|
Reign of Fire
Flipping fire flaming dragons! Mark finds a movie idea that could
have been, well, so intriguing, but instead was mishandled, avoiding
showing the most interesting scenes of the story.
a film review by Mark R. Leeper
CAPSULE:
An idea that could have been intriguing but was mishandled
avoiding showing the most interesting scenes of the story. There
are nice moments in REIGN OF FIRE, but there are is also a lot of
comic book-ish civilization on the slag heap plotting that the viewer
has to wade through to get to it. Rating: 5 (0 to 10), high 0 (-4
to +4). A minor spoiler section following the main review contains
my deductions about aspects of dragon biology as it might be to
explain facets of the plot.
One can see why some of the people who worked
on REIGN OF FIRE might have been enthusiastic about the project,
and also why a lot of the viewers seeing the film are not. This
is a film that has a few diamonds in a lot of rough.
The film combines the over-used cliches of the post-holocaust barbarian
society film with some impressive dragon special effects.

In the prolog to the story we see that the digging of a train tunnel
in London opens an ancient chamber and releases on the world real
dragons--a species more virulent and dangerous than any other that
has ever lived. Previously they brought the downfall of the dinosaurs.
In this release they multiplied in the millions and quickly spread
worldwide to bring the downfall of human civilization. By the year
2020 the remnants of humanity are living in holes in the ground
and have been reduced to being a species rapidly going extinct.
Quinn (Christian Bale) was present when the first modern dragon
was released. Now he leads a diminishing band of humans who seem
to be valiantly soldiering on, defending their small bunker system
in some place that used to be Northumberland and is now little more
a tunnel system under a rock heap.
They keep their stiff upper lips as their members slowly become
dinner for the dragons raining from the sky in rabid attacks. Along
come a militaristic band of Americans led by the macho tough guy
Van Zan (Matthew McConaughey). The Yanks are crude and violent and
step on Quinn's people's rights, but plan to take the fight directly
to the enemy. Van Zan himself is a Sgt. Rock stereotype with a shaved
head, tattoos, bare arms, military vest, and an inch of grubby cigar
between his teeth.
He's a human weapon, but at least he is pointed in the direction
of the dragons. Quinn fears the aggressive element that has joined
his people. In return Van Zan is disgusted by Quinn's overly defensive
strategy. Can they defeat the dragons and save humanity? (Does a
square have four sides?)
In the moments when there are no dragons on the screen, this is
an unpleasant film to watch. It is mostly claustrophobic scenes
in tunnels and shots on rock piles. Limited color is used to create
an oppressive atmosphere. Scenes with dragons are an entirely different
story.
The dragons are majestic beauties who seem to quite naturally take
to the air. Their design was strongly influenced by that of the
dragon Vermithrax Pejorative from the film DRAGONSLAYER. When they
fly overhead we are surprised to see how battle-scarred their wings
are.
Some of the scenes of the dragons look like they come from fantasy
book covers. The early dragon conquests which would have been the
most impressive part of the film (as acknowledged by the poster)
are quickly glossed over to get to the more economical but less
interesting action filmed on the slag heaps.
The screenplay is full of unanswered questions, though many could
be answered in a more intelligent script. The availability of limited
amounts of petroleum and electricity could be explained but are
taken as a given. Aspects of dragon biology that drive the plot
could be consistently explained but generally are not. What could
have been an interesting premise is wasted on a dull story with
uninteresting flat characters.
Perhaps an allegory was intended comparing American confrontational
foreign policy with a European style which is much more reserved,
though if so it was not fully developed.
The dragon effects are the best thing about this film and whatever
is second is a distant second. Somehow effects are just not enough
to make this a recommendable film. I rate REIGN OF FIRE a 5 on the
0 to 10 scale and a high 0 on the -4 to +4 scale.
Minor spoiler ...
There has been some discussion about the science behind the dragons
being poorly considered. This need not be true, but explanation
of what is happening with the dragons may have been avoided to alleviate
the need for cumbersome exposition. Actually the way I figure it,
much of the female dragon's biological energy is devoted to reproduction
which they do very, very fast.
This means they live a relatively short period of time and must
ingest a great deal of food much of the energy of which goes into
creating baby dragons. Like sea lions, one male services a large
harem of females. Males are larger, at least equally fierce, and
are extraordinarily long-lived not expending as much energy in reproduction.
Making things even harder on dragons something has gone wrong with
the reproductive system and the one remaining male is producing
only daughters. (There are, I believe, biological precedents for
this disorder.)
This means the species will die out shortly after the death of
the last male just from the inability to produce more males and
from inbreeding, but the dying human race may not live that long.
There is no way I can rationalize the concept that the dragons
subsist eating ash. Perhaps it was meant figuratively.
Mark R. Leeper
Copyright 2002 Mark R. Leeper
|