Well I read the novel, both Eragon and Eldest and loved them. The movie....quality acting and good special effects, but a plot that is all over the place and hard to follow for people that have not read the book. Basically they screwed up a good story, big time. one and a half stars...out of 4. DD
i only read parts of eragon, however, it seems a LOT like star wars....except with a dragon. even eragon sounds like aragon's name from LoTR.
It has some of the same settings, but Star Wars is a complete rip off as well, not too many original stories out there. But his use of magic is interesting, and the ability of the rider and the Dragon to become one is interesting. It is a great book...the movie...not so much. DD
<object width="425" height="350"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/lpmvFK02jY8"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/lpmvFK02jY8" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="350"></embed></object> These reviews are disappointing ~ the Eragon prequel was pure awesome.
Movie doesn't interst me much, they did an awful job on the publicity and the marketing, they didn't do a good job in identifying what makes this movie special. I know in the licensing world they have been aggressive but almost everyone is turning them down.
the critics are ripping this movie and the kid to shreds. "In a time of darkness, under the evil reign of John Malkovich... a hero shall rise. But lo, there will be little rejoicing, for this dragon rider (newcomer Edward Speleers) is but a nancy boy." is my favorite so far.
The ads make it look like a decent fantasy movie, although it also looked like it had the potential to be another Dungeons & Dragons movie. From the recommendations here sounds more like D&D than Lord of the Rings, I guess I'll pass.
That's because, as Joseph Campbell pointed out, most of our enduring myths have basic structural elements in common. In fact, Lucas reworked the original Star Wars script to bring it more in line with Campbell's archetypal model. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Hero_with_a_Thousand_Faces
I read the book and saw the movie. And. I have to say it was rather rushed. Eargon enters Farthurn Dur (dunno how to spell it) and 5 minutes later he's going to battle. Murtagh's role isn't really clear. He appears out of nowhere and suddenly Eragon accepts him in 5 seconds. Brom was pretty well played though, the gruff old man still the end. A bit too spry though for somebody who was supposed to be over a 100 years old. The movie doesn't really show the grandeur of Galbatorix's empire, with none of the major cities appearing. Werecat wasn't there, the desert disappeared, Saphira goes from an egg to a fire breathing dragon in less than 2 weeks. Not exactly a great film. The best critisism is from wikipedia, in the 'Differances from book' section (has probably been edited though): Quality, something present in the book, was not in the film. Lol, yeah I know this is a long post, but I'm a bit of a book buff.
I've read the book but the previews made it look good to me. Disappointing that no one seems to like it.
I just picked up the first book today. So, if you see someone reading it tomorrow morning in the "Wii line" at Best Buy, that'll be me.
I did not like the guy play Eragon. the guy playing his brother. . or the guy who played the dragonslayer's son [darkhaired guy with the bow] would have been better choices Overall it was ok but not groundbreaking Rocket River
OH YEA A fantasy movie that actually include black folx so that gives it a little extra Juice for me Rocket River
did anybody else get the feeling that the first 15 minutes of the movie, if they had actually explained it and fleshed it out, would have made a better movie than the other hour and 15 minutes? Spoiler a civil war and big ass battle that killed all the dragon riders.. now THAT sounds like a good movie...
