told one of your childish detractors in this thread (what an angry sad sack bunch of dorks who get mad when someone dares to point out some mistakes or to not share an opinion), I agree with you that it was rather dumb for the characters to assume that the beast was dead. Maybe I can let it slide that the villagers thought this, but there was really no reason for a sorcerer's apprentice not to realize that the beast in magical by nature and not so easily dispatched. This isn't a tiger or a bear we're talking about, LOL!

The reason--because the princess said she wanted the result to stand, and this somehow vetoes what the king wants. Who cares what she says though?

I think the reason that the King allows her to proceed is because public opinion could easily sway against him to a point of rebellion. Kings are not ensured their position when the masses get wronged to a certain point, and the people didn't really seem discontent with him other than with the issue of the unfair lottery where the rich were protected. He sees that his only real hope to save her is for the would-be sorcerer to slay the dragon.

The protagonist's love interest clearly commits fraud on the lottery by pretending to be male her whole life...All of this, with no outcry, despite the fact that everyone knows that the princess' name is never put in the pot and everyone is clearly upset about that, even though, presumably, she's the future ruler

I was wondering about this as well when viewing the film. I mean, they basically made it a point for the girlfriend to willingly enter the lottery, but it is hard to believe that some sort of punishment wouldn't have come down upon the girl, if not the father himself for having done this. They wrote it off in one seen where the father tells another not to begrudge a saved life. This was the middles ages, people weren't so forgiving.

A tiny nonmagical shield made by a peasant girl protects the protagonist against a torrent of fire so large that was blown at him for so long that it would have easily disintegrated a 10-story building. There is no way any kind of shield could protect someone from that sort of onslaught

In a sense it was magical, as the shield was made of the dragon's own scales. one of the points of the film is that dragons wouldn't exist without magic. I see no reason that this would be a problem.

The wizard tells the protagonist to destroy the amulet, and that he would just know when to do it. Nevertheless, when the time comes, the wizard tells him to destroy the amulet. The wizard should have just said, "I'll tell you when to destroy the amulet, but if I'm out of earshot, do it when it gets really bright."

Absolutely. The scene where the Ulrich yells at Galen robbed the young sorcerer of any wisdom we might could have walked away thinking he had.

Regardless of all of the above, the lead actor Peter MacNicol is a total cheeseball, and that alone would've ruined the film

Yes, McNicol was bland and never actually caused me to buy into or care about his character at all. The credits roll and he is nothing you even want to remember. Yes, he is rather brave, but as mentioned above the film ends and he never achieves any real wisdom or becomes something more. He was disappointing, but then so were most of the characters here. Princess Elsmith was the only character I liked, and the dragon babies' murder was the only scene that made me feel any emotion. What does that say about the cast??

This is probably the worst fantasy film I have ever seen. I am having trouble thinking of a worse one. The 6.8 rating here at IMDb that this currently has is laughable. This movie deserves no higher than a 2 or 3 from anyone

I do think you are over-reacting. The film has it's problems, yes, but is it REALLY worse than some of the other fantasy films out there?

* * * *
If electricity comes from electrons, does morality come from morons?

[–] midnight_muse 15 years ago

Regarding (2)(c), we don't know what their laws of succession are. For example, Casiodorus didn't inherit his kingship from his father, but from his brother, as evidenced in a speech he gives not long after Galen comes to the kingdom.

Who knows if their culture even allows for reigning Queens at all? Who knows whether Elspeth (as a female) was in the line of succession, necessarily?

And even if she wasn't going to be reigning Queen, but something more like the Queen Mother, there would most certainly be a contingency plan in place in case she didn't live to adulthood, didn't marry, didn't have male children, etc.

So it's faulty to assume her death would automatically bring about turmoil. After all, there were plenty of ways for her to die in the natural course of things, in addition to death by dragon.

Most likely, without Elspeth in the picture, the succession would pass to another (probably male) kinsman of Casiodorus. Something similar seems to have happened to put Casiodorus himself on the throne -- perhaps just the absence of a son by his brother the former King.

I have no idea why I'm discussing this like it's real history...

________________________________________

I don't come from hell. I came from the forest.

[–] TheFatDruidofNacyl 14 years ago

1a. This is a group of villagers that have been without hope for a very long time. They see someone use great magic and move the very earth to prevent the dragon from coming out. This may not be the smartest thing to do but I believe given the time period its possible. Sometimes you have to celibate the small victories.

1b. This character is too sure of himself but not in full control of his powers. He also is being treated like a hero so he gets lost in the moment. This movie shows that he needs to grow as a character.

2a. The king tries to change this but if he would of not let her then his own people would of fully revolted. Even his own guards would of went against him if he didn't allow this.

2b. She is not being suicidal but being a hero. She is sacrificing herself for her people. She is fighting injustice the best way she can by giving her own life.

2c. Well the way the kingdom was at the time, I think it was more important that she set herself as an example, giving people hope. Plus it could be possible there was cousins, uncles, or other in the blood line that could take over the kingdom if needed. They didn't show this because it was not the point of the movie.

3. Her name was put in with everyone else. If the princess didn't do what she did, then there is a good chance This girl could of been picked.

4. The shield was made out of dragon scales. This would be a great defense in itself. Who's to say that the magic energy didn't enhance the shields protection as well. It does show that he doesn't need to say any spells for some magic to work.

5. Just because you may know the right time to do something, doesn't mean you are ready to act on it. By destroying the amulet he not only removes all that power but also kills his mentor. It was hesitation which needed the other guy to yell out for him to step up and do what is right.

A man can change his stars
Fear me, Love me, do as I say, and I'll be your slave.

[–] Isau 14 years ago

I kind of feel like folks are reading a little too much into this movie.

This is a fantasy picture. Some of characters are more 'archetypes' than real people. The 'princess who is pure and beautiful and willing to sacrifice herself for the greater good' is simply a trope of the genre. You may feel it's not 'realistic,' but this is a fairy tale. It's isn't true to real life and isn't striving to be; instead it's true to the theme in the same way Hansel and Gretel or Snow White are.

[–] magic8ball2112 14 years ago

Somewhat legit points. Still:
1) To all concerned, there's only one entrance to the lair. The mountainside is collapsed upon it. Chances are from their viewpoint, a) the dragon was killed when the mountainside collapsed, or b)it won't be able to escape, starve, & die.

2)The King is bound by his own law to go through with the lottery results, even if it costs his daughter's life. Had he not been bound he could've included her in the lottery &, if her name was drawn, could've said "pfft! I don't think so! There's that succession-to-the-throne thing, remember?" and voided her selection. The daughter was keenly grieved at being kept out of the lottery. I don't think her so much 'suicidal' as 'duty bound', setting herself as a sacrifice for the good of the state.

3)Sure Valeria committed fraud. Still, the fact was from that point forward, lest someone come along & kill the dragon, she would no longer be able to avoid the lottery. I do concede they could've penalized her.

4)The shield is made of dragonscales. If they were good enough to protect the dragon when it swam in 'burning water' it was bound to protect the hero. More puzzling is how the hero didn't wholly protect his lance behind the dragon's fire breath, had it exposed to the flame, yet it survived!

[–] MrSiegal 12 years ago

I agree that the OP isn't a troll...just expressing a negative opinion on a pretty good fantasy movie. *shrugs*

How do the angels get to sleep when the Devil leaves his porch light on?

[–] sascha-17 12 years ago

The protagonist's love interest clearly commits fraud on the lottery by pretending to be male her whole life. After she admits to having been female, the king should have at least considered forgoing the lottery one year and making her the sacrifice, as a penalty, putting her in jail, or, at the very least, putting her name in the pot a few times to increase her chances. She should have one lot for each year she skipped out, at the very least. Instead, she is given the same treatment as everyone else, and it is as if her fraud never occurred. All of this, with no outcry, despite the fact that everyone knows that the princess' name is never put in the pot and everyone is clearly upset about that, even though, presumably, she's the future ruler.

Gotta say that this always bothered me. Where's the difference between the King keeping his daughter out of the lottery and our heroine and her father pretending that she was a boy? She lets her fellow virgins take the risk of becoming dragon-fodder for years and years and yet, we're supposed to sympathize with her when she finally *is* entered into the lottery? Hmmmm ..

And besides: If only virgins are applicable, shouldn't the girls entered be *a lot* younger than the ones we see in the lottery scenes? I mean: A rural, pre-Christian community where girls are still virgins in their late teens/early twenties is hard enough to swallow. But if you add the fact that putting out will save you from potential death by dragonfire, I'd say parents would actually force their daughters to have sex as early as possible.

S.