IMDb > Eragon (2006) > Reviews & Ratings - IMDb
Eragon
Quicklinks
Top Links
trailers and videosfull cast and crewtriviaofficial sitesmemorable quotes
Overview
main detailscombined detailsfull cast and crewcompany credits
Awards & Reviews
user reviewsexternal reviewsawardsuser ratingsparents guidemessage board
Plot & Quotes
plot summarysynopsisplot keywordsmemorable quotes
Did You Know?
triviagoofssoundtrack listingcrazy creditsalternate versionsmovie connectionsFAQ
Other Info
box office/businessrelease datesfilming locationstechnical specsliterature listingsNewsDesk
Promotional
taglines trailers and videos posters photo gallery
External Links
showtimesofficial sitesmiscellaneousphotographssound clipsvideo clips

Reviews & Ratings for
Eragon More at IMDbPro »

Filter: Hide Spoilers:
Page 1 of 168:[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [Next]
Index 1674 reviews in total 

673 out of 1026 people found the following review useful:

When the dragon Saphira gives the only good performance in the entire film, you know there is something wrong.

2/10
Author: goldenduc from United States
11 December 2006

I saw this with a friend of mine over the weekend in a press screening and I really did not enjoy it. The special effects are fine but the story is rather hammy and the performances are not very good. The main character looks like a deer in head lights most of the time and the villains acts like cartoon stereotypes more than real characters. Most of the characters here seem like rejects from other films and it shows by how unoriginal they were. The only performance in the film that has any credibility what so ever is the dragon Saphira and that's mainly because she is voiced by Oscar winning actress Rachel Weisz, who has more talent in her vocal cords than all the actors working in this film combined.

My suggestion, wait for DVD.

Was the above review useful to you?

608 out of 977 people found the following review useful:

Rachel Weisz's voice over for the dragon is literally the only good acting the film has to offer.

1/10
Author: normandbutter from Batttle Creek, Mi
16 December 2006

Crude, unimaginative adaptation of Christopher Paolini first novel is a bad joke from top to bottom. The screenplay is a joke, with major characters missing from the original novel and the acting from almost everybody in the film is down right horrible and that's really because most of the roles are miscast to begin with. Jeremy Irons makes an grant effort with what he has to work with but he's let down by the script and the bad performances of his co-stars and the only solid piece of real acting comes from the voice over work of Rachel Weisz, who gives the dragon Saphira enough charm, charisma, and strong will to make her the only believable and likable character in the entire film. That's in itself a great accomplishment considering the fact that script really does not even try to do that with itself.

Was the above review useful to you?

463 out of 722 people found the following review useful:

Good actors, Good special effects, Bad writing.

6/10
Author: Birstyjr from United States
15 December 2006

The movie follows nothing of the book's plot line. I think someone read like maybe ten chapters of the Eragon book and decided to make the movie. If they decide to make Eldest (The sequel to Eragon) it would be nothing like the book because they have changed too many things in this movie to carry the plot correctly. The plot of the movie shares nothing with the book and the characters (the ones they actually decided to add) share no similarities to the book's idea of them. The storyline used in the movie could have possibly been acceptable if it hadn't had such bad writing. The lines were mediocre and no one other than Brom, Eragon and Saphira had ten lines. Murtagh had like eight or nine lines through the whole movie, Nasuada and Ajihad had like two or three (and Nasuada doesn't say who she is) and Hrothgar had maybe one or two lines. They completely rushed the movie too quickly. Unless you read the book, you have no idea how Eragon learns to use magic and are left in the dark about most things. The actors did the best job they could with the horrid lines they were given to read. The special effects were great except that Saphira isn't supposed to have feathers. What dragon has feathers? Christopher Paolini says like fifty times in the book that Saphira's wings are a thin membrane. Also that Eragon is fifteen, not seventeen. Every problem comes back to the horrid writing. Bottom Line: Could have been a great and timeless movie. Not Lord of the Rings worthy.

Was the above review useful to you?

336 out of 482 people found the following review useful:

Don't watch the movie-read the book

4/10
Author: Sven Županić from Croatia
25 December 2006

When I first heard that a movie is going to be made by the book "Eragon" by Christopher Paolini, I must say I was very delighted, and I was even more delighted when I heard that Stefen Fangmeier will be the director. I have read the book, and thaught:"What a great movie this is going to be". Unfortunately, I was wrong. First of all, I would dare to say that half of the events that happened in the book weren't shown in the movie at all(reason: Lord of the Rings has less then 400 pages and the movie lasts around 3 hours; Eragon has around 500 pages and it lasts around hour and a half). As a result, instead of complexed, unpredictable fantasy plot you get simple, one-way heading fairy tale. Characters that play very significent role in book(like Murtagh, Ajihad and Angela) are hardly even mentioned in the movie, so that it becomes centered on pretty much only 3 characters-Eragon, Saphira and Brom. Villains and locations lack imagination, so they look cheap and ordinary. Choice of actors is, in my opinion, good, except Edward Speleers. There are way too much "memorable quotes" in the movie, so that movie becomes kind of too much theatrical.Everybody, from director to actors failed, but still, I personally bealive that the biggest failure is Peter Buchman, screenwriter. Although he had a fantastic material to work on, he managed to ruin it, and make a pathetic screenplay from a fantastic bestseller. Only bright side of the movie is always top-of-the-class John Malkovich(King Galbatorix), pretty solid performance by Jeremy Irons (Brom), but most of all dragon Saphira (voice by Rachel Weisz, whose vocal abilities are on very desirable level)

Was the above review useful to you?

422 out of 688 people found the following review useful:

Not worth it.

1/10
Author: ozarkfrost
21 December 2006

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

Paolini's novel should have been left alone. It was unnecessarily tampered with to make it into a lack-luster movie losing all magic, motivation, and meaning. The writers, director, and producers missed a real opportunity to make this into a great trilogy experience...perhaps they should have read the books first because they were much better than this. Get better actors and get a better director and you will have something. My advice...produce the movie again . We will forget the first attempt and bring back Rachel Weisz who made the dragon the best part of the film and it will be a better film. If you do that, it will succeed.

Was the above review useful to you?

456 out of 776 people found the following review useful:

Skip it.

1/10
Author: billkubert from Clifton, NJ
20 December 2006

Really Bad. If you read the books, do yourself a favor and don't put yourself through the agony of sitting through this travesty. The story line (which skips about 70% of the original story line) wanders miles from the novel. Except for Rachel Weisz's great voice over work for the dragon (which is the best acting this film has) the acting from the rest of the actors is just above high school play level. What were Jeremy and John thinking in taking these roles? The special effects are decent but that's it and the sets are cheesy Save your cash and wait for the third novel.

Let's hope they will not be a sequel.

Was the above review useful to you?

243 out of 385 people found the following review useful:

Change the movie name to Saphira and it is OK

7/10
Author: MKeller14-1 from United States
22 December 2006

Let me start by saying I didn't read the books before seeing the movie but I am reading Eragon now. I enjoyed the movie. Not great but not bad. One of the most nagging problems with this movie has it was way to short and seemed like it was in fast forward most of the movie. If they would have increased this movie to 2 hours to 2 and a half hours I think it would have been a very good movie (hopefully the DVD will have more added in). The acting by Rachel Weisz was fantastic. Jeremy Irons did a very good for his part. But those are two experienced actors that will give good performances regardless. The CG on Saphira was very well done. The main problem with the acting in this movie was Edward Speleers, he had no presence in this movie, which is a bad thing for the main character. It was all most like he was just there to read his lines and go home. For which I hold the director responsible but it was also one of his first movies. I think Edward would have made a good side character, but someone with more experienced should have been casted as Eragon or a director with more proved talent. If you have never read the book and enjoy good CG you will like this movie. Just change the name of the movie to Saphira and it is OK. If you have read the book assume it is a coincidence that the movie and characters share names.

Was the above review useful to you?

289 out of 523 people found the following review useful:

This film plays more like a bad SNL skit parodying the Lord of The Ring.

1/10
Author: margrettgreat from United States
24 December 2006

Horrible and very funny adaptation of the popular children's book that plays like a bad SNL skit that is trying to parody "The Lord of the Rings" than the book that it's based on. The screenplay is a major mess with dialog that even little kids would find stupid and the performances are almost all laughably bad. Jeremy Irons and John Malkovich should be ashamed of themselves for even agreeing to be in this film and Djimon Hounsou should start reading his scripts a little more carefully. The only redeeming thing about this crappy film is the great voice over work of Rachel Weisz, who manages to give the dragon Saphira more talent and range in terms of solid acting than all the human actors working in the film. The C.G.I work done for Saphira was also well done, making her more lifelike than her human co-stars as well.

Outside of Rachel Weisz's great voice acting and the great special effects for the Dragon Saphira, this movie is more and less a bad comedy that did not deserve nether of them.

Was the above review useful to you?

51 out of 80 people found the following review useful:

Eragon?

8/10
Author: horsecrazy1789 from United States
16 December 2006

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

Let's pretend for a moment I didn't read the book:

Actors were great. Effects were great. Story line thrilling. It was an exciting movie that kept you going! All in all, A+.

But WAIT! I did read the book!

What the heck happened?! They absolutely butchered the storyline! I think the only thing they got right were the names! I'm dreadfully sorry Christopher Paolini... They got it wrong from character description to plot line! At first I was giving them a little credit cause they needed to edit it to make a movie, but by the time the sent Roran off to avoid the war instead of to work in a mill, I was fed up! I do give credit to the actors, they did very well for what they were given. The editing was off, there were scenes that it randomly began/stopped raining, voice overs that didn't match up, and other random mistakes. All in all, D-

Moral: It would have been great had I not read the book. Over all, C+

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

EDIT: My friend and I saw the movie for a second time. This time however, we knew what to expect. We both found that the second time around was much better. (One, because we didn't spend the entire movie complaining...) I think I was a little too harsh the first time around. It is a good movie, not as "to the book" as I'd like it to be, but I still think that it is better than nothing. I am definitely hoping for some deleted scenes on the DVD though... All in all, raise it to a B

Was the above review useful to you?

38 out of 57 people found the following review useful:

Dragon Flights of Fantasy

7/10
Author: AZINDN from United States
21 December 2007

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

Eragon (Ed Speleers) is a young farmer who discovers an egg one day. When the egg hatches, out pops a baby dragon who the human learns is his dragon, and that he is a Dragon Rider. Through the inevitable growing pains of child to youth, youth to adult, young Eragon is mentored by a former dragon rider, Jeremy Irons, and learns that dragons and their human rider are bound together by a shared destiny until death. How they choose to live this partnership is the gist of the story as Eragon seeks to save his country from an evil ruler and magician with the help of a band of rebel outcasts, a magic sword, and the brave dragon. Of course, a young beautiful girl, Sienna Guillory is the first love of Eragon, and the partnership of Safira, the dragon and her rider becomes a life's test of courage, cunning, and growing wisdom.

This is a light fantasy film that is most of all feel-good with a smattering of "ancient" wisdom and swordplay which will entertain younger audiences. The special effects and overall look of the film is passable, not a multi-million dollar SFX laden film, but believable in its visuals. As for the story, I don't read fictional fantasy so I had no basis for comparison with "the book." But, I'm not a fan of comparing text to visuals as criterion for quality or authenticity for each medium is its own separate art form. This is a family film that will entertain and enthrall youngsters as well as possibly impart some sense of honor, wisdom through purpose, and a sense of duty above self -- all characteristics that are missing in the mindless, fart-heavy humor of most "tweeny" movies put out for commercial distribution today.

If only to watch the stellar performance of the excellent British actor, Jeremy Irons as he mentors the wet-behind-the-ears Dragon Rider, the film is worth watching as the really ugly bad guys try to bring down the last of the dragons and her headstrong partner.

Was the above review useful to you?


Page 1 of 168:[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [Next]

Add another review


Related Links

Plot summary Ratings Awards
Newsgroup reviews External reviews Parents Guide
Plot keywords Main details Your user reviews
Your vote history