heather fallion
|
Eragon the movieEragon the movie
My advice if you have not read the book – see the movie first.
If you have read the book, do not expect the movie to follow the book.
If you are one of those ppl who get upset when they change things from the book– never go to see the movie.
The movie was good, and contained about 10% from the book including the names of characters. The movie is based loosely on the book by Christopher Paolini, well the first half of the movie anyway, after that everything was pretty much changed around. Lets just say that we thought they skipped like 10-12 chapters, maybe 20 in the beginning and as far as the end of the movie, I lost count.
As far as the movie went , the dragon was well done. I liked that the wings had scales that looked like feathers. I liked the costumes as well.
They may have downplayed things to make it more children oriented. I do know they simplified a lot of things- a lot of the background and mini-adventures were lost from the book. Not to say it was a bad movie, it was good. Just not anything like the book.
I think they simplified it too much. I did not get the element of suspense and I was never worried about the outcome of the conflicts.
This movie reminded me of Disney’s “The Sword in the Stone”. A good family film that did not send the kids home crying.
If you like to see dragons that are done well, see the movie. If you are into Tolkien, the hobbit – not lord of the rings-, see the movie. If you liked “dragonheart”, then see the movie.
If you expect to see something like Narina or The lord of the rings, you will be disappointed.
A good movie I would give it a B, because they did the dragon so well.
Otherwise it would only be a B-.
"Lord of the rings" , Naria would get A+.
|
Maitresse Maia Steeleater
|
Well, I can not argue that Lord of the Rings was, hands down A quality work...even though I was rather shocked and disappointed by some of the changes Jackson made to the story. The entire ending was different...however, I'm not sure I blame him. Just reading the ending, I was was, at times, wishing I could get through it to finish the story.
And Narnia...well that story is extremely dear to me...my father read it to me when I was little. I am extremely protective over it. I'm sure most people feel similarly if they were exposed to it, as a child (OMG how silly I felt, even as a child, when the lion sacrificed himself and I actually cried for days....because my father didn't read that part to me about his "resurrection" until several days later.)
Anyway, back to this one, when I saw the commercials, I thought it looked like an interesting story...I kind of set it aside tho, because I didn't feel the same tug (nay demand) to see it as LOTR. BUt, maybe I'll give it a shot  ~~Maia
|
heather fallion
|
I will say it is based on Lord of the rings. Christopher Paolini was influenced by Tolkien quite a bit. There will be three books. I can see Tolkien and Alexander Loyd in his writing. Mature and inmature in ways. I think he was around 15 or so when published.
It has the flavor of the hobbit in my mind. Not too serious, not to dark.
Great for a pre-teen.
|
maulperson
|
umm, just got a boxed set of the books> Wife and I are both looking forward to reading them once Christmas is out of the way. Maybe we will have to push ourselves out to the movies first. LOL
|
Avan
|
Sounds like I'd best wait for the movie to release on DVD, just finished the books. A nice tale, but I agree, some common elements to LotR. Character development isn't Cherryh by any means, but an amazing work considering how old the kid was when he wrote it.
|
|
|
|