ERAGON - What did you think?

[Man in the Funny Hat]

I would reiterate that fans of fantasy are MORE forgiving of bad writing, wooden acting, and poor direction in a fantasy film than they would normally be. By rights they have to be. The heavier the fantasy elements the higher the budget required to do it right, but making it LESS likely that it will live up to its potential. Since it has for so long been a disrespected genre (and in many ways still is) it does not have a tendency to attract the best writing, the best actors or superior effort in their performances, nor directors with any greater vision and motivation than a paycheck. Bad movies are still bad. Bad fantasy movies; those that draw disrespect even from fantasy fans; are actually somewhat worse for having managed to lose the extra credit the genre is given by those fans.

The fantasy genre is thus filled with dreck and the really good ones are quite uncommon. Eragon, IMO, is passable entertainment, but it is NOT a good movie. Even its fantasy status cannot fully make up for its faults. The wooden acting and cheezy (by todays CGI standards) stop-motion animation of any Ray Harryhausen title (i.e., the Sinbad movies) would be at least as entertaining and those are movies that are 30-40 years old, not to mention utterly forgotten by all EXCEPT fantasy fans and effects buffs.

I CAN say that shortly after having seen Eragon I caught Dragonslayer on cable. Undoubtedly being shown simply to feed off of any interest created one way or another by Eragon. Up until now I had held unshaking to the opinion that Vermithrax was STILL the best dragon ever on film despite every advance of CGI. Now I certainly can't say that Eragon's Sefire (sp?) is actually superior simply for having been surrounded by such an inferior screenplay and acting, but I finally see Dragonslayer and its Go-Motion animation showing its age in comparison to CGI. One reason that I would consider Eragons dragon to remain inferior is that the editing (not mentioned specifically in my earlier review) still struck me as distractingly fast-paced. In other words, I think they were intent on using fast cuts and the impression of unnecessarily extreme speed to attempt to substitute for the excitement that was NOT being provided by script or acting.

Yes we DO need more family-friendly entertainment, but that MUST NOT be gained at the cost of technical and artistic adequacy. Movies of inferior quality should never be praised simply to encourage g-rated content. The two objectives are not mutually exclusive.

 

[Angel Tarragon]

Movies - ERAGON - What did you think?

I think I'll wait until it cpomes on the premium channels to watch. From the reviews I am hearing, I don't think I want to waste my money on seeing it in the theater.

 

[Darrell]

THREAD HIJACK ALERT

Are you going to tell me you expected Han Solo to shoot Vader's cover ships, sending him shooting off through space and giving Luke time to blow up the Death Star?

Well, no. Then again, I was 11, and didn't have a heckuva lot of experience with movies in general. In retrospect, it's pretty obvious from the moment he and Luke say 'good-bye' that he's gonna be showing up again.

Did you expect Vader to throw the Emporer off the ledge and come back from the dark side?

Did I expect that sequence of events? No. Did I expect Vader to turn on the emperor? Yes; from the moment in ESB when he wanted Luke to help him 'rule the galaxy as father and son.'

I also see you left out any mention of Empire Strikes Back which focued heavily on the characters and had an unexpected ending.

Only in that it didn't actually have an ending. It was two-ish hours of pure filler. I'm probably the only (former) SW fanatic that hates ESB almost as much as Ep 1.

In LOTR, did you expect Gollum to destroy the ring?

Reading the book? From the moment Gandalf says he thinks Gollum still has a part to play, I figured he'd be involved in the destruction of the ring. That his 'part' was to engineer a complete random fluke of a destruction was, admittedly, unforeseen...and happily so. One of the only real disappointments for me in the movie was that he and Frodo struggled for the ring. I'd have much preferred that he just pretty much blunder into destroying the ring, like in the book. I like the random happenstance of the 'Hooray! I've got the precious! ... Whoops.' ending.

Wouldn't you say the more conventional ending would involve the army of men overpowering the armies of Sauron? Instead it is shown they cannot defeat Sauron through fighting but need Frodo and co. to destroy the ring. That isn't expected.

When they explicitly state that they cannot defeat Sauron through fighting, I don't find their finding another method to defeat him unexpected at all.

END THREAD HIJACK

Y'know, I'm not sure that comparing Eragon to Star Wars, LotR, D&D, Krull, or any other movie is entirely valid. The fact that we may see a movie as 'bad' or 'good' shouldn't mean that we disregard the 'good' points of 'bad' movies or the 'bad' points of 'good' movies, and in the end, one 'good' or 'bad' movie is of no help in determining the worth of another. Any film should be judged on its own merits, without consideration of any other film.

I saw Eragon, and didn't like it. You may have seen it and liked it. In the end, when the critics have had their (fairly useless) say, and the audiences have all gone home, your own opinion is all that matters. If you liked it, more power to you. It'll be out on DVD by April, pick it up and watch it again.

Regards,
Darrell King

 

[IcedEarth81]

In retrospect, it's pretty obvious from the moment he and Luke say 'good-bye' that he's gonna be showing up again.

It's obvious now because there have been countless movies made with similar happenings. But in 1977 most people were probably pretty surprised by that.

Only in that it didn't actually have an ending. It was two-ish hours of pure filler. I'm probably the only (former) SW fanatic that hates ESB almost as much as Ep 1.

It did have an ending. Vader telling Luke he was his father and then the Falcon escaping and preparing to go save Han is the ending. "I am your father" was surprising when I first saw it.

Y'know, I'm not sure that comparing Eragon to Star Wars, LotR, D&D, Krull, or any other movie is entirely valid.

Why wouldn't it be valid? Those movies are considered in the same basic genre as Eragon. Eragon borrows elements and ideas from Star Wars and LOTR. A comparison is completely valid, perhaps not head to head but in quality. Star Wars and LOTR are both beloved trilogies of movies that, in their time, raised the standard for the genre. Movies made in the same genre will be compared and rightfully so.

 

[warlord]

Not only is comparing Eragon to these movies valid it must be done. Any half-brained fantasy fan can see Eragon is one thinly vieled copyright violation after the other. The only spark of talent this kid showed was his ability to split Darth Vader into three different people and utterly ignore Chewbacca.

 

[Storm Raven]

It's obvious now because there have been countless movies made with similar happenings. But in 1977 most people were probably pretty surprised by that...

Not if they had seen any of about a hundred movie westerns, including, for example, The Magnificent Seven. The mercenary who turns out to have a heart of gold is a staple in that genre, and Star Wars has a lot in common with the movie western genre.

 

[Olgar Shiverstone]

I haven't seen Eragon and don't intend to, but I wanted to comment on this. If I could see it for $2.50, I might consider it. However, here in Syracuse a movie ticket is over three times that much ($8.00). It's even more in other places. Cost is a huge mitigating factor for me in deciding to see a film, and when I'm spending that much, it needs to be at least average for me to consider it - which Eragon hardly is, according to reviews.

Movie prices, grrr (at least in NJ).

Matinee movie tickets to Eragon for two: $16.00
Drinks and popcorn: $15.50
Realizing you just spent $31.50 to watch a badly recycled version of Star Wars: Priceless.

 

[Elf Witch]

Like I said earlier the people I went to see it with liked it. My son he is in his 20s and his gaming group went to see it and they enjoyed it.

Most of my gaming group went to see it and they have all enjoyed it. Sure most of us agree that it could have been longer and was badly edited.

I agree with a lot of what some of the people here are saying and that is that people have become jaded and unable to just sit and let the story wash over them without engaging the crticial part of their brain. Its like a lot of people have become crtitics and look for what is done wrong in a movie and what is done right in a movie as they sit and watch it. I would hate to be a paid critic of the movies because I think it takes a lot of enjoyment out of the simple pleasure of sitting in a dark theatre and getting caught up in the story.

Being critical as you watch the movie is not the same as what Hitchcock called the fridge critic which is what I am. Its when after you see the movie and are making a sandwich and thinking aboutt he movie you realize that there are things wrong with it. That is usually diffrence between a okay movie and a great movie.

I also add something to this. To me a bad movie is one where I sit there wishing I was someplace else. Where my mind wanders and I am bored. When its over I am left feeling well that two hours of my life I aint ever getting back.

So I considered Eragron a okay movie. I was not bored and the movie held my attention. Though it had a lot of fridge moments, But I am still glad I saw it.

I also think the judgement that a film is bad is a personal one. Aside form the critical point of view. For example Big Trouble in Little China from the critical point of view is a bad film, but a personal favorite. A movie like the English Patient is a great film from a critical point of view but to me it is a bad film, boring and several hours of my life wasted.

Maybe its true that LOTR rings raised the bar on fantasy films and now we expect that level out of every fantasy film we see. I just don't see that happening. Hollywood puts out very few great films. Those stand out and are remembered. LOTR is up there with films like Casablanca. Do you know the name of many films that came out the year Casablanca did?

Its like fiction every so often a book will be writtten that blows you away and becomes a great literary classic, but not every book written has this happen some are just entertaining they are pieces of fluff meant to give you a few enjoyable hours of reading.

I think a lot of movies are like that to. I am glad that I am able to turn of my crtical part of the brain and just enjoy so many movies that a lot of critics have said are bad movies.

 

[Darrell]

It's obvious now because there have been countless movies made with similar happenings. But in 1977 most people were probably pretty surprised by that.

As has already been pointed out, no, it wasn't really that surprising. Westerns (and war movies) had been doing the 'good guy scoundrel' bit for years, and far more people had seen those types of movies than had watched sci-fi movies when SW first emerged onto the scene. For what it's worth, in a sense, I would consider Star Wars to be one of the best 'westerns' ever made (too bad its 5 follow-up flicks dropped the ball).

It did have an ending. Vader telling Luke he was his father and then the Falcon escaping and preparing to go save Han is the ending. "I am your father" was surprising when I first saw it.

No, that's a climax...an 'ending' is not the same thing. ESB started out in the middle of something and ended up in the middle of something, and had no real 'beginning' or 'ending' point. It was two-plus hours of 'middle.'

Why wouldn't it be valid? Those movies are considered in the same basic genre as Eragon. Eragon borrows elements and ideas from Star Wars and LOTR. A comparison is completely valid, perhaps not head to head but in quality. Star Wars and LOTR are both beloved trilogies of movies that, in their time, raised the standard for the genre. Movies made in the same genre will be compared and rightfully so.

I just don't think so. IMO, movies should stand on their own feet (one of my problems with ESB, by the way...if you hadn't seen SW and didn't know about RotJ, it would make no sense whatsoever), without comparison to any other movie, regardless of genre. A good movie is a good movie is a good movie...period. Ditto, a bad movie. What's more, in the end, only you can assign a movie any type of worth. If I think the D&D movie is good (I don't, btw, it's just used as an example), it is good...no matter what all the rest of the world thinks. If you think Citizen Kane is a bad film, it is bad...no matter what all the rest of the world thinks. Comparison with ANY other movie is just pointless. It should 'pass or fail' on its own merits, or lack thereof, and in your own opinion.

Regards,
Darrell King

 

[Thanee]

I also found the movie enjoyable and fun to watch. Certainly far from good, but decent enough to not be angry about having spent the money on the ticket.

The wings should have had scales, though.

The scenes straight out of Star Wars were kinda funny.

Bye
Thanee