Dream Warrior (2003) User Reviews

Good concept+Bad Script=Bad Movie

[bpete333 · 3/10 · 9 May 2005]

I basically watch anything with Lance Henriksen in it; even if the movie is bad he's always gives a high-grade performance. This movie had a really cool idea with a very poor execution. If it only had a decent script backing it up, any kind of budget, a director with some kind vision, or even half-way capable actors (Henriksen excluded of course) it would have been much more enjoyable than what we have here. It's like a low-rate X-Men with a post-apocalyptic backdrop. A everything settles man named Parish (Lance Henriksen) becomes the leader (really more like a king) of the new world. Under his rule anything he deems unholy is banned, the main atrocity being people with supernatural, or mutant, powers. Then a mutant named Rage (horribly played by Daniel Goddard) decides to stand up to Parish and bring his reign crumbling down. Too bad a cool concept, even if it's not that original, doesn't make a good movie.

The cover art is deceiving

[Monstrel · 3/10 · 25 January 2008]

I was attracted by the cover art on the box - the photos of armored medieval warriors in post apocalyptic world. Well, the movie has no such characters. But that is not the major problem with it.

The first half of the movie makes a good thriller, but the second half is pure disappointment. The acting is good, I have no complaints, but the plot is so weak, the characters and dialogs are so primitive, so no acting can save the movie.

This movie is about a life after some major disaster caused by the asteroid. In some local village, I guess, some part of New Jersey ;), one guy became the tyrant and rules the population of a few hundred people. Some people develop an unexplained super powers (healing, light throwing, mind reading) and this tyrant executes them if his bike police (10 people) can catch them. Those guys (called freaks) also develop an opposition. There are some prophecies about the child that will be born and lead them. But the movie does not cover what happens after the child is born - it only covers a fight of several people against the tyrant and his miniature police forces. There are also some punk communities around and the legends of some river with a pure water that runs in a two day drive from the village.

The storyline of the movie is really bleak. It does not have good action shots (except for the very beginning), and some episodes look really stupid, like this scene with a hand break at the very end of the movie. All fights are primitive and amateurish.

What also makes me laugh is that all actors wear clean and nice clothes but live in wrecks. At least their blue jeans are supposed to be dirty after a few days out in the field, don't you think? In other words, there is nothing really worth mentioning in the movie. It was supposed to be something like Mad Max or Waterworld, but it is not even close. You can spend some time watching this movie, if you do not have anything else to watch. I gave it 3 only for the good acting.

X-men with more humanity involved

[noizyme · 5/10 · 30 June 2006]

Lance Henriksen was the only real reason to pick up this movie. Later on, I read the box to find Isaac Hayes is in here as well. It turns out that this film is basically the X-men movie with more humanity involved.

Henriksen's character, Parish, is the leader of a post-meteor collision with Earth, leaving a handful of people at his control (roughly 300 max). He uses his hypnotic control over them (a power he gained during the meteor strike) and has a complete reign of control over others like him who were affected by the crash giving them random super powers as well. Rage, the main character being followed, has the real story in this picture, being Parish's son (a twist which no one should have to wait through this movie for) and having hope that he can escape this new colony with his newfound, similarly-affected friends he has made.

Isaac Hayes plays a wise sage who is there to tell Rage and his friends what's really going on throughout the entire film, and he also shows off his cheap "Star Wars-esquire" force push technique on villains.

I felt the movie was a ripoff of like-minded films, which is easy to do being that its such an abstract story but very comic book-like. The special effects went back and forth between weird and stupid (hardly mind-blowing except for the child in the film having crazy evil eyes in a scene). The raining sequence was particularly fake-looking. There was a humorous chant and celebration during the naming of the child, which cannot be missed. Also, like Magneto talking about his feelings in the X-men movies, Parish discusses his actions whilst in the midst of some "rage art" (like splattering paint on canvas-art) which is different and should've been looked into character-wise.

The set design echoed like-minded films which feature a wasteland-looking scenery, but it didn't reflect the DVD's cover art at all (a downer). The hunters (like in true 80's action films) had very leather and stud motifs in their wardrobe, but the main character good guy team didn't have any special suits or anything (one of the only differences between it and X-men). I liked the one girl, Paloma (I think her name was) was a direct ripoff of Jubilee from X-men and acted more like a human Tesla coil than anyone with superpowers. And the main girl (who could heal people) was just like Jean Grey, Isaac Hayes might as well have been Professor X (but with Hayes' Black Moses wardrobe), and the others had power like heroes on Captain Planet.

The music was nothing special except in the first scene when the meteor was going down; it was more-or-less rehashed electronic music with the edge of 80's action movies (again). And the direction was like a television direction, which makes sense as it seems like a straight to video release anyways, yet it was still average with hardly any thought going on.

All in all, I gave the film a 5. I check the running time about 4 times in the movie (meaning: it got boring at times), but it was a different take on these hero movies out. This seems more like a vehicle for up and coming actors who are tired of not being in films, so they made this. And it wasn't all that horrible...just average as hell.

a 'B' movie that tried.

[dotcore · 14 December 2004]

I sure am glad I work at Blockbuster, If I didn't I wouldn't ever get to see gems like "Dream Warrior".

A giant piece of bad CG animation made to look like a meteor collides with earth, causing volcanoes to erupt and lots of stock footage we have all seen on the discovery channel to appear. If that stock footage was the apocalypse, then I am really confused. Anyway, The main character, Rage (Yes, that is his name, his father is a dipshit.)was let out of his cell by an unseen figure. The viewer finds out soon enough that our hero can read minds. This is why he is being hunted. In the post-apoc-stock-footage world of "Dream Warrior" that meteor caused humans to evolve.

Anyone that has evolved is considered "impure" and is called a freak. Also, they are pale imitations of the X-men. Seeing how Rage's only power is to read minds. All the other freaks get cool powers.. Isaac Hayes' character, Zo, for instance, has telekenisis. So does an annoying kid who probably also had a stupid name. Speaking of stupid names, the healer freak is named... Sterling, and I believe her last name was... PADLOCK, making her name to be Sterling Padlock.

For a B action movie, this was actually pretty good. (I didn't even make fun of the fight scenes) The story was interesting, even though it is sort of a rip of off the x-men, minus the super heroes. It also borrows a lot from Mad Max. "Dream Warrior" has a lot of faults. But one has to look at a movie like a high school student, B movies are like the special kids, they want to be just like the cool, popular kids, ("Dodgeball" is like that class clown that hangs out with "White Chicks")and for instance and are fun to watch when they try.

...I don't think that made any sense. I give dream warrior a 2 out of 4. a B movie that tried.

No Dream, No Warrior

[ncc1205 · 1/10 · 7 January 2005]

Throughout the late 1950's and early 1960's, motion picture studios capitalized on the popularity of film by churning out hundreds of B movies. Most of these are forgettable, but, every so often, a picture managed to capture the imagination of an audience and, consequently, turned a tidy profit. As digital film-making technology in the 21st century continues to become available to the booming population, any cinemaphile armed with a camcorder believes he's the next Spielberg, Scorsese, or – could it be – George Lucas. The resulting explosion of horror, thriller, or low-grade science fiction titles available at your corner Blockbuster Video continues to grow. In an era of modern film-making when any Tom, Dick, or Harry possesses affordable technology to make a motion picture, it only stands to reason that there will eventually be more folks making motion pictures than those who should truly be allowed to make motion pictures, and rarely has there been better evidence than that of the direct-to-DVD schlock, "Dream Warrior, " also known as "A Man Called Rage." Rage (played by an unshaven Daniel Goddard) is no ordinary man. Though he's blessed with 'Men's Health' spokesmodel good looks, he's little more than a mutant with superhuman abilities … abilities that start and stop with the gift of grunting and flexing and throwing a grenade on cue. That, and he packs a mean air pistol. He's on the run from Parish (played by ever-reliable and, apparently, always affordable Lance Henricksen), the future's 'man of God' who wants to wipe the impure mutants – like Rage – off the face of the planet … if he could just find then all hiding outside his single building. But when Rage is rescued by a beautiful mutant (the lovely Sherilyn Fenn of 'Twin Peaks' fame), he throws caution to the wind in favor of saving Parish's infant son from the evil leader's nefarious plan … which never quite gets fully explained.

Made in a derelict warehouse with wooded exteriors shot a stone's throw away, "Dream Warrior" presents the story of an uninteresting apocalyptic tomorrow not unlike the world seen in the 'Mad Max' films only with much less desert: shabbily-dressed survivors – normal in every sense of the word save their psychic abilities to hurl lightning, heal the injured, and sense water (woohoo!) if they're not dressing 'Goth' and watching men fight to the death on top of a truck bed – march through the woods in search of 'The River,' a place of legend where mankind's last hope for survival can be realized. Of course – with a plot this thin – you know it's only a matter of time before all of these characters are thrown together. Blacksploitation legend Isaac Hayes even makes an appearance as a shadowy religious loner sent to explain it all to the mutants because they apparently don't have enough sense to figure it out for themselves.

At best, the film is a guilty pleasure. At worst, the film takes pleasure at being just plain guilty. "Dream Warrior" boasts no real dreams nor any real warriors, and it takes just over 91 minutes for Rage to discover that he's Parish's firstborn, to help kill his maniacal father, and to march off into the woods intent on saving the world. From what? We're never told.

Written and directed by Zachary Weintraub, "Warrior" proves definitively that there is one too many Weintraub's working in the film industry.

Beauty!

[skankified · 1/10 · 22 April 2005]

I must say, this movie should have received at least 10 Oscar nominations. Special effects alone should have received 5-6, (!!!!WARNING, SPOILERS UP AHEAD, READ AT YOUR OWN RISK!!!!!!)you'll know what I mean when you see the sweet opening sequence involving a CG Asteroid and stock file footage of a volcano erupting! When I first rented the movie, I must say that I expected the movie would be set in new york and have a man dressed in medieval armor with his face painted, all of which were on the DVD cover. I was slightly disappointed when the movie had nothing to do with the man in medieval armor, a war, new york, dreams, or warriors. I was also very confused as to why the movie only included cars from the 1930s or 1960s. Even though there are about 13 trillion Toyota Camrys and Ford Taurus,' the characters apparently could only find cars that are rare in todays world, like some 1930s antique Hitler-mobile. I guess the asteroid mustve hit all the Japanese car plants and somehow all the rarest antiques in the world survived. And apparently they're all solar powered now, because all gas stations were destroyed as well. Although you would be pleasantly surprised at how simple it is to convert a gas engine to solar power, you pretty much just connect a couple wires to a solar panel. The battle-bikes or Nazi-cycles were also a vehicle highlight! Yet, the movie was oddly pleasing, especially the performance of the girl with lightning powers, who was a real scene stealer. I'm so thankful Isaac Hayes got time off his busy schedule to co-star with THE, yes THE Lance Henriksen. Not as good as Surf Nazis must die though, this movie did not have a character as compelling as Mama Washington.

complete garbage

[blue_92sho · 1/10 · 23 January 2005]

This is one of the worst movies i have ever watched. I would rather remove my eyes with a spoon then even think of watching this garbage again. The guy on the cover was not even in the movie!!!!! Was that honestly the director's cut.... I mean come on i could have made a better movie with the camera on my cell phone.I would have to say that the budget for this movie must have been $20 and a loaf of bread to feed the way over priced actors and actresses, who were horrible i must add..... but i will have to say that it is better than watching open water, or Dracula 3000 which isn't very hard to beat... whoever made this movie should never be allowed to produce or direct a movie like this!

Terrible flick IMO

[thcb777 · 1/10 · 22 June 2005]

This movie wasn't at all what we expected? We got the impression from the box that it was set in the ancient ages? IE. Attila, or Braveheart because the case showed a guy dressed in armor almost like something from a movie set in the mid-evil era. I was disappointed in the movie overall I found the fight scenes far to rehearsed looking and slow the acting was poor at best minus Danica's (parish's wife, the few's scene's she was in were okay and her acting was slightly better than her co-actor's). It is a (2004) movie but it appeared to be done as a low budget 80's flick which may be due to a low budget I am not sure? It left far to many unanswered question's and overall I cannot even think of a movie to compare it to and unfortunately we feel as though this is one movie that we should not have rented. And I guess it proves the saying, Never judge a movie by the case it comes in :)!!

Defrauding Cover

[Claidheamdanns · 1/10 · 20 October 2006]

This movie was a big waste of time. The knight on the front cover of the DVD never appeared in the movie at all. I got the distinct feeling that the movie was filmed with a home video camera ... or perhaps the person who said cellphone camera was not too far wrong.

It's time for bed, but I almost have to watch another movie, just to flush this one out of my mind.

I would say that this movie borrowed heavily from Escape from New York and Escape from L.A. I expect that it will not be too long before we see it available on the dollar movie rack at our local grocery stores.

One positive note. This movie gives me new hope. When I was 13, I got a movie camera for my birthday, and a friend and I shot some take-offs on Indiana Jones. Seeing this movie in Blockbuster gives me hope that my movie might some day make it there, too. I pity the poor sap that rents it, though.

Perhaps the worst movie that I have ever watched

[black_dog88 · 1/10 · 7 January 2005]

Okay first off, this movie looked like it had potential to be a sweet B-movie. The cover showed a guy in medieval armor standing in front of what we assumed was a post-apocalyptic New York City (hence the statue of liberty). Lance Hendriksen was good in previous work and my friends and I were in the mood for a B-movie, so we rented it. It was perhaps the biggest mistake of our lives. This is where my rant begins and I may give away parts of the movie that could ruin it for some, so stop reading if you want to waste 5 bucks and watch this movie. Firstly, the movie at no point had New York City or any man in medieval armor. The plot made little sense because their quest was for a river, except what they found was far from a river. Think about what a river is, RUNNING WATER. The "river" was a pond. They panned around the whole thing. I failed to see the "river" run to an ocean. Could they not afford to take the cast to a real river? The grenades were perhaps the biggest joke that I have ever seen. The grenade placed in the motorcycle didn't even damage the bike, it just made a little fire. And what was with the cars? Did every car from 1960 and beyond disappear when the meteor hit? I'd guess that this was filmed in Australia because of the Australian cast, so why would the cover have New York City? The whole point of the movie was really stupid. I won't even comment on the brains of some of the characters either. All in all, this was not even entertaining except for the extreme stupidity that I laughed at.

quick, over here!.i think i've found it...,

[disdressed12 · 1/10 · 14 November 2007]

no.sorry.my mistake.i thought for a minute i may have found the plot to this movie.but i don't think think a search party could have any success finding the plot to this movie.there are a few good actors in this movie,but they can't do anything to make it better.i think the movie dragged their performances down with it.as a a result,you won't find much in the way of acting here.and the dialogue.wow.awful,truly awful.i suspect they were going for something profound here,but they fell short by a long shot.this thing is really tedious.i think this is a case where they should have scrapped this thing before it was done,or at least not released it.i don't want to say it's bad,but it sure is the opposite of good.this is how i feel about the movie,and others may feel differently.all i know is,it sure didn't do it for me. for me,Dream Warrior is a 1*/10 movie.

Great Henriksen and Norton chemistry!

[wgg-1 · 9/10 · 6 April 2004]

In a cast of pros, Lance Henriksen and Richard Norton as villain and henchman respectively portray a complex chemistry between their characters that elevates "Dream Warrior" aka "Man Called Rage" above standard action movie fare. The chemistry between these two excellent actors is also obvious, and their scenes together give this movie its best moments of tension and drama. An opening stunt featuring Norton, also the film's stunt coordinator, sets the swift pace for the science fiction epic which will please the "Beastmaster" fans of Daniel Goddard, playing the hero. It's always a thrill to watch actors who excel at their craft, especially when they work together. Norton and Henriksen more than qualify!

The write-up on the back of the DVD is lame but the movie isn't. Goddard shines!

[sugarmoon-1 · 7/10 · 12 January 2005]

Highlights: 1. Movie/TV vets like Sherilyn Fenn and Lance Henrickson deliver as usual. 2. Film newcomer Daniel Goddard is not only an incredibly natural dramatic actor (with lots of range potential), but he also encompasses physical strength and grace of movement. Goddard is a handsome hero, but not so good-looking as to blindside your ability to follow his dialog. I have to admit to being rather smitten with Goddard at this point in his career and look forward to his future projects with great enthusiasm. 3. The secondary cast is also worth mentioning. Although I have never seen any of them before they were also very natural actors. By natural I mean as a complete cast, neither of them seemed to stick out as being amateurs.

Lowlights: 1. Gratuitous female T & A shots (and not enough male ones-LOL) 2. In the opening "lets explain how the apocalypse happened" scene, graphics and sound mixing are really bad. Really bad. But post-production budgetary restraints may be to blame for this. 3. Goddard and Isaac Hayes (It's Salisbury Steak day children!-South Park) are captured by a Gothic tribe. While I understand this was the vehicle for bringing Rage and the Dream Warrior together to save the infant 'chosen one', not to mention an extremely sexy sleeper headlock executed by Goddard on a Gothic fighter, it was just kinda cheesy. 4. The infant in more than a few scenes was obviously a doll. In particular, the scene in which Rage is saving the infant and the infants mother by leading them down a ladder to a sun-level, Goddard (and this is my only criticism to this man) does not seem aware of the fact that he is holding an infant. Not that I'm implying they should have used a real infant but at least had Goddard hold something a little more precious than a doll in order to pull the right actions out of him.

Neutral: 1. The script must have been quite convincing in order to attract the actors involved but does loose its momentum and clarity a few times as a film.

Overall, the cast/crew does an incredible job. By the end of the movie everything seems wrapped up and nicely packed with the exception of Goddard's character Rage who is last scene walking back to the place of contention so "the people" can know the truth about Parish's (Henriksen) fanatical pursuit for perfection.

Horrible movie; a waste of a 5 dollar rental fee.

[thefriedalien · 1/10 · 3 December 2007]

It receives one star, only because it cannot have zero.

I would like to post simply that, but apparently I must continue for a minimal length of 10 lines. So: Character on cover is not seen in the entire movie (neither are any characters wearing chainmail to my recollection).

Car chase scene appears to be filmed at a top speed of 15 MPH.

Dialog could quite easily have been delivered and written by a pubescent teenager full of 'angst' (by angst I mean he really just wanted to see some random actress's breasts).

Please, for your own sake, do not even illegally download this movie.

Worst Movie Ever

[thomas-lavoie · 1/10 · 30 May 2006]

This is the worst movie I have ever seen in my whole life. So the plot goes like this: In an apocalyptic future, a man with extra-human powers goes on the run. As you might have noticed, I copied this from the internet movie database because I actually had to read the plot outline on this site to understand what I had just seen. None of it made sense, the actors were terrible and the story was awful. If you like bad movies see dream warrior. The movie was so cruddy that my mind automatically erased it from memory. I actually think that the 1996 movie Space Truckers was better with the square pigs and anti-gravity beer. What a waste of time. If I could put a 0/10 I would. This movie was a mega mammoth waste of time.

X-Men reboot with no-budget

[mrjfrisby · 2/10 · 24 February 2013]

What if Magneto was a Good Guy? What if Xavier was a bad guy? What if the powers changed but the characters remained the same? What if things worked out between Rogue and Wolverine? The similarities to the X- Men are...are you ready for it...uncanny. Parrish has telepathic ability like Xavier, but like Magneto is striving for a pure genetic society, albeit without mutation. Though Sterling is a healer, the whole experience is very much like Rogue, including a streak in her hair and she really likes Rage. Rage is the Wolverine character. If nothing more than the name, which Wolverine is an embodiment of. Combine Rage with Sterling and you get Wolverine. Zo has telekinetic ability. Although not the manipulation of metal through magnetism, in many ways it has the same pragmatic story effect. Although he is like Magneto in that he is all about the mutants, he is the good guy in that he has the original "Xavieresque" wish for peace. One might think of this as the "beginnings" reboot, as there is an orphanage of freaks nearby and they are thinking about building a mutant community at the river. Hence your "Zo" School for the Gifted. Danica is something of a Storm playing the Wolverine-enamoured Rogue role. And there is a character who fills the spot of Cyclops. He is the gentle, leader apparent. Once again, a brewing fight over Sterling, who though is Rogue-esque, fills that role of Jean Grey, in the sense of the-girl-whose- heart-is-being-fought-for. Two other minor characters bring the Jean Grey-esque fledgling telekinetic and but also her slightly premonitionistic ability. And lastly, the new mutant baby has the Pyro character, who in this movie is a brother to Rage. Which is not unlike Wolverine and Pyro. In X-men, these two characters in particular struggle with deep rage and a reluctance to loyalty, and though ultimately choose a side, initially, they have a great deal in common. Anyway, obvious this movie, is a story by someone who likes the X- men. However, the movie is all story driven and has a negligible amount of mutant powers being used.

Pretty damn bad

[mmrbass · 2/10 · 9 March 2013]

While this isn't the worst movie I've seen, it is one of the few where I gave up on it before finishing it. The producer of this thing must have had pictures of Lance Henriksen and Isaac Hayes in bed together to rope them into this.

This is basically X-men set in post-apocalypse with bikers (all half-dozen of them) shot on a budget and with the skill of a bunch of fifth-graders. That's not necessarily a bad thing, but the story is rambling and incoherent with oddball elements like a surprise tribe of Juggalos that nobody knows about living just around the corner.

The main problem, though, is that the story is very slow and boring. Not even the Juggalos and the half-naked girls can save it. If you are are fan of the genre, there is any number movies, most of them made in the 80's, that are much better, even in their awfulness.

The reason this gets two stars is that I actually know worse films.

Love Daniel

[calussed · 9/10 · 25 March 2004]

I'm a huge Beastmaster Fan HUGE!!!!!!! I have waited and waited for almost a year now to see this movie and through a friend of a friend I got to see it. The plot is basically... years after the earth has been hit by a meteor there are bands of people who have survived. Amongst them birthing defects have caused supernatural powers to develop amongst a rare few and... fearing the effect that they can may have on his reign of power Lance Henriksen's Character wants them dead. (Twist to be expected.) The directing is the best but Daniel is amazing. He has an intense yet charming quality about him. When he smiles it is all over for me. Can't wait till the movie is released so that I can buy a copy.

What I expected

[gregopego12 · 7/10 · 10 July 2006]

Yes, this movie has a low budget. Yes, it has Sherry Lynn Fenn (chek speling) in a damp fur coat. Yes, it looks a lot like the segment where our "hero's" from Eurotrip end up in the former Eastern Bloc (before they pool their financial resources) A lot of this movie will be familiar and derivative. You shouldn't be surprised. For whatever reason, the meteor that destroys most of civilization has left both "regular" people and "mutants" with special powers alive. You'd think that people would need special powers to live through an apocalypse, and the "regulars" wouldn't survive, but survive, they do, and their king, Lance Henriksson, (chek speling) needs to eradicate the mutants--even though one of them can heal people.

I must say, that there wasn't much behind the hero (for most of the movie), and I'd like to know what he planned after the rescue of "the healer." But I think, on the whole that the actors took their parts seriously enough, and the director used his budget wisely (real stunt work and good enough editing). One segment of the movie is confusing, but the scenes, themselves are all well made. I enjoyed the movie, because it knew what it had to work with and I could see a real effort. Enjoy it. P.S. (chek speling) is a little joke--I know there's a silent "J" ;)

Nice try!

[the_oak · 6/10 · 10 August 2014]

After reading the reviews before watching the movie, I did not have high hopes. However, in hindsight, I think some of them were a bit harsh. Albeit, after the really amateurish first 5 minutes, with the meteor impact shown just as some images the director probably found on google, and a scene that lasted for 5 minutes where the bad guys crank up their motor cycles at least 25 times, I was very near to giving up. But then, maybe after the mutants came, with their nice powers, and that super pretty woman who had healing abilities, I kept on watching. I think that Lance Henriksson was a pretty good villain. I especially liked one scene, where the number one hench man remarked that how come the mutants just didn't realize that they did not deserve to live? After which the boss just replied. "I like that!" The fact that this movie is a B or a C movie, with probably a very limited budget, makes it just more interesting. It is like a poor mans X-men. The prophet had some sort of combined powers were he could create a shield to push people away at the same time having prophetic abilities. This is not the worst movie ever made. It is FAR worse to spend tens of millions and still make garbish, like the last Planet of the Ape movie. This movie at least does not pretend to be anything else than it is!