Eragon (2006)
Genre: Action / Fantasy
Duration: 104 minuten
Country:
United States / United Kingdom / Hungary
Directed by: Stefen Fangmeier
Stars: Ed Speleers, Jeremy Irons and Robert Carlyle
IMDb score:
5,1 (134.361)
Releasedate: 14 December 2006
Eragon plot
"As darkness falls, the last dragon will choose its rider."
When Eragon finds a shiny blue stone, he thinks he has luck on his hand; maybe he can buy food for his family with this. But when the stone makes a dragon appear, he realizes that he has found a treasure that may be as old as the Kingdom. From one day to the next, his life has completely changed and an ancient secret is entrusted to him. With a sword and Brom's counsel to protect him, Eragon and the dragon must stop a king with dark powers before he threatens the Kingdom. Can Eragon take on the power of the legendary Dragon Knights? The fate of the entire kingdom is in his hands...
Actors and actresses
Eragon
Brom
Arya
Durza
King Galbatorix
Murtagh
Uncle Garrow
Ajihad
Angela
Saphira (voice)
Reviews & comments
Onderhond
-
- 87623 messages
- 12889 votes
Phew.
In the wake of LOTR and in a decade when dragon scum got some attention again. But a film like this doesn't set you up without a solid budget and with a director who is at least capable of making a smooth Hollywood film. So no go. Immediately also fin the career for Fangmeier.
Rightly so. The story is as flat as a dime, just a lot of clichés thrown together and reeled without too much conviction. Therein lies the only advantage of this film: because of the fleeting narration, the running time remains well under two hours. Quite a relief.
You don't have to expect much from the actors, despite some well-known names. Speleers is boring, Irons plays one of his worst roles ever (and I wasn't a fan already) and Malkovich must have scratched his head after seeing this film.
It drags from uninspired setting to uninspired setting, the bored narration and bad acting makes it all that much worse. Add to that the bad and outdated effects and a sad soundtrack and you have a really dramatic movie.
But in 2040, with the necessary nostalgia at the ready, the long-awaited sequel will come, probably preceded by a reboot.
0.5*
Translated from Dutch · View original
W.V.40
-
- 25 messages
- 304 votes
Too bad they never filmed the other books.
Translated from Dutch · View original
wilofski
-
- 202 messages
- 575 votes
Bad movie actually.
My girlfriend (halfway asleep) summed it up nicely: "it's exactly like it came from a very thick book".
And that is exactly what this film does: trying to reel in far too much story in a very short period of time, resulting in very little acting and a lot of explaining.
"Little" is also the amount of quality that the protagonist adds to this whole.
"Little" is also the amount of playing time good actors like Malkovich get here, unfortunately.
"Little" is also the logic in the time calculation of the movie: "it's still 5 days drive to the exiles" *1 day before arrival*: "I'm going to the bad castle, totally on the other side of the kingdom" * that same evening* "amai, already arrived at the castle" *the next morning* "good day mister exile"
"Little" is also a word that is now stuck in my head and doesn't really have any meaning anymore.
Little, little, little,... Wine? Wine-ish? Does it have anything to do with wine? Is that positive? Or is it just about diluted wine?
In short, the most interesting thing about this film was that a semantic saturation of "little" made me embark on an etymological quest for that word.
Few.
Hehe, few stars yes...
Translated from Dutch · View original
Corporate & Media
Realtimes Network
Innovatieweg 20C
7007 CD, Doetinchem, Netherlands
+31(315)-764002
