Eragon
discussion
The movie version sucks!
message 201:
by
Sarah
(new)
-
rated it 4 stars
Jan 06, 2012 03:43PM
He didn't join the army, he ran away from the draft.
reply
|
flag
I disagree, that film ended as it ended because someone cared for those who did not read.I think it ended as it ended because people who done it where not from MOVIE business but from TV business. So the have made 2 hours long TV show.(Lotr is 6h long movie).
And now I have nightmares about other great series (honor harrington) that is being translated into Movie, that they will also do poorly.
I really would be better without chance to watch this "TV Show" disguised as "Movie".
Caitlin wrote: "I haven't seen the movie. Could someone please tell me what is so atrociousy wrong with it?"It completely betrays the book in so many ways it would take hours to list them all
The book was terrible. It's hard for me to imagine that the movie could really be a worse movie than the book was a bad book. What's worse than "worst ever"?
Madeline ~Plub!~ wrote: "Is the movie that bad? I haven't seen it..."yes it is!!! i hated it!!
Yes, the movie is that bad. They completely gutted the story, for the sake of getting it done. The movie loses all of the intricacies of the story line. I heard it was because the option to the movie rights, which is purchased by a studio and has a limited time to it, was about up and rather than fork over more money for it and do the movie right, the just quickly threw something together and gave us the fans crap.
I have never seen Hollywood chopped up a book so badly! I take that back they did the same thing to the Percy Jackson. I can only imagine it is a great honor for any author to have their book turn into a movie or tv show but I just wish they would make sure hollyweird don't destroy what they create and their readers love.
i don't know what your talking about the Percy Jackson movie was pretty good
this isnt about the percy jackson movie, the clue is in the title
Jennifer wrote: "Jeremy Irons was the BEST choice for Brom, I totally agree! I think that the movie would have been good if it were not about Eragon, and if I hadn't read the book first. It was a good movie..."
I couldn't agree more. All the times Eragon cared for Saphira, taught her words, etc. gone... not fair!
Vanessa wrote: "The book was terrible. It's hard for me to imagine that the movie could really be a worse movie than the book was a bad book. What's worse than "worst ever"?"You must not have read the right book then. :/ If you thought the book sucked, then you've got the wrong one :)
It is likely that the movie forever ruined the perceptions of those who have never read the books foreversuch a shame
Daniel wrote: "this isnt about the percy jackson movie, the clue is in the title"jeez ! i was in the middle of a book discussion with someone else. so stay off my back.
I AGREE!! Every single thing that came out of their mouths was cliche!
The tralier... omg.. at the end, the guy was wearing jeans = =///
Lia wrote: "Daniel wrote: "this isnt about the percy jackson movie, the clue is in the title"jeez ! i was in the middle of a book discussion with someone else. so say of my back."
oh sorry, your comment was on an empty page so i didnt see the previous comment :/
The movie was a shocker. The CGI animation was not impressive. The English accent got on my nerves. I would have preferred a TV series to a film for Eragon.
Terrible movie!!!!! didn't follow the book
Ajay wrote: "The movie was a shocker. The CGI animation was not impressive. The English accent got on my nerves. I would have preferred a TV series to a film for Eragon."im english :/
Ajay wrote: "The movie was a shocker. The CGI animation was not impressive. The English accent got on my nerves. I would have preferred a TV series to a film for Eragon."sorry but true, after a while it did start to get annoying.
Sarah wrote: "Vanessa wrote: "The book was terrible. It's hard for me to imagine that the movie could really be a worse movie than the book was a bad book. What's worse than "worst ever"?"You must not have rea..."
I'm pretty sure it's the right book. Eragon, by Christopher Paolini, right? Otherwise known as, a terribly written, flat book with paper thin characters, done by a precocious child who (apparently) had read Lord of the Rings and didn't know better than to just copy it.
Impressive, perhaps, in the way that watching trained animals can be impressive. The impressive thing is that they've learned to ape human behavior, poorly. Paolini apes writing behavior, without actually writing. But then, the kid was only six or seven when he wrote it, right?
Vanessa wrote: "Sarah wrote: "Vanessa wrote: "The book was terrible. It's hard for me to imagine that the movie could really be a worse movie than the book was a bad book. What's worse than "worst ever"?"You mus..."
Hurray to logic!
How by copying Tolkien you can get shallow characters? (and add 10 to mentioned numbers)
And I know what you mean by "paper thin characters", but you are unjust! Characters are enough for the plot, mechanics of world are also enough for plot, and plot is enough for characters and world. AND its young adult (which hate too much "immersion").
Maybe its just not your genre? (high fantasy mixed with YA should I call it?)
However if You think that you judged book correctly than if You compare it to film its like Your comparison of Tolkien's works to Paolini's. Yes movie is that bad. (I'm sure that story writer behind Power Rangers also worked for movie adaptation of Eragorn)
definetly!!! I was outraged when i watched the movie cause they did it horribly!!!! the book is amazing and the movie is trash. Its as simple as that
I just recently finished the book and remembered that I had the DVD (Never opened). I love the book, I fell in love with the charactors. The movie, made me sad, it does no justice for the book.
Przemek wrote: Maybe its just not your genre? (high fantasy mixed with YA should I call it?)There are a few decently written YA novels, but perhaps you've hit on a point there. I don't believe that just because people are young, they ought to be given ridiculously bad literature. Or that if they claim to prefer ridiculously bad literature they should be left alone to wallow in the horrible.
The Chronicles of Narnia are fantasy, and for children even (not teenagers) and those are excellently crafted classics. Ditto Alice in Wonderland/Through the Looking Glass. Just because people are young doesn't give them an excuse for being stupid, and that goes for double for both the readers and the author of Eragon.
btw, yes, I know he was a teenager. I was being sarcastic, calling him a six year old, because he wrote so poorly.
Maybe it's just a matter of opinion then. :/ I can't change your thoughts, and you can't change mine. So, let's just agree that we like our own certain aspects, and dislike our own aspects. Sound good? :)
There was this channel on Youtube that made HILARIOUS videos based on the movie.
"What is your art?"
"The art of survival."
...
"GET ME OUT GET ME OUT OF THIS CAGE!!!" xD
xD
The movie was awful.
"What is your art?"
"The art of survival."
...
"GET ME OUT GET ME OUT OF THIS CAGE!!!" xD
xD
The movie was awful.
They could have turned the film into an epic Lord of the Rings-like series. But instead I felt like the movie just kind of went off on its own story. So many characters were left out. Brom was played by an awesome actor, but I still wanted him to have a white beard or something. The end of the movie wasn't really like the book - it was sooooo corny. But all that aside, the dragon Saphira was amazing.
Hey at least the main character was cute! :D
Heidi wrote: "Hey at least the main character was cute! :D"Hmm, yes that is very true. He was very cute! XD
he was blonde though!!! they could've at least dyed his hair brown...
Clara wrote: "he was blonde though!!! they could've at least dyed his hair brown..."Did he have brown hair in the books? I forgot.
Haha I didn't even read the book. *blushes*
The movie is an awful adaptation. Really atrocious. It rushes through parts of the story that are important, and adds/alters elements that change the characters and their motivation in a huge way. I felt truly awful for Christopher Paolini after I saw it...it must have been so exciting for him to see his book being turned into a film, and then so disappointing to see how much they changed. For instance: Having Eragon and Brom running from the Rarzak instead of tracking them totally changes Eragon's character. He's fleeing instead of seeking justice for his uncle's murder. Truly awful. I hope one day another studio is able to option the books and do a better job of adapting them, though I think this terrible version may prevent that from happening :(
Brian wrote: "Don wrote: "If I judged the book by the movie then I would never have read the book. Thankfully I read the book first."According to Wikipedia, Paolini liked the movie..."
I kind of think he HAD to say that, you know?
I kind of liked the movie but the book was way better.
Butchered Barbie wrote: "I kind of liked the movie but the book was way better."On one hand the movie adaptation doesn't live up to the book - on the other hand, so few books ever get made into movies, and Christopher Paolini must have been happy about that.
I kind of liked the beginning of the movie, but the more it departed from the book, the worse it got. I especially hated what they did to Angela; in my opinion she was by far the best character and they turned her into some blind mystic.
I have to admit that I was disappointed. The movie had so much potential because I really ENJOYED the book! I am guessing the director and screen writer had never really read the book ... or if they had they aren't really fans of this genre. If they are fans of the genre and liked the book, WHAT was THAT!?!?! BAH!
"action-packed"Action packed was Lord of the rings.
Maybe lotr risen my expectations too high ?
Anyway I'm now eager to watch movie adaptation of best book I've ever read, and Eragorn so called "movie" did not made me easy about it :(
@Clarissa
I think that they where good at their profession. Its just that their profession had little in common whit what was required.
If they did TV Series, then it would be good enough.
However they are guilty of copying TV-like skills to Big screen :|
i think that they are making a new movie... just something my brother heard when he was at one of Paolini's book signings...
Brian wrote: "I thought the movie version was simply atrocious. It would have been comical watching them undermine themselves and their chances for a sequel if it weren't for the fact that it was based on this b..."No argue there.
there really isn't...
SUCH A STUPID MOVIE! Couldn't follow it , it sucked.I EVEN GOT THE DUMB VIDEO GAME. It sucked too.
the movie had no plot line... and it skipped around a lot... and it didn't end right... i could go on ALL day!!! ;)
It completely sucked where we're the twins like seriously how can you make the next movies without them like jeees
The movie was decent entertainment. But if you are expecting a movie that supports the book and is a good representation of the book. Well then you will hate the movie. They screwed up horribly on the movie and cant even attempt a movie on book two because its so bad. If the movie wasn't supposed to represent the book it could pass. But because it is, Major FAILURE!!!!!
I refused to watch the movie after seeing trailers do it wouldn't spoil the books for me. I think I saw like 20 minutes of it when it was on TV and I wasn't impressed :(
I read the books and then watched the movie, and the movie wasn't even the same... The movie ruined the books for me. And the way they did the movie, there is no way that they can even make a second movie... It was horrible.
