When the movie ended (yes, I endured the entire thing), I sat there staring at the screen and uttered the words, "What the heck?" I felt like I just watched a fantasy-themed production from the early 1970s. I gave it 2 stars only because Kelly Stables was a decent actress, but even she was not convincing in her role. The low budget was obvious, especially during the fight scenes when apparently they could only afford to hire an undernourished person for holding the heavy camera. Either camera mounting gear was unavailable on those days for renting, or it was just cheaper to hire someone off the street who lacked the strength to hold the camera steady.Guess no one in the editing team has access to after effects software. Lighting, mood setting, color tinting--you know, the visual impact basics that decorate the scenes with an altered element--were completely absent. Heh...the outfits worn by the villagers with fresh dirt applied in an attempt to give a worn, soiled look was a severe distraction.Intrigue is what captivates an audience. Character depth, convincing roles, unpredictable story lines, and visual impact create intrigue. This movie had nothing in the way of intrigue.This ranks as the second worst production in my viewing list. The actors may want to strike this from their tear sheet list of accomplishments.

This film is so bad I'm stuck where to start. The acting? The FX? The plot? The camera work? The costumes? Actually the costumes weren't too bad.Acting was variable, from fan film to school play. Junior school (that's age 7 to 11, translate to your local education equivalent for non UK people) school play that is. Wooden would be an up. The most rational explanation I can think of is that the cast were basically handed the scripts 5 minutes before each take and not given the chance to even talk to each other. I have seen worse acting from professionals, but only in classes where they are demonstrating how not to do it.FX were poor, both CGI and physical. The dragon, when you could see it, looked like a stop-motion shot with a mobile phone (my niece makes short films that way, the amusement of herself and friends, so I know the comparison is apt). Camera work was shaky, close to that of the Blair Witch Project or Cloverfield, where at least that was deliberate and part of the story.The plot was largely absent, narrative causality and storyline were largely missing leaving us with a poorly connected network of events.To be fair, I didn't see to the end. After just shy of an hour neither I nor my sister could bear to watch any more so we switched off and put "Rachel Getting Married" on. If faced with this film I recommend you do the same.Stephen

Very good lower-budget Adventure/Sci-Fi film. The special effects were above-average and the acting was as well. Isaac Singleton Jr. plays a fun character with his excellent facial expressions. Shots of scenes with the dragon are actually very well done on such a low budget. Makes me wonder what they could have done with a larger budget. All in all an enjoyable film that will keep you entertained. Much better than some of the box office adventure films out lately that spent 50-100 mill and the film turned out not to be enjoyable and entertaining. The people who enjoy adventure films or "dragon" films will want to see this one. This is the type of film people want to have an opportunity to see so hopefully this will be available to most.

I am embarrassed to admit that I watched this film all the way through, even though I could have turned it off at any time. I was, I suppose, oddly mesmerized by the awfulness of it all. Who knows? On some level, perhaps I enjoyed it.The dialog is stilted and corny, delivered in a manner so "ham" the actors should have been pierced with cloves and garnished with pineapple. The dragon, despite its total 1950s-style animated cheesiness, must have been considerably more expensive per minute than the ham actors, because its appearance on screen is mercifully brief. When one considers the quality of the actors, the sets, and the special effects, it seems probable that this was the lowest budget feature length film of 2008.Nevertheless, I will be on the lookout for future performances of the fabulous Slate Holmgren, whose face and mannerisms are perfect for a comic villain. Needless to say, he was NOT a comic villain in Dragon Hunter.