I saw it the other night, and I enjoyed it. I especially liked the battle at the end, where Eragon had the dragon catapult him over to the other guy. Pretty good thinking, I'd say.

Anyway, I think the movie was probably better than most of the fans made it out to be. It's just that it wasn't the book, and so they feel that some sacred text has been molested, for lack of a better word.

It's difficult finding movies that adhere very closely to their literary parents. The only book movies I've seen that stuck extremely close to the book itself were the first Harry Potter movie and the Da Vinci Code.

I like Tom Bombadil too, but I see where Doc's coming from, and I understand why they took it out. Maybe it's from watching so many commentaries and such (yes, I'm a huge LotR junky) but it seems to me that, especially (mostly) regarding people who hadn't read the book, the movie had a pace to keep. The entire Tom Bombadil sequence was almost like a reprieve from the story. Things started to pick up, and then they fell back to a standstill, which was okay for the book, but for the movie? How many people, who weren't hardcore fans of the book, would want an hour-long aside that seemingly had nothing to do with the plot?

Books and movies pace differently. Somethings are more interesting visually, while others are more interesting in the literary world. Not everything can carry over.

-Ri

This is, of course, a huge point to remember. I believe it was Roald Dahl's wife that said that it was best for movies to differ from the book, considering the vastly different mediums involved.

I thought it was pretty cool, All it would make is a silly AD&D scenario as a conversion though.

Edited by Catman on April 27, 2007 at 6:08:06.

Well today I watched the movie no after having read the book, so many contradictions... >_>

Erasgon, Eragon was the best, his dragon is cool, i own the dvd, it is so cool!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!