[philodox]

It is funny how most of the negative comments in this thread are based on what people think it will be like. Most of you haven't even read it. Negative preconceptions like this are completely useless in a discussion about a book... take it to one of the Zhaolu threads.

To the OP: You say that you 'tried to read it'... did you actually finish the book? I found the writing style slightly juvenile when I started reading it, but as I went on I got used to it and it ended up being a great book. It is worth noting that he WAS 16 years old when he started writing the book. The fact that he uses short and succinct sentences allows the points to come across quickly and once you get used to the flow, the imagery is excellent.

As for the comments about it being like Lord of the Rings... ummm, no. There are hardly any parallels you can draw here other than it is a fantasy novel. If you want to bitch about something being a LotR rip-off, take a piece out of Terry Brooks or maybe even Stephen R. Donaldson.

I don't know much about the movie, but John Malkovich is in it and I have yet to see a movie with him that I don't like. Mary Reilly was great.

EDIT: Just for clarification, I am not trying to say that Eragon is the best book EVAR or anything like that. I just don't think it is the worst. I read the book because my younger sisters loved it [same reason I read Harry Potter], and I enjoyed it well enough. My personal taste leans more towards Robert Heinlein and the historical fantasy of R. A. MacAvoy, though lately I have been reading a fair bit of old Judith Tarr and early Piers Anthony Sci-Fi.

 

[TheMarchingMule]

philodox, perhaps Eragon hit upon one of my most pet peeved things that I said earlier: the making up of "names" that I personally think anybody can do. Make up syllables that roll off with a hint of strangeness to them and you got it.

As for those who said, "So-and-so is in the movie, how bad can it be?" Since when did who's playing in it determine how good the movie is? Anybody, when offered enough money (I don't know if this is the case here) can be in the worst movie of all times, yet try/do their best.

Sure you can call it a fantasy novel, but the main point is that it's a recycled ripoff of the TRUE types of fantasy novels that I'm sure many of you have read back then (Lloyd Alexander or Terry Brooks, anyone?)

 

[Febs]

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheMarchingMule /img/forum/go_quote.gif Sure you can call it a fantasy novel, but the main point is that it's a recycled ripoff of the TRUE types of fantasy novels that I'm sure many of you have read back then (Lloyd Alexander or Terry Brooks, anyone?)

It's not like Brooks is the most original fantasy writer of all time. Of all of the fantasy writers that have followed in the Tolkien traditional (which, of course, is most fantasy writers), Brooks is probably the most derivative of Tolkien.

 

[philodox]

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheMarchingMule /img/forum/go_quote.gif philodox, perhaps Eragon hit upon one of my most pet peeved things that I said earlier: the making up of "names" that I personally think anybody can do. Make up syllables that roll off with a hint of strangeness to them and you got it.

Well, it is better than calling everyone Doug and Frank... i really don't see what your problem with this is.

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheMarchingMule /img/forum/go_quote.gif As for those who said, "So-and-so is in the movie, how bad can it be?" Since when did who's playing in it determine how good the movie is?

Movies are usually made by who is in them. It is a rarity [and pleasant surprise] when you find a great movie with all unknown actors. You can to some extent gauge a movies worth by the actors in it... but it doesn't always work. [Johnny Depp in Cry Baby... yuck!

]

I don't think I've read anything from Lloyd Alexander, but Terry Brooks is complete sh!te.

EDIT: You didn't answer my question about reading the book. Did you finish it?

 

[craiglester]

quite apart from the books, I'm talking of the movie here.

I'll refrain from this cos it just looks cheesy. not so much derivative but maybe a bit too generic.

Of course, my wife wants to go see it.. what's a guy to do?

 

[Chops]

Eragon?

I've never heard of it until just now! Never heard of the book, series, movie, nothing. And from the sounds of it in this thread, I highly doubt I'll get much further than now with it. LOL

 

[jpelg]

I've read the first book "Eragon", and am halfway thru the second "Eldest", at the vehement request of my 10yo niece who loved the series so much she's read them both twice in preparation for the movie ("Uncle Jimmy, you have to read this. It's the best evar!").

They're not so bad, and in some ways quite good, especially for a 15yo author. Is the series a ripoff? Perhaps, but so is just about every other hero's journey epic, including those others mentioned (including the Star Wars trilogy). So what? It's the best story worth telling, imo, regardless of the bent or version.

Judging from the trailers, the movie appears to have taken quite a bit of artistic license (my niece has already picked it apart). But the cgi looks pretty cool. I'm hoping for good acting performances from the older, experienced actors (Irons & Malcovich are two of my favs, actually).

I plan to take my niece on Friday

!

 

[vagarach]

Quote:

Originally Posted by YamiTenshi /img/forum/go_quote.gif professionals to design the book cover

My sister (who I'm sure is equally as nuts about the book as the OP's) says that the author's sister painted the dragon (or whatever they call it) that is on the cover. I think that the teenage girl market is the important one here.

I watched the trailer and it seems just like D&D all over again. The word fromage comes to mind.

Oh and John Malkovich. How on earth does he get paid to act? Have you seen him in Napolean (the miniseries)? It's the same here. He takes any suspension of disbelief and throws it out the window. And his crazed American accent. Why?

edit: Seems Malkovich has a huge resume. I'm still wondering how he managed it. Obviously other people think he's good!

 

[Akathriel]

Honestly, I thought the book was a mediocre composite of the ideas of better fantasy authors. Although the age of the author at the time was very impressive, the novel itself is generic.

 

[cantsleep]

Quote:

Originally Posted by craiglester /img/forum/go_quote.gif Of course, my wife wants to go see it.. what's a guy to do?

go see it if it doesnt bother you too much

 

[blip]

Quote:

Originally Posted by vagarach /img/forum/go_quote.gif edit: Seems Malkovich has a huge resume. I'm still wondering how he managed it. Obviously other people think he's good!

I'd say that most of the critical reaction to Malkovich has been good, even superlative. (Check out say Dangerous Liaisons for an example of that) However, he does have this tendency to... well... become a bit too playful with a role. He likes to play up the melodrama for an amusing result.

And I think overall he is a bit over-rated.

That said, I can't wait to see him ham it up with Jeremy Irons... Wow! That's going to be a lot of ham.

 

[Rock&Roll Ninja]

I guess I'm in the minority: I simply don't care.

*I didn't read the book. It was explained to me as "teenagers and dragons".

*I've already seen Dungeons & Dragons, Reign Of Fire, and House Of The Dead. While Eragon can't possibly be as bad as the third, the trailer has me believe it is a mash of the first two. None of this makes me think this will be a good investment of my $20 for going to the theater. I'll probably netflix it (is that a verb yet?) next year.

*My wife already dragged my to see Harry Potter 1 - 16,000. I paid my dues for watching kiddy fantasy films this decade.

*My alotment of 'hate' for rip-off fiction has already been spent on aformentioned Harry Potter, an alcoholic combination of The Littlest Witch TV series and the Dungeons & Dragons Monsterous Manual.

Maybe I'm just too old. I'll go back to badmouthing every version of Dune tomorrow.

 

[philodox]

Quote:

Originally Posted by vagarach /img/forum/go_quote.gif I watched the trailer and it seems just like D&D all over again. The word fromage comes to mind.

If you are talking about that terrible D&D movie that came out a while back, that is pretty harsh criticism. I don't see how there is any way it could possibly turn out THAT bad.

BTW. Am I the only D&D geek that was bothered by the fact that they made it seem as if red dragons are more powerfull than gold dragons? That really bugged me for some reason. I mean, if you are going to base your movie on a game I like at least make it accurate.

Quote:

Originally Posted by vagarach /img/forum/go_quote.gif Oh and John Malkovich. How on earth does he get paid to act? Have you seen him in Napolean (the miniseries)?

I haven't seen him in Napolean... but have you seen him in Mary Reily, Of Mice and Men, Being John Malkovich, Heart of Darkness, etc? The fact that he is playing 'the bad guy' in Eragon is a very good thing.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rock&Roll Ninja /img/forum/go_quote.gif *My alotment of 'hate' for rip-off fiction has already been spent on aformentioned Harry Potter, an alcoholic combination of The Littlest Witch TV series and the Dungeons & Dragons Monsterous Manual.

While I don't mind Harry Potter, that has to be one of the funniest observations I've read.

 

[vagarach]

Quote:

Originally Posted by philodox /img/forum/go_quote.gif If you are talking about that terrible D&D movie that came out a while back, that is pretty harsh criticism. I don't see how there is any way it could possibly turn out THAT bad.

Yes, I watched the trailer again for D&D. Eragon isn't that bad. Definitely.

 

[VicAjax]

you think they'd at least be able to come up with a new dragon, instead of a lame copy of the one from that god-awful movie Dragonheart: