"Eragon" is an extremely disappointing movie. As a fan of the book, this reviewer wanted to love this movie, but it just did not live up to its potential. With all of the hype, you would expect "Eragon" to be great, maybe not the level of "Lord of the Rings," "Harry Potter," or "Chronicles of Narnia," but just a notch below those. It is a shame that something so hyped up could be so disappointing. It would more logical to save your $8.75+ and either watch "Casino Royale" or spend a little more and buy the book, "Eragon."
King Galbatorix has slaughtered all the legendary dragons and their riders, driving the rebels into hiding. Luckily, hope still is possible because Princess Arya is able to export the last remaining dragon egg from Galbatorix. This egg ends up in the possession of Eragon. This dragon, named Saphira, has immediately bonded with Eragon. Sadly, this makes Eragon a target for King Galbatorix and his sorcerer henchman, Durza. Eragon soon finds his family under attack. To his luck, a man named Brom is there to rescue him. Brom leads him on a journey that teaches him the ways of dragons and magic. Is Eragon ready to face these dangers?
If you enjoyed the book, you will not like this movie. Many of the key characters are nonexistent. Many of the locations were not there either. They even left out some key plots in the book. It almost seems like the screenwriters just skimmed the book, and put only the "key" elements. It almost felt like the makers only cared about the buck and not the film itself. It is difficult to fit a whole book into just one movie, but they could have done some modification here and there in order to do that. If you look at recent films like "Lord of the Rings," "Harry Potter," "Spiderman," and "X-Men" (before "The Last Stand") those movies were not 100% perfect to the book, but there was enough modification for people to not mind.
The most bothersome part of this movie was the length. It is a known fact that you cannot make an epic fantasy with a runtime of only 99 minutes long. "Dumb and Dumber" was seven minutes longer. What were they thinking making a fantasy movie that was shorter then a buddy comedy? They should have increased the run time by 60 minutes. This reviewer would have no problems sitting through a 150-minute movie and fans of the book would probably not mind either. This proves that they cared more about the number of screening then the quality of the movie.
Due to the short runtime, there are many plot holes and very little character development. You have a hard time caring for any of the characters on the screen. Everything seemed rushed when it never needed it to be. Some things were not explained very well. If you had not read the book, you might have been confused. The blame should be going to the screenwriters and the director, Stefen Fangmeier. This is more proof that the makers did not care enough.
The acting was mediocre at best. When you have a cast with names like: Jeremy Irons (as Brom), John Malkovich (as King Galbatorix), Djimon Hounsou (as Ajihad), Rachel Weis (as Saphira), and among others, you would expect at least better then average. This reviewer's friend said it best, "When the actors weren't acting like robots, they were overacting." All of the blame should be going to the screenwriters because there is no other way you can look at that. The only actors to do a better then mediocre job were Jeremy Irons as Brom and Rachel Weis as the telepathic voice of Saphira.
Another problem was the music. A good movie has an amazing film score that draws you into the movie as it were another character. You should not expect "Lord of the Rings" quality, but you should at least hope for something that could draw you into the story and make you care a bit more. An Avril Lavigne song, "Keep Holding On," is played at the beginning of the end credits. This reviewer has nothing against Avril, but it makes you wonder what "20th Century Fox" was thinking deciding to put a mainstream teenybopper song in a fantasy movie.
The movie was not all disappointment. The visuals were amazing, especially Saphira. This Saphira, with the scales and feathers, was a unique dragon to look at. Whenever Saphira and Eragon were in flight, you should be in awe. This is not surprising considering that Industrial Light & Magic (ILM), a visual effects company created by George Lucas, were in charge for all the special effects. Plus when you have a $100 million budgeted fantasy movie, you better expect some great special effects.
Overall, this movie was a disappointment. Sure the visuals were amazing and Jeremy Irons and Rachel Weis tried their best to save this movie, but unfortunately the makers did not seem to care about the quality of the film. While reading the book, "Eragon," it was obvious that Christopher Paolini was no JRR Tolkien, it is also clear that Stefen Fangmeier is no Peter Jackson. "Eragon" probably would be more enjoyable if you do read the book, but it is extremely doubtful. Skip this title but if you have to see it, wait for the DVD rental.
King Galbatorix has slaughtered all the legendary dragons and their riders, driving the rebels into hiding. Luckily, hope still is possible because Princess Arya is able to export the last remaining dragon egg from Galbatorix. This egg ends up in the possession of Eragon. This dragon, named Saphira, has immediately bonded with Eragon. Sadly, this makes Eragon a target for King Galbatorix and his sorcerer henchman, Durza. Eragon soon finds his family under attack. To his luck, a man named Brom is there to rescue him. Brom leads him on a journey that teaches him the ways of dragons and magic. Is Eragon ready to face these dangers?
If you enjoyed the book, you will not like this movie. Many of the key characters are nonexistent. Many of the locations were not there either. They even left out some key plots in the book. It almost seems like the screenwriters just skimmed the book, and put only the "key" elements. It almost felt like the makers only cared about the buck and not the film itself. It is difficult to fit a whole book into just one movie, but they could have done some modification here and there in order to do that. If you look at recent films like "Lord of the Rings," "Harry Potter," "Spiderman," and "X-Men" (before "The Last Stand") those movies were not 100% perfect to the book, but there was enough modification for people to not mind.
The most bothersome part of this movie was the length. It is a known fact that you cannot make an epic fantasy with a runtime of only 99 minutes long. "Dumb and Dumber" was seven minutes longer. What were they thinking making a fantasy movie that was shorter then a buddy comedy? They should have increased the run time by 60 minutes. This reviewer would have no problems sitting through a 150-minute movie and fans of the book would probably not mind either. This proves that they cared more about the number of screening then the quality of the movie.
Due to the short runtime, there are many plot holes and very little character development. You have a hard time caring for any of the characters on the screen. Everything seemed rushed when it never needed it to be. Some things were not explained very well. If you had not read the book, you might have been confused. The blame should be going to the screenwriters and the director, Stefen Fangmeier. This is more proof that the makers did not care enough.
The acting was mediocre at best. When you have a cast with names like: Jeremy Irons (as Brom), John Malkovich (as King Galbatorix), Djimon Hounsou (as Ajihad), Rachel Weis (as Saphira), and among others, you would expect at least better then average. This reviewer's friend said it best, "When the actors weren't acting like robots, they were overacting." All of the blame should be going to the screenwriters because there is no other way you can look at that. The only actors to do a better then mediocre job were Jeremy Irons as Brom and Rachel Weis as the telepathic voice of Saphira.
Another problem was the music. A good movie has an amazing film score that draws you into the movie as it were another character. You should not expect "Lord of the Rings" quality, but you should at least hope for something that could draw you into the story and make you care a bit more. An Avril Lavigne song, "Keep Holding On," is played at the beginning of the end credits. This reviewer has nothing against Avril, but it makes you wonder what "20th Century Fox" was thinking deciding to put a mainstream teenybopper song in a fantasy movie.
The movie was not all disappointment. The visuals were amazing, especially Saphira. This Saphira, with the scales and feathers, was a unique dragon to look at. Whenever Saphira and Eragon were in flight, you should be in awe. This is not surprising considering that Industrial Light & Magic (ILM), a visual effects company created by George Lucas, were in charge for all the special effects. Plus when you have a $100 million budgeted fantasy movie, you better expect some great special effects.
Overall, this movie was a disappointment. Sure the visuals were amazing and Jeremy Irons and Rachel Weis tried their best to save this movie, but unfortunately the makers did not seem to care about the quality of the film. While reading the book, "Eragon," it was obvious that Christopher Paolini was no JRR Tolkien, it is also clear that Stefen Fangmeier is no Peter Jackson. "Eragon" probably would be more enjoyable if you do read the book, but it is extremely doubtful. Skip this title but if you have to see it, wait for the DVD rental.