1,765 reviews
When I first heard that a movie is going to be made by the book "Eragon" by Christopher Paolini, I must say I was very delighted, and I was even more delighted when I heard that Stefen Fangmeier will be the director. I have read the book, and thaught:"What a great movie this is going to be". Unfortunately, I was wrong. First of all, I would dare to say that half of the events that happened in the book weren't shown in the movie at all(reason: Lord of the Rings has less then 400 pages and the movie lasts around 3 hours; Eragon has around 500 pages and it lasts around hour and a half). As a result, instead of complexed, unpredictable fantasy plot you get simple, one-way heading fairy tale. Characters that play very significent role in book(like Murtagh, Ajihad and Angela) are hardly even mentioned in the movie, so that it becomes centered on pretty much only 3 characters-Eragon, Saphira and Brom. Villains and locations lack imagination, so they look cheap and ordinary. Choice of actors is, in my opinion, good, except Edward Speleers. There are way too much "memorable quotes" in the movie, so that movie becomes kind of too much theatrical.Everybody, from director to actors failed, but still, I personally bealive that the biggest failure is Peter Buchman, screenwriter. Although he had a fantastic material to work on, he managed to ruin it, and make a pathetic screenplay from a fantastic bestseller. Only bright side of the movie is always top-of-the-class John Malkovich(King Galbatorix), pretty solid performance by Jeremy Irons (Brom), but most of all dragon Saphira (voice by Rachel Weisz, whose vocal abilities are on very desirable level)
- damir-zupanic1
- Dec 24, 2006
- Permalink
The movie follows nothing of the book's plot line. I think someone read like maybe ten chapters of the Eragon book and decided to make the movie. If they decide to make Eldest (The sequel to Eragon) it would be nothing like the book because they have changed too many things in this movie to carry the plot correctly. The plot of the movie shares nothing with the book and the characters (the ones they actually decided to add) share no similarities to the book's idea of them. The storyline used in the movie could have possibly been acceptable if it hadn't had such bad writing. The lines were mediocre and no one other than Brom, Eragon and Saphira had ten lines. Murtagh had like eight or nine lines through the whole movie, Nasuada and Ajihad had like two or three (and Nasuada doesn't say who she is) and Hrothgar had maybe one or two lines. They completely rushed the movie too quickly. Unless you read the book, you have no idea how Eragon learns to use magic and are left in the dark about most things. The actors did the best job they could with the horrid lines they were given to read. The special effects were great except that Saphira isn't supposed to have feathers. What dragon has feathers? Christopher Paolini says like fifty times in the book that Saphira's wings are a thin membrane. Also that Eragon is fifteen, not seventeen. Every problem comes back to the horrid writing. Bottom Line: Could have been a great and timeless movie. Not Lord of the Rings worthy.
- the_zero_g
- Dec 29, 2006
- Permalink
- mrs-mcmanus
- Dec 19, 2006
- Permalink
- goddessngirl
- Dec 15, 2006
- Permalink
How to describe a movie based on a lovely book, that could have had a wonderful franchise, but was so hurriedly done, and so poorly directed as to become a horrible flop? First lets say that while the book has some flaws, this movie is really a disservice to it; a more or less complex plot is reduced to its bare elements making it a very predictable ordeal (as any other story would), the photography doesn't reach the standard set by LOTR or HP, becoming quite bland, the casting -while good on the stronger characters (Brom, Durza, Galbatorix)- is really lacking, particularly on critical characters like Murtagh and Arya, and the music -so critical to convey the emotions of the movie- is so corny and clumsily placed that rather than enhance takes away from the experience. So little works on this movie and so many details are ruined using the cheapest tricks, that any sequel would never make it to the big screen (more so when critical plot points were stripped from the movie).
Having read and enjoyed the books with my 11 year old son, we had high hopes and were both devastated with this ... thing promoted as a movie.
It is indeed a sad, sad adaptation, a proof that some movie execs in its eagerness to make a quick buck have indeed killed what could have been a geese of golden eggs.
Hopefully Mr. Fangmeier will go back to do special effects and never return as a movie director. At least I know that I will never see a movie made by him again.
Having read and enjoyed the books with my 11 year old son, we had high hopes and were both devastated with this ... thing promoted as a movie.
It is indeed a sad, sad adaptation, a proof that some movie execs in its eagerness to make a quick buck have indeed killed what could have been a geese of golden eggs.
Hopefully Mr. Fangmeier will go back to do special effects and never return as a movie director. At least I know that I will never see a movie made by him again.
Let me start by saying I didn't read the books before seeing the movie but I am reading Eragon now. I enjoyed the movie. Not great but not bad. One of the most nagging problems with this movie has it was way to short and seemed like it was in fast forward most of the movie. If they would have increased this movie to 2 hours to 2 and a half hours I think it would have been a very good movie (hopefully the DVD will have more added in). The acting by Rachel Weisz was fantastic. Jeremy Irons did a very good for his part. But those are two experienced actors that will give good performances regardless. The CG on Saphira was very well done. The main problem with the acting in this movie was Edward Speleers, he had no presence in this movie, which is a bad thing for the main character. It was all most like he was just there to read his lines and go home. For which I hold the director responsible but it was also one of his first movies. I think Edward would have made a good side character, but someone with more experienced should have been casted as Eragon or a director with more proved talent. If you have never read the book and enjoy good CG you will like this movie. Just change the name of the movie to Saphira and it is OK. If you have read the book assume it is a coincidence that the movie and characters share names.
- MKeller14-1
- Dec 21, 2006
- Permalink
I saw this with a friend of mine over the weekend in a press screening and I really did not enjoy it. The special effects are fine but the story is rather hammy and the performances are not very good. The main character looks like a deer in head lights most of the time and the villains acts like cartoon stereotypes more than real characters. Most of the characters here seem like rejects from other films and it shows by how unoriginal they were. The only performance in the film that has any credibility what so ever is the dragon Saphira and that's mainly because she is voiced by Oscar winning actress Rachel Weisz, who has more talent in her vocal cords than all the actors working in this film combined.
My suggestion, wait for DVD.
My suggestion, wait for DVD.
Crude, unimaginative adaptation of Christopher Paolini first novel is a bad joke from top to bottom. The screenplay is a joke, with major characters missing from the original novel and the acting from almost everybody in the film is down right horrible and that's really because most of the roles are miscast to begin with. Jeremy Irons makes an grant effort with what he has to work with but he's let down by the script and the bad performances of his co-stars and the only solid piece of real acting comes from the voice over work of Rachel Weisz, who gives the dragon Saphira enough charm, charisma, and strong will to make her the only believable and likable character in the entire film. That's in itself a great accomplishment considering the fact that script really does not even try to do that with itself.
- normandbutter
- Dec 15, 2006
- Permalink
- horsecrazy1789
- Dec 15, 2006
- Permalink
- Everchosen
- Dec 16, 2006
- Permalink
- ozarkfrost
- Dec 20, 2006
- Permalink
Really Bad. If you read the books, do yourself a favor and don't put yourself through the agony of sitting through this travesty. The story line (which skips about 70% of the original story line) wanders miles from the novel. Except for Rachel Weisz's great voice over work for the dragon (which is the best acting this film has) the acting from the rest of the actors is just above high school play level. What were Jeremy and John thinking in taking these roles? The special effects are decent but that's it and the sets are cheesy Save your cash and wait for the third novel.
Let's hope they will not be a sequel.
Let's hope they will not be a sequel.
- billkubert
- Dec 19, 2006
- Permalink
- melanieatkins_1
- Feb 13, 2007
- Permalink
- Sorrymanyou
- Mar 23, 2007
- Permalink
Hi. I went to the theater today and saw Eragon (well duh, otherwise I wouldn't be writing this comment) and came on here to read what other people thought of it. I was stunned to find not one good comment in a gigantic trash pile of supposedly witty remarks and reasons on how the movie "sucked". I have not read the book myself (I know I'm going to get bombed for this in a reply later), but I thought the movie was totally awesome, and deserves to be acknowledged as a piece of cinematic art, despite the fact it is merely one and a half hours long or so, but who cares? I certainly don't, and look forward eagerly to the sequel.
Maybe I shall read the book someday, just to see what you people are talking about. I look forward to your well-written protest messages in my in-box later, though I did not mean to offend anyone with this comment. Bye-bye.
Maybe I shall read the book someday, just to see what you people are talking about. I look forward to your well-written protest messages in my in-box later, though I did not mean to offend anyone with this comment. Bye-bye.
- bloodlust67
- Dec 14, 2006
- Permalink
Just saw the premiere, here in Portugal, and after reading all the terrible reviews, I was ready for the worse case scenario. Fortunatly, it wasn't THAT bad, I actually enjoyed the movie, but one cannot stop wondering why the hell they trashed a lot more of the original tale then necessary. The CGI is great, the cast is actually quite decent, and it really looks like the team that brought us this, wanted the movie do be bad. The "catch phrases" are as awful and basic as any B-movie, and the interaction between characters should have been worked a lot better. But it's fair to say that who hasn't read the book, will overlook some of the flaws.
I'm giving it a 6. A 7 may also be adequate, but... I've read the book.
I'm giving it a 6. A 7 may also be adequate, but... I've read the book.
- KrIaXPaTaLa
- Dec 13, 2006
- Permalink
I only just watched this movie and i thought it was brilliant i would have liked to have seen John Malkovich in it a bit more but all in all it was great. The Special Effects we beautifully done the story was straight to the point and didn't drag on but sometimes very predictable i don't know why people think the acting was hopeless the acting was brilliant especially Robert Carlyle who played Durza The Shade, i thought his portrayal was really good played a very evil man, Ed Speelers i thought was good for a first major picture playing along side Jeremy Irons, John Malkovich, Robert Carlyle, Rachel Weiz, and Djimon Hounsou would be very nerve racking especially trying to act to their standards, i was even quite surprised to see Australian Actor Chris Egan who played Roran even though he wasn't in it for long it was still good to see him in a movie rather than in Home and Away, Jeremy Irons and John Malkovich two of my favourite actors i thought were good to.
So all in all i thought it was good don't know why people don't like this movie so much i just think people should rather just enjoy a movie instead or picking at everything just so they can have an argument, i recommend it to anyone and hopefully there will be a sequel.
So all in all i thought it was good don't know why people don't like this movie so much i just think people should rather just enjoy a movie instead or picking at everything just so they can have an argument, i recommend it to anyone and hopefully there will be a sequel.
- ironshadowknot
- Feb 16, 2008
- Permalink
OK, so no Academy nominations forthcoming, but all in all, I think this movie was worth our admission and pricey popcorn. Some of the dialog was a bit stilted and hammy, but the characters were easy to care about and/or easy to loathe, as whichever the case required. There were four of us attending, ages 9 (daughter), 11 (son), 22 (my hubby) and 35 (me, the wife)... We all enjoyed it for different reasons. No, we weren't totally blown away (well, my daughter thought it was fabulous, and wants a dragon), but no one was disappointed either. Of course, none of us have read the book, so we were simply judging what we had seen for ourselves, and we had no preconceived notions about what it should be.
But, the special effects were pretty cool to watch, the scenery was beautiful, costuming was pretty cool and the fight scenes were exciting to watch (and my husband & I liked that Friesian that Irons rode). When all was said and done, we had each been sufficiently entertained. A fun afternoon with the family, everyone cheering on Eragon and his dragon. An enjoyable, though not overwhelming movie.
But, the special effects were pretty cool to watch, the scenery was beautiful, costuming was pretty cool and the fight scenes were exciting to watch (and my husband & I liked that Friesian that Irons rode). When all was said and done, we had each been sufficiently entertained. A fun afternoon with the family, everyone cheering on Eragon and his dragon. An enjoyable, though not overwhelming movie.
Formula for disaster ..... take a rookie director whose reputation is as a CGI/FX whiz kid, an unknown screen writer, a cast that looks fantastic on paper, but embodies nothing of the original characters and has to deliver the schlock that before mentioned screenwriter has written, and then attempt to set to film once of the most anticipated book adaptations in recent history. It fails on so many levels.
I DID read the book, but have the sense to know that film doesn't have to completely follow the book word-for-word/chapter-for-chapter. I am not one of the fanatics raving that the movie sucks because Arya is blonde or doesn't have "elf ears". I am saying the movie sucks for all the reasons already mentioned ad nauseum .... because the pacing is deplorable, the dialog is beyond bad, and the directing is cliché. I thought that the effects were actually quite good -- Duza's makeup, aside. One questionable costume design was Arya's "Indian Princess" costume in the last scene. She looks like an extra from some 40's western.
To sum, the director and screen writer should be tarred and feathered, but only after the studio execs who green-lighted this turd are drawn and quartered. Too many fans had too many expectations for something FAR better than this.
I DID read the book, but have the sense to know that film doesn't have to completely follow the book word-for-word/chapter-for-chapter. I am not one of the fanatics raving that the movie sucks because Arya is blonde or doesn't have "elf ears". I am saying the movie sucks for all the reasons already mentioned ad nauseum .... because the pacing is deplorable, the dialog is beyond bad, and the directing is cliché. I thought that the effects were actually quite good -- Duza's makeup, aside. One questionable costume design was Arya's "Indian Princess" costume in the last scene. She looks like an extra from some 40's western.
To sum, the director and screen writer should be tarred and feathered, but only after the studio execs who green-lighted this turd are drawn and quartered. Too many fans had too many expectations for something FAR better than this.
3/10 To put it simply, Eragon lacks. The story is rushed unexplained and poorly thought out, the acting is below par, and the cinematography is annoying with its tilted angles and range so close to the action so that you can't see what is going on.
The writing of the movie is by far its weakest aspect. The story is rushed quickly jumping from one thing to the next without any plot development so the viewer is left constantly wondering what is going on, one second our main character is a naive farmer, the next he is suddenly a fully experienced warrior with absolutely no evidence showing exactly where he gained this experience from. Entire scenes of the movie plod along with absolutely no meaning or relevance to the story, scenes which should have been cut out of the movie to make the narrative flow better. Characters come and go as they please with no relevance to the story, such as the archer who just suddenly appears out of nowhere and then just aimlessly follows the main characters without actually adding anything to the story. It almost seems as if the movie was written by a 9th grade high school student for his English class.
The acting of the movie is far below par, as it seems that nobody in this movie seems to have emotions as if all the characters were cyborgs from the Terminator series or Steven Segal. For example there is the scene where the main character discovers that the stone he has found isn't a rock but actually a dragon egg as the egg hatches. Now normally people seeing a small monster burst out of a rock would express quite some level of surprise or shock, but all our star does is raise his eyebrows slightly and give a pathetic tiny gasp. Every character in the entire movie is like this, if someone is crying over a slain comrade all they do is frown and have a look of "dang it" on their face, if someone is cheering over victory, all they do is leer and go "woooo". The emotion is non existent.
Eragon is a poor movie at best that fails to be entertaining, especially when compared to the other movies it is copying they style of such as "Lord of the Rings" and "Harry Potter". It seems that the makers of this movie thought, "This movie has swords, magic, old English style speech, horses and dragons, it therefore must be good". They were wrong. The belief that just because your movie looks a bit like "Lord of the Rings" it must be good like it, is incorrect.
The writing of the movie is by far its weakest aspect. The story is rushed quickly jumping from one thing to the next without any plot development so the viewer is left constantly wondering what is going on, one second our main character is a naive farmer, the next he is suddenly a fully experienced warrior with absolutely no evidence showing exactly where he gained this experience from. Entire scenes of the movie plod along with absolutely no meaning or relevance to the story, scenes which should have been cut out of the movie to make the narrative flow better. Characters come and go as they please with no relevance to the story, such as the archer who just suddenly appears out of nowhere and then just aimlessly follows the main characters without actually adding anything to the story. It almost seems as if the movie was written by a 9th grade high school student for his English class.
The acting of the movie is far below par, as it seems that nobody in this movie seems to have emotions as if all the characters were cyborgs from the Terminator series or Steven Segal. For example there is the scene where the main character discovers that the stone he has found isn't a rock but actually a dragon egg as the egg hatches. Now normally people seeing a small monster burst out of a rock would express quite some level of surprise or shock, but all our star does is raise his eyebrows slightly and give a pathetic tiny gasp. Every character in the entire movie is like this, if someone is crying over a slain comrade all they do is frown and have a look of "dang it" on their face, if someone is cheering over victory, all they do is leer and go "woooo". The emotion is non existent.
Eragon is a poor movie at best that fails to be entertaining, especially when compared to the other movies it is copying they style of such as "Lord of the Rings" and "Harry Potter". It seems that the makers of this movie thought, "This movie has swords, magic, old English style speech, horses and dragons, it therefore must be good". They were wrong. The belief that just because your movie looks a bit like "Lord of the Rings" it must be good like it, is incorrect.
- littlejimmy835
- Dec 19, 2006
- Permalink
It was nothing like the book i mean they changed sooooo much it ruined the whole concept of making a movie in the first place. i mean you can see it was cheaply made you can see the reflecting of a car in the background of the beginning they cut out main characers and changed the whole damn plot.......i swear i am going to get the director.....ill get the Amish Mafia after them!!!!! if your a fan of the Eragon series please don't waste your time on this cheap rip-off of lord of the rings....there are scenes taken right out of LOTR(lord of the rings). if you really want to see it wait till it comes out on sale. seriously wait until it comes out on DVD.
- ihatchetmanrox
- Dec 15, 2006
- Permalink