Last weekend I went to see the movie Eragon with my mom. I love the first two books in the series (Eragon and Eldest) by Christopher Paolini, but I’d give the movie 1 out of 5 stars. In other words, it sped through the book extremely fast, it didn’t even put all the important parts of the book into the movie, the characers sucked, and the Raz’aac are supposed to look like pigs!!! *pant, pant*
Review of the Characters:
Eragon: Sappy, not very photogenic, very full of himself
Aria: Ugly
Brom: He was the best character
Murtagh: He looks cool wth his cloak on and his hood up, but otherwise…*cough, cough*
Derze: Extremely ugly, so ugly that he should go around with a bag over his face.
I really suggest you read the books before watching the movie so you don’t get biased against the stories. Maybe if they hadn’t sped through the book and had put more of the important parts in the movie it wouldn’t have sucked. But they didn’t, and it did.
Ciao for now!
Not pulling any punches with that review, eh? So what is it about the books that is compelling? (I haven’t read them.) Are they at all similar to Harry Potter?
Books are always, always, always, always better than the movie. If you’re going to see a movie that is based on a favorite book, you have to leave behind all your own conceptions of people, places and time. It took me about 5 viewings of Lord of the Rings before I could forgive all the changes they made and just accept it for the movie that it was. Maybe that will be the case in this instance. I do think that the Harry Potter movies were done pretty well; but that’s because I only read the books once and didn’t have a whole lot invested in them; not like I had in LOTR. I’ve read LOTR probably every year of my life since I was a senior in high school.