Let's be honest, "Lord of the Rings" ruined the genre forever, simply because the three movies achieved such cinematic perfection that they remain untouchable by any other fantasy book adaptations. "Eragon", based on the first book in Christopher Paolini's best-selling trilogy, back then still duology, is not essentially a bad film, but it has too many parallels to "Lord of the Rings" and ultimately fails in almost every comparison. Having said that, I really enjoyed the film and it looked fantastic, but again, a fantasy movie these days has to be more than enjoyable to leave its mark.
In Alagaesia, there used to be an army of dragon riders until they were all betrayed by a Galbatorix, who drove the dragons into extinction and proclaimed himself king of Alagaesia. But one night, a young farm boy named Eragon discovers a mysterious stone in the woods near his home and decides to take it home. Shortly afterwards, the stone turns out to really be an egg, when a baby dragon hatches from it, and when Eragon touches it for the first time, a mark is left on his hand. The dragon grows up quite quickly, but Galbatorix has become aware that a new dragon has been born and puts the task of killing Eragon on the shade Durza, a dark sorcerer. His forces ravage through the villages killing several people, including Eragon's uncle, and the boy is only saved by Brom, a strange man from the village, who trains Eragon into using his dragon. He wants Eragon to make his way to the Varden, a group of rebels opposing the rule of the king, and in the process him, the boy and the dragon named Saphira, form a close bond of friendship. But Eragon keeps dreaming of a young woman, who is kept prisoner by Durza and against Brom's advise makes his way to the castle with Saphira, but the evil shade has already put out a deadly trap for him.
I have to admit that I have never read Paolini's books, but considering they were such bestsellers, I assume that they were a lot better than this movie. Ultimately the film, which is also rather short for a fantasy book adaptation with a running time of just over 100 minutes, feels empty and the plot seems to lead into nowhere. Brom leads Eragon to the Varden, but once he arrives, it never becomes quite clear why he was supposed to go there in the first place. The relationships between the characters felt completely dry, there was no powerful emotion, no history, and essentially the film manages to tell its story but there is no depth in there at all. The script written by Peter Buchman, whose only writing credit was the third installment in the "Jurassic Park" series, is not horrible, but full of the typical "young man leaves his home to become a hero" clichés, and there are of course the monologues by the mentor about foolishness, responsibility and his deep dark secret that becomes obvious the first time he appears on screen. While the cinematography and landscape shots are not as present as they were in "Lord of the Rings, they are still quite beautiful and much of the film was shot in Hungary, showing that you don't need to travel all the way to New Zealand to get some fantastic pictures. Patrick Doyle might not be the most well-known composer, but delivers a powerful and epic score, that even gave me goose bumps once, when Eragon sat outside of the farm staring into the far reaching plains of Alagaesia.
So, the cast of this film is absolutely top-notch and I was surprised by how many big names were brought together for this fairly mediocre movie. Edward Speleers tries very hard in the title role and he does have the spark of charisma to him that you need to be a hero in a fantasy film. He also reminds me a bit of Simon Baker, who plays Patrick Jane in "The Mentalist", and ultimately he gives a good performance that should hopefully get him recognized. Jeremy Irons is stellar as Brom and his robust presence on screen makes the mediocre quality of the lines he says almost irrelevant. Although he is the typical mentor for the protagonist, and his motives and history are relatively transparent, I enjoyed to see him again in one of his rare appearances in movies these days. Sienna Guillory makes a beautiful figure as Arya, but unfortunately her character is a complete mystery and her background is never explained at all. Robert Carlyle gets to pull off his role in the craziest way possible and although his character, the shade Durza, is in no way explained as well, it was a lot of fun to watch his maniacal laugh and his grimaces. John Malkovich was in this film, yes, but he can't have been on screen for more than maybe five minutes, and his lines of dialog are limited to about a dozen. A pity that such a talented performer was wasted in such a way. And then there is Rachel Weisz, who doesn't act, but merely provided the voice for Saphira. Merely, are you kidding? This woman has such a fantastic and haunting voice that she outplays almost all the other actors on screen, which really does not speak for the quality of the characters.
Although it in no way reaches the very good representatives of the genre, the film was enjoyable and simple to understand, without the drama and philosophical aspects of "Lord of the Rings" or even "Harry Potter". The actors are mostly fun to watch, although their characters seem like nutshells without the real prize in. I'm neither surprised it wasn't a big success, nor that no sequel was made, but maybe that would have answered a lot of the questions that came up in this film, but were never answered.
In Alagaesia, there used to be an army of dragon riders until they were all betrayed by a Galbatorix, who drove the dragons into extinction and proclaimed himself king of Alagaesia. But one night, a young farm boy named Eragon discovers a mysterious stone in the woods near his home and decides to take it home. Shortly afterwards, the stone turns out to really be an egg, when a baby dragon hatches from it, and when Eragon touches it for the first time, a mark is left on his hand. The dragon grows up quite quickly, but Galbatorix has become aware that a new dragon has been born and puts the task of killing Eragon on the shade Durza, a dark sorcerer. His forces ravage through the villages killing several people, including Eragon's uncle, and the boy is only saved by Brom, a strange man from the village, who trains Eragon into using his dragon. He wants Eragon to make his way to the Varden, a group of rebels opposing the rule of the king, and in the process him, the boy and the dragon named Saphira, form a close bond of friendship. But Eragon keeps dreaming of a young woman, who is kept prisoner by Durza and against Brom's advise makes his way to the castle with Saphira, but the evil shade has already put out a deadly trap for him.
I have to admit that I have never read Paolini's books, but considering they were such bestsellers, I assume that they were a lot better than this movie. Ultimately the film, which is also rather short for a fantasy book adaptation with a running time of just over 100 minutes, feels empty and the plot seems to lead into nowhere. Brom leads Eragon to the Varden, but once he arrives, it never becomes quite clear why he was supposed to go there in the first place. The relationships between the characters felt completely dry, there was no powerful emotion, no history, and essentially the film manages to tell its story but there is no depth in there at all. The script written by Peter Buchman, whose only writing credit was the third installment in the "Jurassic Park" series, is not horrible, but full of the typical "young man leaves his home to become a hero" clichés, and there are of course the monologues by the mentor about foolishness, responsibility and his deep dark secret that becomes obvious the first time he appears on screen. While the cinematography and landscape shots are not as present as they were in "Lord of the Rings, they are still quite beautiful and much of the film was shot in Hungary, showing that you don't need to travel all the way to New Zealand to get some fantastic pictures. Patrick Doyle might not be the most well-known composer, but delivers a powerful and epic score, that even gave me goose bumps once, when Eragon sat outside of the farm staring into the far reaching plains of Alagaesia.
So, the cast of this film is absolutely top-notch and I was surprised by how many big names were brought together for this fairly mediocre movie. Edward Speleers tries very hard in the title role and he does have the spark of charisma to him that you need to be a hero in a fantasy film. He also reminds me a bit of Simon Baker, who plays Patrick Jane in "The Mentalist", and ultimately he gives a good performance that should hopefully get him recognized. Jeremy Irons is stellar as Brom and his robust presence on screen makes the mediocre quality of the lines he says almost irrelevant. Although he is the typical mentor for the protagonist, and his motives and history are relatively transparent, I enjoyed to see him again in one of his rare appearances in movies these days. Sienna Guillory makes a beautiful figure as Arya, but unfortunately her character is a complete mystery and her background is never explained at all. Robert Carlyle gets to pull off his role in the craziest way possible and although his character, the shade Durza, is in no way explained as well, it was a lot of fun to watch his maniacal laugh and his grimaces. John Malkovich was in this film, yes, but he can't have been on screen for more than maybe five minutes, and his lines of dialog are limited to about a dozen. A pity that such a talented performer was wasted in such a way. And then there is Rachel Weisz, who doesn't act, but merely provided the voice for Saphira. Merely, are you kidding? This woman has such a fantastic and haunting voice that she outplays almost all the other actors on screen, which really does not speak for the quality of the characters.
Although it in no way reaches the very good representatives of the genre, the film was enjoyable and simple to understand, without the drama and philosophical aspects of "Lord of the Rings" or even "Harry Potter". The actors are mostly fun to watch, although their characters seem like nutshells without the real prize in. I'm neither surprised it wasn't a big success, nor that no sequel was made, but maybe that would have answered a lot of the questions that came up in this film, but were never answered.