Eragon - reviews - Page 2

Radioman970 · 12-15-2006, 06:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chuck Mayer

Eragon is designed to sell kid's meals and toys and a videogame. It looks woefully generic.

Just felt this should get a double post, and placed at the top of the next page, as a convenience.

But it still might be mindless fun. Even Godzilla 1998 was fun a few times when I watched it.

Malcolm R · 12-15-2006, 06:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Qui-Gon John

As to Eragon, wow, what a ripoff in the name department. Are there no creative talents whatsoever in the industry anymore, that they couldn't come up with original names on their own.

Again, this was written by a 15 year old kid. His whole mind was probably full to bursting with names and plots from fantasy books and movies.

And Narnia was awful. If this is worse, I'll not even waste my time.

Josh.C · 12-15-2006, 06:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Malcolm R

And Narnia was awful. If this is worse, I'll not even waste my time.

I'm gonna have to strongly disagree Malcolm. Sorry it wasn't your thing, but definitely not "awful" imo.

I thought it was very well done.

Qui-Gon John · 12-15-2006, 07:05 PM

Well, I wouldn't call Narnia awful either. But it really didn't do much for me. I had seen the old version, which IMHO was way too cheesy. But I gave this a fair view going in and the production values were great, so no negative bias there. But the story just didn't grab me, I never really felt much for the characters, a bit for the kids, much less for any of the characters in Narnia.

Chuck Mayer · 12-15-2006, 07:06 PM

I thought Narnia was well-done, with it's heart in the right place. I found it a bit dull, but it's a competent film.

Sorry Josh...I only bring Pan's up when someone else does

For me, it's not quite as good as The Fountain, but it is MUCH more accessible. It just belongs in discussions with The Departed and United 93. Not Eragon.

Back to Eragon, Malcolm nails it. It was written by a 15 year old. I wrote stuff ripping off Aliens when I was 12. While it sucked, it was probably better than Alien Resurrection

Long story short, if you think it'll be good...maybe you'll enjoy it. I think it would be awful, so for me it probably would be.

I would like to hear more HTF reviews. I thank Simon for his...I am not surprised at his opinion.

Josh.C · 12-15-2006, 07:17 PM

I wouldn't say it surprised me either, but I'm going into it with low expectations, and taking a group of kids. As long as they like it, it will be a successful outing.

I'm not so old and set in my film watching genre's (not trying to imply that any of you are either) that I can't admit to enjoying some children's stories brought to life.

I already mentioned that I thouroughly enjoyed Narnia. I also am a huge fan of the Harry Potter films. Any of you remember The Neverending Story??? LOVED IT!

Since I will not be seeing the film until Saturday or Sunday, I can't say where this one will fall on my kid's fantasy tale movie list.

I'm still going to give it a chance. And I look forward to more reviews over the next few days.

SilverWook · 12-15-2006, 08:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RobertR

Simon's informative review killed any interest I may have had in this film. I hate talking dragons.

If "The Hobbit" movie ever gets made, you're not going to like Smaug very much.

Patrick Sun · 12-15-2006, 09:48 PM

This was one of the blandest looking films I've seen in quite a while. The color palette was dour and dank in many spots, and the daylight scenes weren't all that good either.

Jeremy Irons does his yeoman's best, but can't quite elevate the material, and the guy playing Eragon, Ed Speleers, isn't all that interesting and the director/writers are perfectly okay with just putting him in scenes that just plod along with nary a thought given to time and distance covered by characters in impossibly short spans just to keep the film moving. Robert Carlyle chewed up the scenery, but wasn't all that nefarious as the Shade stooge of the king.

You could tell that many characters got the short-shrift towards the last half hour of the film, minimal character introduction and then the big finale that didn't live up to the build-up.

The dragon herself looked okay in closeups, but the flight sequences have a lot of hazy shots with not much details. It didn't look like state of the art 2006 CGI, more like 1996 CGI.

I give it 1.75 stars, or a grade of C-.

CoreyII · 12-16-2006, 02:38 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Simon Massey

Corey

I enjoyed Narnia and would say that this film gave me a greater appreciation of Narnia - it could have been just as bad. That said I have read the Narnia books as a child and had a connection to them - have never read Eragon.

Eragon is worse than Narnia IMO.

Pan's Labyrinth is great though!!!

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chris Atkins

Oh I disagree about Kong and Narnia, Corey. Kong might have had better technical aspects, but Narnia was a much more uplifting (and better told) story.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Josh.C

I agree Chris

Thanks for the response Simon.

Hey Josh and Chris. I'd love to go into detail as to why I think Kong is better than Narnia, but you know someone on this forum will say that I am straying off the topic since this thread is about Eragon. So I'll just end this by saying when it is all said and done I'll take the big ape over Qui-Gon Lion anyday of the week

.