Eragon

Look, the movie was fine because I love Fantasy, but objectively? It lacks that Dungeons & Dragons magic. Something is missing. And yeah, I won't claim it's too short, but if we’re measuring it against Lord of the Rings or Star Wars, it doesn't even come close. It isn't even in the same league. Honestly, I doubt any sci-fi flick will ever become a massive hit again after Star Wars, because those are the kinds of films that stay with generations. Personally, though, I thought the second and third Star Wars sequels were... well, not my thing. With the third one, I expected something spectacular, but it just didn't land for me. I'm not saying that to pretend I'm not a die-hard fan—because I'm actually one of the biggest

Brandon Ortiz88 said:Look, what does it matter if a movie doesn't follow D&D rules? That doesn't mean it can't be a solid piece of Fantasy.

I get that they don't *have* to follow them, but if you aren't capable of building an original world from scratch, at least respect the D&D lore. Not everyone has the chops to invent good Fantasy... That's all I was getting at.

Austin Roberts8 said:Look, I get that they don't *have* to follow them, but if you aren't capable of building your own entire universe from scratch, you should probably respect the d/d rules. Not everyone can just whip up a decent fantasy world out of thin air... that's all I was getting at.

Well, he actually had a pretty solid concept regarding how magic works in the book, which was slightly more fleshed out than most: the idea that every spell requires a certain amount of physical energy, making the process much slower and more taxing—I think that’s one of his stronger ideas, anyway. But overall, I'm inclined to agree with you,
though I still find the book to be decent (honestly, it's much better than the movie version), and considering how young he was when he started—maybe fifteen or sixteen—and the fact that the second book actually outshines the first, I'd say the guy definitely has potential as a writer.

Look, I realize you aren't obligated to follow them, but if you can't build a compelling world of your own, then at least respect the d/d rules. Not everyone has the knack for crafting great Fantasy... That's all I was getting at.

I play Dungeons & Dragons and I love it, but honestly? This is just nonsense. Dungeons & Dragons is Fantasy, sure, but Fantasy isn't defined by Dungeons & Dragons. If you’re going to be pedantic about it, then fine—say that if someone can't invent a good Fantasy setting, they should just stick to Lord of the Rings, even if that's equally ridiculous. There have been countless incredible Fantasy stories and worlds released both before and after Lord of the Rings, and not a single one of them defines the entire genre.

In my view, the whole Fantasy genre really grew out of those old legends and epic sagas. Honestly, it doesn't matter whose specific rules they decide to follow; the real issue is that if they were going to go ahead and change them, they really ought to have done a much better job of it.

Brandon Ortiz88 said:To me, Fantasy evolved from legends and epics—it doesn't matter whose rules you follow, really. The point is, if they wanted to change things up, they should have done it better.

Oh please, that was clearly written by some kid totally swept up in their own imagination. Honestly, even if they had thrown fighter jets into the story, who would actually care? The real issue lies with the producers—and I think we can all agree on that one. Instead of picking something with actual weight to adapt, like something by Martin... man, we might have seen some real Fantasy! This damn Hollywood machine just chases the dollar, coming up with these cheap marketing gimmicks to decide which titles to put on screen just to lure in the biggest crowd possible (in this case, everyone from hardcore fantasy fans to kids who are just there for the spectacle). It’s all about that "WOW!! A 15-year-old wrote a book!" angle. It’s just so transparently obvious.

Pretty much.

@bluebison8:So, LOTR started out as a D&D setting that basically grew into something way bigger than just LOTR. Because of that, it’s the benchmark.

He definitely had a blast while he was writing the book—and honestly, I actually had a decent time watching the movie—but man, I really wish they’d picked something else (something better, higher quality, and more original) to turn into a film.

I highly doubt it. Honestly, I think they’re just a bit full of themselves—totally convinced they're saving the world or starring in some big Hollywood movie to chase global fame. Just imagine the top-tier PR manager and massive marketing budget they must have had to sell that garbage.

@bluebison8: After LOTR, a Dungeons & Dragons setting was born that eventually outgrew the scope of LOTR itself. Because of that, it stands as a benchmark.

That benchmark only applies within the realm of Pen & Paper games; when you look at novels or movies, it’s nowhere near that level.
Tolkien has always been the standard for fantasy novels, and ever since those LOTR films hit the big screen, he's become the yardstick for all fantasy cinema.

Yeah, exactly

I just feel like I need to say something about this movie, especially since I actually sat down and read the book too. Honestly, if you just took Star Wars, transplanted it into a fantasy setting, swapped out some names here and there, tossed everything in a blender, and... boom, Eragon was born. You've got this evil king who wiped out all the "dragon riders" who used to be the peacekeepers and protectors of the old kingdom; then in the second book, this kid goes looking for some old Elf living deep in a remote forest... does that sound familiar to anyone else? There’s a whole mountain of stuff like that, but honestly, I can't even be bothered to list it all.
And if you want some objective proof to back up what Samuel Ortiz3 said about how absolutely terrible the quality of this film was, just look at the fact that they completely gave up on making a sequel.....

Thomas Martinez52 said:I just wanted to weigh in on this movie—and honestly, the book I picked up recently too. It’s basically like taking Star Wars, transplanting it into a fantasy setting, swapping out a few names, throwing everything in a blender, and... boom, Eragon was born. You’ve got the evil king who wiped out all the "dragon riders" who used to be the peacekeepers of the old kingdom; then in the second book, there's this old elf the kid is hunting for, living deep in some distant forest... sound familiar? There's a ton more stuff like that, but I can't be bothered to list it all.
And if you want objective proof for what Samuel Ortiz3 was saying about how bad the movie actually is, just look at the fact that they completely gave up on making a sequel.....

Objective proof... hmm... interesting take. Anyway, I highly doubt they won't make a sequel (sooner or later). I mean, studios have made sequels for truly massive (unthinkable) pieces of crap movies. For instance—you might not even know this, but I think it happened pretty recently—there was a sequel to Dungeons & Dragons showing up in video rental stores. No big marketing blitz, nothing (at least as far as I could tell). It looked like one of those TV productions, but it was actually decent enough (compared to the first one).

I know about Dungeons & Dragons, I actually sat through it, and ever since then, whenever someone asks me what the absolute worst movie I've ever seen is, I don't even hesitate—it’s that one. A total train wreck from start to finish, honestly.

I know Dungeons & Dragons 2 well enough—I actually sat through it. Ever since then, whenever anyone asks me what the absolute worst movie I've ever seen is, I name it without a second thought. It was an unmitigated disaster!

You clearly haven't sat through enough actual trash or those movies trying way too hard to be trash.
Personally, I think the first Dungeons & Dragons movie was even worse.

bluebison8 said:You clearly haven't sat through many actual trash movies—you know, those wannabe trash flicks.
Personally, I think the first Dungeons & Dragons is even worse.

Oh, way worse! I'm totally with you there. That first one is just a complete joke. Man, I was literally sitting there waiting for that guy from the dark movie to start rapping or something. It felt more like some typical American teen trash-core nonsense shoved into a fantasy setting. Just awful.

The whole structure is mostly ripped off from Star Wars (episode 4, especially that "you have failed me for the last time" line), themes from Dragonheart, and bits borrowed from Lord of the Rings (mostly the movies). What was truly stupid was the time travel aspect.

I'll just add at the end that the movie wasn't poorly edited.

bluebison8 said:You clearly haven't sat through enough trash movies, or those cheap wannabe trash flicks.
Personally, I think the first Dungeons & Dragons is even worse.

Yeah, sure, the first one was a total disaster, but I can't bring myself to call it any worse than the second one. I mean, I didn't notice stuff quite as stupid as in the sequel, like how they keep calling that guy the Leech as if that's actually his damn name. It's just awful.

Honestly... I think this movie is a total disaster. Sure, he was writing it between the ages of 15 and 19, but that’s hardly an excuse for plagiarism. There isn't a single original scene in the entire movie; and based on what I've been reading on the forums, there's barely anything original in the books either. The film feels like Star Wars wearing a different costume with some terrible new names (for example, "Eragon" basically means "dragon," "Allgeasea" is just "All Earth and Sea," and "Galbatorix" is "Gaul Batorix"...). It follows the Star Wars plotline almost perfectly without any deviation, aside from the telepathic dragon—but even that was already in the books. Plus, almost every single scene feels ripped off from other movies, like:
* When Durza uses a weapon he just finished crafting to stab the blacksmith = Robin Hood, Prince of Thieves
* Durza giving a speech to the orc armies = Saruman
* Eragon learning to fly on a dragon, joking around and laughing = Harry Potter
* The Ra'Zake with those creepy things walking on their faces = The Mummy
and it just goes on and on. As for the book?
* The fight between Durza and Eragon where Eragon sees visions of Durza's infamy = Harry Potter
* That evil king, Gandalf, as he's known—well, okay, fine, but others have done that too.
It's just awful.

Honestly, I think you LOTR fans have been totally spoiled 😁 the movie is actually pretty decent—it’s easy to watch, fun, and the special effects are solid enough... what's your take?