PDA

View Full Version : Eragon



scruffziller
08-06-2006, 07:27 PM
Have not read the books. But I have heard they are really good. John Malkovich is in it, can't wait!!!Visuals for the movie are up on its site. Looks like we are getting our new LOTR exerience for the holidays this year again!

http://www.eragonmovie.com

scruffziller
10-16-2006, 10:20 AM
http://movies.aol.com/movie-trailer-clip/eragon-ed-speleers-jeremy-irons

Trailer is up for those who haven't seen it. Looks awesome.

General_Grievous
10-17-2006, 06:46 PM
I think it'll be a good movie, but it'll probably bomb. This has nowhere near the fanbase size of Lord of the Rings, Harry Potter or Narnia. Besides, I'm kinda getting sick of the sudden fantasy bandwagon in theaters every Christmas since LOTR came out. Lemony Snicket, Harry Potter (though it was good), Narnia (ditto), and now Eragon. They're really milking this genre, aren't they?

2-1B
10-26-2006, 09:35 PM
It's all over the TV now...haven't we had enough Flying Dragon movies already? WTF? :confused:

Jargo
10-30-2006, 05:40 PM
very derivative in presentation. John Malkovich sounds like he had a lobotomy and jeremy irons is still doing his C list actor thing. The lead actor, that blonde kid, he looks and sounds really dull. and the backdrops and clips in the trailers look like someone copied shots from the cutting room floor of LOTR and Narnia.

In short it looks like a pile of pants to me. A latecomer to a cinematic phase that's already passed. I'm done with swords and sworcery. Pretty much done with sci-fi too. fuhget all this technical wizardry and CGi bolstering of a lame movie. we need some real movies with real actors and real scripts and story and plot and none of this hollywood schlock. just good no nonsense movies about people. The sort of movies we used to get when movies were good. when people actually cared about what they watched or made. before it was all about opening weekend returns and publicity and winning awards crap like that.

the last great decade of movies was the seventies. once we hit the eightes it all went butt shaped.

General_Grievous
11-04-2006, 10:07 AM
the last great decade of movies was the seventies. once we hit the eightes it all went butt shaped.

While I agree with your second paragraph, DP, I think you're forgetting that the '90s had some really great movies. Off the top of my head I can name a bunch: GoodFellas, Silence of the Lambs, Pulp Fiction, Jurassic Park, Forrest Gump, The Lion King, Titanic (overrated but still good), Saving Private Ryan, etc.

But you are right about there being too many fantasy movies now. IMO, LOTR, Harry Potter, and Narnia are the exceptions, but the rest can be considered cheap knockoffs. I'll still see this, though. But I'm not expecting anything on the level of "Return of the King".

scruffziller
12-12-2006, 06:55 AM
You know, I didn't want to be a naysayer when I opened this thread. But the more I have watched the trailers here recently, I am realizing that this is most likely gonna be some juvenile, shallow crap. Very low quality and poorly made. It seems to me that this is going to have the caliber of the first Dungeons and Dragons movie. I'll probably still go see it but is going to be at the bottom of my list. I want to see Apocalypto, Pursuit of Happyness, and The Good Shepherd first.

kool-aid killer
12-12-2006, 09:57 AM
I plan on catching it this weekend. I have no clue what the plot is about other than what i put together from the previews. I dont have high expectations for it but it could turn out to be really good. I wont know until i see it though.

General_Grievous
12-15-2006, 04:02 PM
Spoilers

Just saw this. It was an average movie. It was no Harry Potter or Narnia film, and certainly no "Lord of the Rings". The story seemed like a Star Wars knockoff. Farmboy and old mentor save princess, mentor is sacrificed, farmboy becomes hero, film is set up for sequel. Sound familiar? On the bright side, the dragon was pretty cool, and Jeremy Irons did a pretty good job. So it's overall not a bad movie, but it's nothing spectacular.

scruffziller
12-16-2006, 11:57 AM
Spoilers

The story seemed like a Star Wars knockoff. Farmboy and old mentor save princess, mentor is sacrificed, farmboy becomes hero, film is set up for sequel. Sound familiar? On the bright side, the dragon was pretty cool.


Yea was reading about the "Star Wars" mold it takes in the paper review. And it mentions the awesomeness of the dragon. It says that "she is more believable than most of the humans....." Hmmmmmmm, gotta see this step up in the CGI, but the trailer version of the dragon didn't seem all that spectacular. Is the movie version better? How does the CGI caliber compare of the dragon to Aslan from Narnia?

General_Grievous
12-16-2006, 12:03 PM
The dragon's cool, about the same caliber CGI of Aslan. And she's voiced by Rachel Weisz. She was the character that I most cared about in the movie, mainly because Eragon was a whiny prat and the princess had the personality of a dead fish. The dragon was the most well-rounded character in the movie.

Mr. JabbaJohnL
12-17-2006, 01:51 PM
I saw it last night . . . it was alright, but not that great. There were some serious pacing problems IMO. You could tell that it stole a lot from SW and LOTR, except, you know, it wasn't very good. My girlfriend had read the book and said that they left a lot out, which made it also a little bit confusing. Oh well.

scruffziller
12-17-2006, 04:18 PM
Yea, I don't think I am going to make an effort to see this.