While unreasonable to expect theatrical-quality effects on a straight-to-video release, the approach should not have been to smudge every person, prop and backdrop to comparatively sharpen the dragon.

Trite characters, cheesy CGI in violent stand-alone sequel.

I have no idea why I liked this, or why I'm even admitting that I did.

**A shame.** If “Dragonheart” managed to make an impact and assert itself as an iconic epic adventure, the same cannot be said of its sequels. In the review I wrote for the initial film, I spoke a little about its popularity and impact… and when a film achieves this effect, it already makes a series of sequels designed to “milk the cow” and monetize the success obtained. This was the first sequel, and it was so weak that it would have been better not to exist. We already know that sequels are rarely as good as the original movies (although we can name several examples of sequels as good or better than the originals), but this movie is so weak and had such a limited budget that I have doubts about the real effort. from the studio to bring the project to a successful conclusion. The most praiseworthy and redeeming aspects of this film reside in some of its technical characteristics. In fact, the film has a good soundtrack (in good part a recycling of the first film's musical themes) and tries its best to be fun, engaging, friendly and enjoyable for the whole family. There's plenty of humor, although the jokes don't always work: burning flatulence or drool dripping over a human are situations we've seen before on film, and much better. Everything else is woefully weak: the script, based on an implausible prophecy and a dragon's egg left behind by Draco, is rather weak and ridd…