5/10 Bethany CoxĪfter just coming from a screening of Eragon, I was interested that George Lucas produced this film. Overall, not unbearably awful but I don't necessarily recommend it. The actors though are burdened by a very hammy and lacklustre script that could've done with more intelligence and wit and there are parts where the direction is flawed. It is pretty much the same for Sienna Guillory, gorgeous but unconvincing. Ed Speleers is rather bland as Eragon, handsome yes but bland. The story was a great idea, but due to the running time primarily it meanders all over the place and is unevenly paced(sometimes feeling rushed and sometimes it drags). This could be a reason why the relationship between Eragon and Sapphira came across as unconvincing. One is that the film is too short, consequently the characters feel thinly sketched. However, there are many things wrong with Eragon.
The best thing though was the dragon Sapphira, very well designed with expressive voice work from Rachel Weisz, and the flying scenes and the CGI effects are a delight.
Also John Malkovich chews the scenery with glee as the tyrannical King Galbatorix, and Robert Carlyle is decent as Durza. Jeremy Irons, a great actor, does a good job as Brom acquiring a dry sense of humour, much better than he was in Dungeons & Dragons, somehow his overacting in that film managed to further bring it down. The acting is uneven, but there were some good performances.
TRAILER FOR ERAGON THE MOVIE PLUS
Plus the cinematography was excellent, as was the sweeping score.
The sets are wondrous and the costumes are very nice. Starting with the redeeming qualities, the film is very assured visually and technically. Also, I do not think it is the worst fantasy film ever, that dishonour belongs to Dungeons & Dragons. While the film could have been much better, there are redeeming qualities. First things first, I have yet to read the book, but my brother absolutely loves it and says it is so worth the read.
0 kommentar(er)
