Report, edit, etc...Posted by DT_Battlekruser on 2006-12-17 at 01:38:25
Seeing as I'm an almost weekly moviegoer, I decided to start a column here reviewing the movies that I see.
What: Eragon
Rating: PG - fantasy violence, intense battle sequences and some frightening images
Length: 1 hr. 39 min.
Starring: Edward Speleers, Jeremy Irons, Djimon Hounsou
Opens: December 15, 2006; nationwide
Grade: D
The following synopsis is from Fandango:
Searching for food for his family during a harsh winter, a boy named Eragon happens upon a shiny blue stone in the forest. Soon, he's helped hatch a dragon who takes him on an adventure through a mystical land.
------------
Eragon was a decent book. I was charmed by the new angles it brought to the classic tales that constantly bring me back to Lord of the Rings and Star Wars. One of the most intriguing bits of the novel was the interplay between the dragon Saphira's double role as a hatchling many years Eragon's junior and also as one of the last of an ancient race, wise beyond all standard of human comparison. It was interplay such as this that made me like the novel. The dynamic relationships between the characters made the story interesting.
As a movie, however, Eragon strips the book of its story and its charm, leaving a vastly oversimplified version of Lord of the Rings - sans the terrific acting jobs of actors such as Viggo Mortensen and Elijah Cohen. It would seem that the target audience of Eragon was my eight-year-old brother, who, incidentally was enraptured by the special effects that, when compared to things like Casino Royale, leave a lot to be wanting. There is no dramatic tension, no sense of mystery or intrigue whatsoever. Everything Eragon needs to know is, in the movie, presented to him upfront as if God were speaking to him.
Stripped of the novel's unique interplay between characters, Eragon is an extremely unsophisticated fantasy movie, feeling more like a blow-by-blow summary of the novel than a story itself. Moviegoers this weekend would find their money better spent on films such as The Pursuit of Happyness or Charlotte's Web.
What: Eragon
Rating: PG - fantasy violence, intense battle sequences and some frightening images
Length: 1 hr. 39 min.
Starring: Edward Speleers, Jeremy Irons, Djimon Hounsou
Opens: December 15, 2006; nationwide
Grade: D
The following synopsis is from Fandango:
Searching for food for his family during a harsh winter, a boy named Eragon happens upon a shiny blue stone in the forest. Soon, he's helped hatch a dragon who takes him on an adventure through a mystical land.
------------
Eragon was a decent book. I was charmed by the new angles it brought to the classic tales that constantly bring me back to Lord of the Rings and Star Wars. One of the most intriguing bits of the novel was the interplay between the dragon Saphira's double role as a hatchling many years Eragon's junior and also as one of the last of an ancient race, wise beyond all standard of human comparison. It was interplay such as this that made me like the novel. The dynamic relationships between the characters made the story interesting.
As a movie, however, Eragon strips the book of its story and its charm, leaving a vastly oversimplified version of Lord of the Rings - sans the terrific acting jobs of actors such as Viggo Mortensen and Elijah Cohen. It would seem that the target audience of Eragon was my eight-year-old brother, who, incidentally was enraptured by the special effects that, when compared to things like Casino Royale, leave a lot to be wanting. There is no dramatic tension, no sense of mystery or intrigue whatsoever. Everything Eragon needs to know is, in the movie, presented to him upfront as if God were speaking to him.
Stripped of the novel's unique interplay between characters, Eragon is an extremely unsophisticated fantasy movie, feeling more like a blow-by-blow summary of the novel than a story itself. Moviegoers this weekend would find their money better spent on films such as The Pursuit of Happyness or Charlotte's Web.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by Mp)Blu on 2006-12-18 at 11:33:00
Meh..I'm still gonna go watch the movie. 
Report, edit, etc...Posted by ShizTheresABear on 2006-12-18 at 11:39:29
Meh, I don't feel like watching it anymore. But I saw the Pursuit of Happyness... good movie. 
Report, edit, etc...Posted by Centreri on 2006-12-18 at 15:56:39
I decided I'll try not to watch it when I started reading the reviews - I had hoped it would be as complicated and sophisticated, if not more, than Lord of the Rings, but since this is simply a vastly simplified version of the book I'd rather keep the scenes in my head rather than adopt bad ones from the movie.
Pursuit of Happiness it is!
Pursuit of Happiness it is!
Report, edit, etc...Posted by roryfenrir on 2006-12-20 at 18:01:05
i havent seen it but as soon as i heard there was a movie of it, i knew they would mess it up. So much of Eragon is the journey from his house to farthen dur, and that consisted of many boreing, but important events that made up of much of the book. I thought that the movie would just jump pretty much from battle to battle.
is that how it is?
i still might go see it.
is that how it is?
i still might go see it.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by Mp)Blu on 2006-12-20 at 18:42:05
QUOTE(roryfenrir @ Dec 20 2006, 05:01 PM)
i havent seen it but as soon as i heard there was a movie of it, i knew they would mess it up. So much of Eragon is the journey from his house to farthen dur, and that consisted of many boreing, but important events that made up of much of the book. I thought that the movie would just jump pretty much from battle to battle.
is that how it is?
i still might go see it.
[right][snapback]605903[/snapback][/right]
is that how it is?
i still might go see it.
[right][snapback]605903[/snapback][/right]
Pretty much. If the movie was done in three hrs like the LOTR movies to allow more detail to the movie, it would have been better.
