Reign of Fire

2002 "They're extremely intelligent. Highly evolved. And they don't like sharing the planet."
6.2| 1h41m| PG-13| en| More Info
Released: 12 July 2002 Released
Producted By: The Zanuck Company
Country: United States of America
Budget: 0
Revenue: 0
Official Website:
Synopsis

In post-apocalyptic England, an American volunteer and a British survivor team up to fight off a brood of fire-breathing dragons seeking to return to global dominance after centuries of rest underground. The Brit -- leading a clan of survivors to hunt down the King of the Dragons -- has much at stake: His mother was killed by a dragon, but his love is still alive.

... View More
Stream Online

Stream with Prime Video

Director

Producted By

The Zanuck Company

AD
AD

Watch Free for 30 Days

Stream on any device, 30-day free trial Watch Now

Trailers & Images

Reviews

Claysaba Excellent, Without a doubt!!
Baseshment I like movies that are aware of what they are selling... without [any] greater aspirations than to make people laugh and that's it.
Kaydan Christian A terrific literary drama and character piece that shows how the process of creating art can be seen differently by those doing it and those looking at it from the outside.
Fatma Suarez The movie's neither hopeful in contrived ways, nor hopeless in different contrived ways. Somehow it manages to be wonderful
garthlotel Stumbled upon this movie and was pleasantly surprised. Not your usual dragon / fantasy fare at all. With an amazing cast all putting in strong performances, a wonderfully original storyline, great action sequences and consistent thrills, you won't be disappointed.
Adam Moore I was enticed into this movie by its premise of "Christian Bale and Matthew McConaughey fight dragons," a premise that the movie mildly delivers on, but I still ended up hating it by the end. Before writing this, I browsed through some of the other reviews to see what others were saying, with plenty calling this an disregarded classic and some noting the nitpick criticisms of others like tank fuel and well-fed children. I'm sorry to be raining on your collective parades-if you like a movie, you like a movie-but my criticisms also stretch a lot further beyond small plot holes. One point for me is the movie hypes itself up too much over things that it thinks are really cool, but are either actually really dumb or subverted in the end. There's no better scene exemplifying this than the first scene we see McConaughey arrive at Bale's settlement, when they show these soldiers standing by a helicopter, looking mean. A character points out to another that they have an average life span of seventeen seconds and their tasked with jumping out of the helicopter to throw a net behind them to bring down a dragon. Sure, desperate times call for desperate measures, but the way the character, and by proxy the movie, talk about these guys, it's like they're supposed to be really cool and admired for that. Why would you ever brag about having an average lifespan of seventeen seconds? it doesn't sound epic or brave, it sounds suicidal when you put it like that. That's how this movie's approach to "coolness" feels; either plain stupid or poorly executed.But that's not as bad to me as the clichéd, unlikable characters. Now I understand the movie took a more serious approach than most would take with this concept, going for a more grim depiction of a post- apocalypse brought on by dragons, but the characters focused on here are both predictable and illogical at the same time. Bale and McConaughey's characters are at odds with each other almost the entire movie, with the movie painting Bale as the sympathetic hero-type, and McConaughey as the ignorant soldier. The issues for each character are Bale is always, always right, yet refuses any credit and is always fought against, and McConaughey acts overtly alpha with others while bemoaning them for his own mistakes. Sure I can see some realism in these character traits, but they're hardly compelling and only make these characters feel punchable.And yet none of that would really matter if this movie felt nearly as exciting as promised, but it all feels so bland. The CGI and other effects are well-done for the time, but the overall imagery felt uninspired, with everything being some shade of brown and rubble, and all the characters wearing the usual tattered clothes of any post-apocalypse. I know not every post-apocalyptic movie can be The Road Warrior. It could still have tried something different from the usual with its imagery, something to maybe make it more memorable. The action bored me too, even as a b-movie or a "turn your brain off" deal, it couldn't keep me interested. The movie at least feels like a quick sitting, but that certainly doesn't help it be more interesting.I know there are certainly worse movies out there, ones more deserving of bile and criticism, but those movies also have that much going for them. Reign of Fire sits in this spot for me where it's not a great movie, but it's not an awful movie either; it's this level-headed bad quality that's unexciting to talk or think about, which is so much worse.
Leofwine_draca This is a fairly entertaining post-apocalypse movie that sees a few huddled survivors living in squalid conditions in a Britain destroyed by fire-breathing dragons. It sounds ludicrous, but the good news is that this film never panders to kids in any way, meaning I had a chance to enjoy it. The running time is extremely short and action-focused, detailing efforts to destroy a dragon and put an end to the endless oppression faced by the human survivors. The script is nothing special, but it does the job and the scenes of spectacle it focuses on are all quite enjoyable if not anything we haven't seen before. The scenes of a destroyed London are well done and the CGI effects used to animate the dragons are very good indeed, on par with those in LORD OF THE RINGS. I also liked the climax and the only misstep was a ridiculous helicopter jump where the participants are descending through the air for about five minutes even though helicopters can't fly that far up.There are three notable cast members. The first is the hero, Christian Bale, on his ascendancy to fame after his success in American PSYCHO. He gives a typically intense performance here and one of the things I've always liked about him is the way he gives the same dedication no matter what genre of film – a light sci-fi crowd-pleaser like this or a dark-as-heck horror like American PSYCHO. He's supported by another up-and-comer, Gerard Butler, not bad in a rather limited supporting role. The American lead is an unrecognisable Matthew McConaughey who I thought was very good, playing a borderline psychopath with a real disregard for human life. While I don't pretend that this is a brilliant film – it's far too insubstantial and airy for anything beyond a popcorn flick – it mostly avoids the pitfalls of many a Hollywood blockbuster and provides a decent watch.
bernardbrookes-1 This film is great, I have watched numerous times and it is always good value.What is so good is seeing the emergence of Christian Bale (pre Batman) as being able to hold and command a leading role. He had done so previously but this was his first action role and this then leads on to his future.However, it is Matthew McConaughey who commands and elicits most interest in the film. I really do believe that it is this film that began his renaissance. It proved he could act and could also do gritty roles.This is a seminal film for both actors, great work and good for their future prospects.