Summary:
A young sorcerer’s apprentice is recruited by knights from a distant land to slay a dragon.
My Thoughts:
If you follow this blog at all then you know I have a proclivity for fantasy films. Earlier this year I did a whole series on films based on the works of Robert E Howard (Conan movies- sword and sorcery stuff). Needless to say, I’m into this kinda stuff, and I don’t care who knows it. I’ve given this film 3.5/5 stars, but for me personally it’s more like a 4/5. This movie is pure fantasy schlock and I ate up every moment of it. It follows fantasy book clichés to the point of being a little bit silly, but if I’m being honest that didn’t turn me off from it in the least. It’s rare that I get to see pulpy fantasy trash up on the big screen, and this film certainly scratched that itch. It’s a travesty that I went twenty-eight years without seeing this film, but I did.
“Be thou consumed by the fires that made thee!”
Galen (Peter MacNicol, “Dracula: Dead and Loving It”) is an apprentice of the sorcerer Ulrich (Ralph Richardson, “Doctor Zhivago”). One day, a band of knights led by Valerian (Caitlin Clarke, “Crocodile Dundee”) approaches Lord Ulrich’s castle in hopes that he can help them with their dragon problem. The way is long and treacherous, and Ulrich is old and feeble; he dies, and Galen inherits his powers. Galen travels with Valerian to the distant land where he intends to use his newly inherited powers to slay the dragon.
So… you ever play Dungeons and Dragons?
This movie is essentially a D&D campaign- as are many 70s and 80s fantasy novels- and those are the kind of novels that I like to pick up on a whim and binge-read over a weekend. Honestly, this is probably the closest I’ll ever get to seeing a Robin Hobb or a Brandon Sanderson novel on the big screen. If I can’t get FitzChivalry Farseer or Vin and Kelsier on the big screen then I’ll settle for Galen and Ulrich. As I mentioned above, this film does follow a lot of fantasy tropes, but it does so in a way that seems respectful to the source material. The tropes don’t exactly feel like tropes in this context, it feels like we’re just watching a retelling of a dragon slaying story from medieval folklore.
What tropes does it follow? 1) A hermit sorcerer and his apprentice living in an isolated castle. 2) A distant kingdom being harassed by a menacing dragon. 3) The dragon’s fury is sated by sacrificing young girls to the dragon twice a year (must be virgins- that’s also a cliché). 4) Magic is used through amulets (or conduits) and dragons are slain with fabled weapons. 5) A greedy king that learns the errors of his ways.
Those are some of the major ones, but I feel like if I really wanted to I could pick this film apart and talk about how each of the events that happen are in some reference to a different story. Again, it didn’t really bother me in this film, primarily because of the tone of the film.
Tone is something fantasy films often struggle with. Play something too heavy and the story comes off brooding and dreary; play something too light and the magical elements feel more silly than serious. This film finds a pretty good balance. There are some scenes towards the beginning of the film with Hodge (Sydney Bromley, “An American Werewolf in London”) that are played a bit too loosely for me, where magic is more of a gag than a tool, but for the most part the film maintains a rather serious demeanor. In sticking with a more serious tone, the film succeeds in crafting a story that works on multiple levels. The dragon is scary; the story is exciting; we have characters that we care about… The point is that when fantasy films do their best to take themselves seriously, the audience will be more invested.
My biggest issue with the film was Peter MacNicol. He was rather annoying as our protagonist. His character arc is pretty similar to a lot of fantasy stories as well: he starts as a cocksure apprentice and then learns how inexperienced he really is in the face of true danger. My problem with him was the way that he delivered lines; he seemed to always be surprised, and after a while that gets incredibly irritating.
Verdict:
Okay, look. This movie is far from perfect, but as a fantasy film it’s a prime example of sword and sorcery, and its one of the better dragon movies I’ve seen (I’d say it’s better than “Dragonheart”). As a cinephile I look at this movie and see it as a time capsule from the 80s, with as much schlock as entertainment; but, as a fantasy fan, I look at this film and see exactly what I’m looking for in a pulpy paperback novel. This movie might not work for you as well as it does for me, but I certainly enjoyed this film far more than I ever imagined I would.
This film is mostly forgotten at this point. DVDs are hard to come by, and it’s not available on Blu Ray. Don’t let this gem be buried in the sands of time unappreciated.
Review Written By: