Master of Dragonard Hill (1989)

Director:

Gérard Kikoïne

Writers:

Rupert Gilchrist (novel)
Rick Marx (writer)

Genre:

Adventure | Drama

Plot Keywords:

Female Nudity | Independent Film | Based On Book | Based On Novel

Cast

Oliver Reed	...	Captain Shanks
Eartha Kitt	...	Naomi
Herbert Lom	...	Le Farge
Claudia Udy	...	Arabella
Patrick Warburton	...	Richard Abdee
Dennis Folbigge	...	The Governor
Winston Gama	...	Manroot (as Winston Gamma)
Martin Du Wee	...	Calabar (as Martin Duwee)
Annabel Schofield	...	Honore Juno
Iain Winter	...	Vicennes
Ralph Draper	...	Granger
David Phetoe	...	Isaac
Sipati	...	Callie
Julia Maepa	...	Clover
Milu Chiloquette	...	Danielle (as Milu Chiloguete)

Runtime:

93 min | West Germany:87 min (video)

Country:

USA

Language:

English

Color:

Color (Eastmancolor)

Certification:

West Germany:18 | Iceland:16 | USA:R

Filming Locations:

South Africa

Movie Connections:

Follows Dragonard (1987)

Lash him with the Dragonard! No, even worse, make him watch DRAGONARD!

(Spoilers below. I completely give away the fact that this is a very bad movie).

I rent this movie because I'm watching every movie I can find about pirates or the 18th-century Caribbean. Dragonard is set on an 18th-century Caribbean island. Good. It has Oliver Reed in it. Better! Let's watch.

I know I'm in trouble before the movie even starts, because across the screen float the dreaded words "Cannon Group." When I see that a movie has been fired out of the muzzle of the Cannon Group, I yell "Incoming!" and dive for cover. Cannon has bombarded me with such gems as the Lou Ferrigno HERCULES, REVENGE OF THE NINJA, and SEVEN MAGNIFICENT GLADIATORS, along with other titles I'm too embarrassed even to admit that I watched.

It's the Caribbean island of St. Joseph in 1747. A young Scot has been convicted for rebelling against the king. Or I think that's what happened. They were too busy whipping people, with a whip called a Dragonard, to make the main plot points very clear. Anyway, the young Scot tries to escape and is caught, so they sentence him to a hundred lashes. I think this movie was intended to appeal to people who have a, um, thing for whips.

Eventually, the slaves revolt while their masters are partying at the bordello. This has to be the most incompetent slave revolt you've ever seen. Instead of surprising and killing their masters, whom they know to be reveling in the bordello, the slaves grab up their weapons and wander around the island doing nothing all night, then seize the bordello the next day after their masters have had plenty of warning and time to escape. Then these intelligent slaves sit in the bordello and wait for their masters to roll up artillery. Bad move.

But what really makes my jaw drop is when, after the villainous planters led by Oliver Reed tear the hell out of the rebels, our heroic Scot stands up and declares that it is time to put an end to the violence and settle the affair in a COURT OF LAW!!! Paging Mr. Scot, this is the 18th century, and the court of law you're appealing to will sentence you and all your fellow slaves to death for servile insurrection. I'd be more sympathetic with your ignorance had a court of law not already sentenced you to slavery in the colonies for the last rebellion you joined.

The truly terrible thing about Dragonard is that it actually appears to have had a decent budget. It was able to pay for some star power in Oliver Reed and Eartha Kitt. The sets are beautiful. The costumes are luxurious. So the legion flaws of the movie are apparently due to sheer incompetence rather than lack of money. Lazy voiceovers substitute for exposition, or worse, repeat it. Patrick Warburton speaks and acts not like a heroic Scot but like a time-traveling high school senior from 20th-century Boston who couldn't find Scotland on a globe, much less mimic a Scottish burr. He is even worse than Claudia Udy, and I have seen ten-year-olds in middle school stage plays do better than Claudia Udy in this movie. However, I do understand why they didn't hire the ten-year-olds, despite their superior thespian abilities, because shooting some of Udy's scenes with middle school students would have been illegal. Alas, even the redoubtable Oliver Reed is not much good here, even though he could teach Warburton a thing or two about that Scottish burr. The only performance here that is even average is Eartha Kitt's; she plays an old cynical madam with a little zest.

The action scenes are incompetent also. Warburton gets them all, and he flubs them all. The director just flings bad guys at him at random, without any clue as to where they're coming from. I might have been a little bit more worried for Warburton's time-traveling character if any of his opponents had been armed.

So having established that the movie lacks all merit as action entertainment or art, is it at least worthwhile as soft core pornography? Well, maybe I'm not the best person to ask about that. But the fact is, despite a considerable number of breasts on display for public view in this movie, there's hardly a scene in the whole mess that I find arousing. You can do just as well watching Shakespeare IN LOVE, Excalibur, ROB ROY, or any number of historical/fantasy films heavy in sexual content, and get the added bonus of seeing a good movie in between the sex scenes. There really isn't very much prurient material here, and what there is is pretty tame stuff for sex fiends.

As if this movie doesn't have enough drawbacks, it can be hard to find at the video store. The clerks usually think you're asking for DRAGONHEART, a different and much superior movie.

I wrack my brain to think of any reason for watching DRAGONARD, and I am finally reduced to: bragging rights. "I sat through DRAGONARD. Long after all my friends fled, I endured it to the end, without whimper or moan." You'll be the life of the party.