Kinda blown away.....

Post Reply New Topic

and I don't mean impressed. A couple years ago, when it was in theatres, I saw the film adaptation of Eragon. Now mind you I hadn't read the book first and didn't even know the book existed until I stepped into the auditorium in which it was screening. Anyways I just finished litening to the audiobook earlier this week so I picked up the movie because through listening to it.,vague memories of the movies were sparked and I wanted to find out what was changed or left out.

I was quite disappointed because many key element, such as the first time Eragon used Brisingr was changed and the scene'a locale was completely different from what the book made it sound like. However, scenery and character introduction changes, which did aggrovate me aside, They completely changed various character's appearance, Arya for example, was a tall elvan woman with black hair I believe and the woman they cast, is probably only of average height and on top of that her hair is like a golden brown colour. And on top of which the book clearly says Eragon had scried Arya in the river and dreamt of her and yet they completely cut that out and basically turned it around to have her screye him and tell him her name and where she is through being poisoned by the shade. Another drastic change that greatly annoyed me was in the final battle for the Varden, In the novel it clearly stated that an Urgal had damaged Sephira's breastplate to the point where it was so misshapen nad pressed inot her chest that she couldn't breathe and that after the battle was done while he was healing, her armour had been reformed and repaired whereas in the movie that was completely negated and her neck armour was cut through and she was fatally wounded and Eragon, knowing he shouldn't, used the magic to heal her and that's is what left him unconcious for a day and a half and not the battle with the Durza which had left Eragon scarred from one shoulder to the opposite hip. And the bit of casting that really pissed me off is that the novel clearly told you that Murtag is twenty-three and it looks as though they cast him as being no older than Roran(inthe novel's case) or as old as Eragon claimed to Brom to be(in the film).

If you feel I'm nitpicking or just being too critical don't hold back. All I want is honest opinions of those who've read and seen Eragon.

I read Eragon before I saw it. I think if you've read the book first you're bound to be disappointed because there will be changes. It's very hard to translate directly from the book,otherwise it would be far too long. I can think of an instance where I was glad that I saw the movie before I read the book " The Shipping News" just because I could visualise Kevin Spacey rather than how the character was described. I hate it when major content is changed. "The Haunting of Hill House" is a wonderful psychological drama by Shirley Jackson and the scary parts are very subtle and you're never really sure whether the ghosts are really there or a product of a woman slowly going mad. What they did with it cinematically was just an obscene embarrassment. Simon Birch is based on A Prayer for Owen Meany by John Irving and that was greatly compressed but the basic message was the same even if things that happened to two different people in the book happened to one person in the movie. But it bugs me when they change things too.

I was also very disappointed in the film adaptation of the book; it had none of the character scope or gradations of the book. And I was very disappointed in the dragon...

I've since read the other two books... I was disappointed in the second book [boring], but felt the third had a better sense of pacing and suspense. Naturally the battle scenes are better realized than the developing relationship between Eragon and Arya, or the complexity of politics in bringing together so many disparate groups. But I put that to paucity of the young author's life experience, and as he gets more that will change.

Yes, the author is quite young. When did he start the series, at 15?

Something like that. In the last book, it did seem like he'd at last been on a few dates.

The book is very good considering the author's age but it's obviously an "immature" work (I mean no disrespect by this - just that he's not writing in adult mode yet).

The film was done by adults and as such should have been "on the ball" enough to correct some of those mistakes. Instead, it's "paint-by-numbers". It's very obvious.

Not the worse fantasy book adaptation (the Golden Compass should get that award) but a generally poor effort. I don't think that any of the sequels are likely to be filmed.

No small mercy, that.

Well, some elements were missing from LOTR =/ (especially the Bombadil part) So meh, book to movie adaptations are tricky.

I've read a critique of the book, that wasn't entirely kind but it points out he wrote it at 16 and edited it at 17



I'm fairly sure that your right about eldest because, as Eragon was panned for, due to the fact that the director wis a visual effects, specifically in CGI, by trade, from what I've listened to so far of it, because it jumps back and forth between Eragon's journey to Elesmira( and the battle Roran and the whole of Cavahaul, it's just too choppy in itself to be made into a movie. However there is a fan sight whose name I forget that is a word of the "ancient language"(but not Eragon's true name), they have active links for Eragon and Brisngr in a dropdown list for a "films" subsection and though it lists Eldest the title is completely inactive.

As with quite a few movies recently, I think the series could probably have been better realised as an anime series.

yeah well... I've got something brewing right now that I'm still in early research stages of but I'm debating whether to write it up as a manuscript or a screenplay.. One of the things i wanna do at a pivotol area would involve quite involved CGI animation which is why I'm also debating if I'd rather it be filmed live-action or animated if I were to go the SP route.