Eragon (Widescreen Edition)
|
List Price: Our Price: $3.97 You Save: $11.01 (73%) Availability: Usually ships in 1-2 business days Buy Used: from $0.30 (click here) Category: DVD See more DVD releases |
|---|
Buy this DVD movie at online store in your country
Canada
Canada
Movie Reviews of Eragon (Widescreen Edition)
Movie Review: Pleased with Eragon purchase!
Summary: 5 Stars
Pleased with AMAZON.com purchase of item..they NEVER have let me down. Rented this from B.B. and chose to purchase @ Amazon.Movie Review: Great Sale
Summary: 5 Stars
Very Fast shipment the DVD was in very good condition just like he said great seller thanks!!!!Movie Review: it came in exellent condition
Summary: 5 Stars
The movie eragon came in excellent condition and I really like it when it comes this way.Movie Review: An honest review, an enjoyable flick
Summary: 4 Stars
[If I express opinions with which you do not agree, I'm open to debate. This is, after all, a review--an expressed opinion.]
Will your kids love this flick? Yes.
Will you enjoy it? Probably.
The kids will love the story, and it will hold their attention. Yes, there is fantasy violence, but it is not treated with the same level of gore as was present in the Lord of the Rings films (or most other modern fantasy. This kids loved it and have asked to watch it again, but I did notice that it did not spill over into their play as some other movies have (i.e., no one has been running around the house pretending to be Aragon).
The main character was refreshing--his rash decisions, his wrestling with his 'brother'. I believe the author's youth brought a realistic perspective to Eragon that is often missed by other writers who are trying to recreate their understanding of youth.
Overall, this was a good film that your family will enjoy watching.
If you only want to read good things about this film, stop here. I'm not out to bash Christopher Paolini--the fact that he wrote it while so young is quite impressive, and I hope to see more from him as his writing style matures--but I do want to reflect upon those things that made this movie (and not necessarily the book) something less that great.
I've seen many mentions (in press and in reviews) that cite the influence of the Lord of the Rings on this book and movie. As a long-time fantasy reader and fan, I don't see the connection apart from the obvious generic parallels: fantasy genre, dragon, reluctant hero, experienced mentor, enemy wants to kill the hero.
I found the story line a little too predictable at times, the villians too cliche (with one exception), and the costuming too bazaar (my word choice is intentionally not "bizarre"). Perhaps the written work provided the background required to make sense of the costuming--especially Arya at the end (the native American homage) and the Varden. While I could see a clear middle-east theme in the peoples of the Varden, it did not make sense with my knowledge of mountain cultures. Perhaps the world of Eragon does not see snow in its mountains, but that one cultural juxtaposition just did not fit and it affected how I saw the movie as a whole.
As to the villians, I found Galbatorix to be unbelievable. This individual who was the cause of the downfall of the dragon riders is shown as little more than an inept monarch who likes making threats. His unveiled "secret" at the end was something I anticipated from the first few scenes. The Ra'zac were intriguing to me--I would have like to have seen more of them rather than the (seemingly) dim-witted Urgals. When I saw the Urgals, I thought immediately of the Gumbas from the Mario Brothers movie. My son said that the book painted them as horrible warring monsters, but the movie made them look like stupid warring oafs. Now, the one villian who was interesting was Durza. I found his portrayal very compelling (even though his appearance is apparently nothing like it was described in the book), his actions befitting his role, and his presence necessary to carry the film.
The presence of the older, experienced but reluctant mentor is, pehaps, an overused plot device in many fantasy yarns. In this case, although Brom's backstory was very predictable, how his role played out in the story (or rather the "when" more than the "how") was not expected. The Brom character was believable. I'd love to see Paolini write Brom's backstory sometime.
On a final note--admittedly and entirely a matter of preference--I did not like the portrayal of Saphira the dragon. At times, the dragon's physical traits appeared feline, or even cartoonish--mostly around the head/face. Overall, the dragon CGI was fantastic and the movement and textures were good (especially the distant shots), but Saphira (again, in my opinion) lacked something truly "draconian." I cannot full place it, but I think it is, in part, to the construction of the wings. I was weaned on dragons that had leathery, bat-like wings, so my prefernces are likely biased by those early stories. I will read the book soon to see if those film wings match the author's descriptions.
Movie Review: Lord of The Rings Light
Summary: 4 Stars
Going into this movie, I was expecting a mediocre and boring piece of film which would fall into the cracks of movies never to return again. Instead, it's like one of those strange 80's fantasy films which didn't fit into the whole feel of the day, but holds enough charm to one day become a backwoods classic. Think "Labyrinth" and other such movies. And contrary to the opinion of so many ravingly insane and stalker-like fans, this movie isn't half-bad.
I don't know where all the "Star Wars" comparisons were coming from, except for that suspicious sunset scene. But anyways, this felt a lot like Lord of The Rings. And that's what this movie aspires to be, with the Peter Jackson like pans of the journey over breath-taking landscapes. Who know Hungry could look that good?
So while this movie doesn't exactly do anything new, I didn't really expect it to be, when all fantasy works steal off each other anyway. This movie is a combination of those Tolkienesque quest epics, and those dragon movies which never seemed to strike a chord with audiences. See that's 90's dragon movie whose name I can't think of, and that Christian Bale evil dragon film which I kinda liked.
Another bad point to this movie is just the poor choice of director and writer. If you're going to do a big movie like this, don't give it to a first-timer. And as for writer, let's just say it's fun to guess what the character is going to say, before they actually say it. Fun game.
As for characters, Eragon is likeable, yet immature and stupid. Jeremy (love that name) Irons does the best with what he is given. And the girl, what can I say, she doesn't look half-bad. But here's a question while we're at it. Is all Elvish the same? Do Lord of The Rings Elves, and Eragon Elves speak the same language? And why do they sound so different from Santa Clause Elves?
Anyways, the bad guys on the other hand, are pretty bad, mean, cardboard, evil, and you wish for them to go away, in a bad way. And those soldiers sure seem a lot like Orcs. Here's another question. Why did Rachel Weiz lose her English accent for her dragon role? I didn't even know it was her.
But onto the good points. The action, while not original, is entertaining. The sword fights are cool, and the battles, while not exactly impressive, are interesting. The story, while not original, is interesting, and mostly keeps your attention. It also avoids the ugly fate of Golden Compass, by keeping down the confusing mythology. Although they could have cut down on the Elvish a little bit.
But for the best part of the movie, let's give a round of applause for the director. Because I thank him for keeping the movie a little more than an hour and a half. Not 3 hours, not 2 hours. Just a nice little hour and a 38 minutes. But although this is a very nice running time, the director could have easily cut down many scenes to make this a true 1 hour and a 1/2.
Overall, while not exactly original or brilliant, it's Lord of The Rings light. It keeps you interested throughout the whole movie, it has some cool sequences, and some characters are pretty likeable. And again, I like the running time. So don't listen to the crazed and mentally unstable fanatics of the much-overrated book, this movie could have been a whole lot worse.
Real Score: 3.5