Eragon (2006)

It’s fine. It's literally the definition of a fine movie. You’ve seen it before, you know every beat and outcome before the characters even do. Only question is how much escapism you’re looking for.

There's no way I can possibly love it entirely but I just think its ridiculously bad, but enjoyable at the same time.

A terrific literary drama and character piece that shows how the process of creating art can be seen differently by those doing it and those looking at it from the outside.

There are moments in this movie where the great movie it could've been peek out... They're fleeting, here, but they're worth savoring, and they happen often enough to make it worth your while.

When I watched this movie I was a bit thoughtful. It reminded me a lot of a B version of "Lord of the Rings" or something like that. After some research, I discovered that it is based on Christopher Paolini's books. In fact, after blockbusters like "Harry Potter" or "Lord of the Rings", literature and cinema were filled with fantasies. On the other hand, the studios bet so high on these films that they try to force the making of trilogies and franchises. This is quite evident in this film, with its open ending announcing a sequel that wasn't made.The script is simple: a magical land was ruled by knights mounted on dragons and everything went well until they became corrupted, fought each other and one of them betrayed all the others, killing everyone and becoming a dictator. Now comes a new warrior, who must be able to unite the resisters and lead the revolt against him. Simple and predictable most of the time, the film never proves to amaze or move us. In fact, it's usually empty and insensitive, with a promise of romance that never materializes and the almost total absence of emotions. Even action scenes seem so unrealistic that we never feel real danger (partly because there isn't much empathy with the characters, so we never care about them).Ed Speleers is a stranger to me and is still very young, so I don't understand why they didn't hire a more experienced actor. It was a casting mistake and he was never up to the character. Jeremy Irons is excellent in his role and stars in some of the best scenes in the film. Rachel Weisz was competent in the task of giving voice to the dragon, Saphira. On the other hand, John Malkovich looks a lot like himself and Sienna Guillory was unlucky with her character, whose importance we will never know because the film would only reveal it in the sequel. I believe that the bad casting options and low acting performances is due to the bad material given to the actors. Another problem I felt was the editing of the film, which made it's rhythm rather irregular, with a lot of dead moments. Technical features, however, compensate these weaknesses: CGI's good and cinematography, colorful and bright, is a feast for our eyes. The choice of sets and the design of costumes were judicious and everything was thought to the smallest detail. The soundtrack, without being amazing, performs very well and suits what we are seeing on screen."Eragon" might have been much more interesting if they had made this film without thinking about sequels and if they had put in the main role another actor, more skilled in the task of showing feelings and gaining our empathy. Despite being a forgettable film and not deserving of being considered good, its regular enough to be watchable.

Movie doesn't set itself up properly for non book readers and rips up the book and uses it to wipe its bottom from the perspective of the book readers. This movie is only Eragon in name and if you've never read the books its going to be quite disappointing for non kid viewers. Random omissions and changes as well as unexplained points severely hurt the movie in my opinion. At least the CGI wasn't terrible. This would be a movie a child might find fun but any adult would just be dissatisfied with.

On 15th December 2006, I signed to see Eragon at the cinema as I felt I could "use the experience". That evening, the experience turned out to be far more than I was expecting. I had a feeling that dragons would be involved as the first letter of the title is the letter after "d" in the alphabet. Before the film started, there was a trailer of Eragon the game which included a voice over saying, "Who you think is your greatest enemy, is actually your greatest ally." I quickly realised this referred to the dragons. I was very inspired.Within the first few minutes, I was already fascinated by what I was seeing. I hoped Arya would escape with the blue stone and was relieved when she sent it away by magic. When Eragon found it, I just could not wait to see what happened next. It's that kind of adventure.The bond Eragon and Saphire share is so strong. One day Eragon is a farm boy - the next day he's a hero. Amazing!I quickly came to find that Eragon is one of those films you can't really call a film, because it's beyond a film - it's a quest, a fulfilling adventure.For me, I certainly proved that a year can end very differently to how it starts. If anyone has anything negative to say about the film or the game, they had better keep it to themselves rather than spoil it for others. One of the students I knew loved dragons and had an Eragon poster in his room. I have no fear of flying and I would gladly team up with Eragon and Sapphire (I would ride a dragon of my own) and stand alongside Murtagh against Galbatorix.

I know this movie was not up to the standards of Lord of the Rings or others in the quality. It may not have even followed the book. But if you watch it with an open mind and not comparing it to the best there is on the market, it is very entertaining. I for one would love to see a sequel. It frustrated me the way it ended. Wanted to know just how the evil king and his dragon would be defeated. People are just to hard on some of our movies these days. Look to be entertained, and stop picking them to death. There is not a movie out there that can stand up to opinions that are set on finding the bad in them. When there is so much good qualities about them. Most of the time I judge weather or not I go see a movie in the theaters. If the critics don't like it then it is most likely a good show. The more they like it the less the chances I will see it ever. That rule of thumb works very well for me.