Bumblebee
Mary Poppins Returns
Halloween
Outlander
Log in with Facebook
OR
By creating an account, you agree to the Privacy Policy and the Terms and Policies, and to receive email from Rotten Tomatoes and Fandango.
Please enter your email address and we will email you a new password.
Critics Consensus: Written by a teenager (and it shows), Eragon presents nothing new to the "hero's journey" story archetype. In movie terms, this movie looks and sounds like Lord of the Rings and plays out like a bad Star Wars rip-off. The movie spins the tale of a peasant boy who is suddenly entrusted with a dragon and must, with the help of a mentor, train, grow strong, and defeat an evil emperor. The way the critics picture it, the makers of Eragon should soon be expecting an annoyed phone call from George Lucas.
Critic Consensus: Written by a teenager (and it shows), Eragon presents nothing new to the "hero's journey" story archetype. In movie terms, this movie looks and sounds like Lord of the Rings and plays out like a bad Star Wars rip-off. The movie spins the tale of a peasant boy who is suddenly entrusted with a dragon and must, with the help of a mentor, train, grow strong, and defeat an evil emperor. The way the critics picture it, the makers of Eragon should soon be expecting an annoyed phone call from George Lucas.
All Critics (124) | Top Critics (31) | Fresh (20) | Rotten (104) | DVD (14)
Give Eragon a few years: By then, it might be delightfully bad.
A painful reminder of what fantasy cinema was like before the Lord of the Rings trilogy re-wrote the rules.
The title of Hollywood's latest fantasy epic is simply the word 'dragon' with one letter changed, and unfortunately, that's about the level of creativity you can expect from Eragon.
With no momentum and no real characters to care about, [Eragon] lumbers its way toward a grand, sequel-setting finale.
...So heavily derivative of Star Wars and The Lord of the Rings it should be ritually torched by followers of Yoda and Frodo.
Eragon may not be a big Oscar contender, but in a movie season filled with blood diamonds, fascist soldiers and Idi Amin, it provides a much-needed afternoon of PG-rated family-friendly adventure.
Kids too young for Lord Of The Rings may be distracted by this below average fantasy, but for everyone else this is derivative and silly.
Regardless of your feelings about the fantasy genre, there's one thing everyone can agree on: Elves should not be 5-foot-6.
As my companion dourly noted, "I just paid $30.00 to see Star Wars." (And yes, that's matinee pricing and all I had was a water.) But wow, great effects, seriously.
Tolkien lite.
The viewer is not transported to the magical, complex and elaborate kingdom of Alagaësia of the book, but rather is merely observing action scene followed by action scene.
Director Stefan Fangmeier would have been better off following the cliff-hanging, lucidly written action scenes by [Christopher] Paolini.
I didn't hate this as much as everyone else. There's nothing new in the story or the filming, but it's all done well. It is weak when compared to "Lord of The Rings" or "The Hobbit", but it's much better than other fantasy films like Tom Cruise's "Legend". I personally found "Eragon" entertaining.
Super Reviewer
"I've got a great idea for a new movie now hobbits and shit are in vogue!" "Oh, yeah? What's it about?" "Well there's this young farmboy see, and he lives with his uncle...let's call him Duke Styporker. He can be played by some characterless pretty boy with an English accent, like that Hayden Christensen dude! EVERYBODY liked him...am I right or am I right?!" "Okaaaay...." "He finds out one day that he's the chosen one to hang out with this dragon who speaks to him!" "You mean like Dragonheart?" "No, no...nothing like that! That had that cool, charismatic Scottish guy voicing it. We'll just get a Satnav to do it and make her communicate through thought so we don't have to make its lips move...that oughtta save us a few bucks!" "I see..." "Then he can meet up with an ageing mentor who used to be like him, who teaches him how to fight and use magic powers. We could call it The Horce or something! But there's this bad ass Emper...er I mean King who wants him dead, so he calls in his right hand man who used to be a good guy like Obi Wan Kebabi (just thinking off the top of my head here!) but turned to the dark side!" "How did you get in here?" "This bad guy, called, um Garth Nader, captures a feisty princess who Duke has to rescue with the help of an enigmatic, morally ambiguous mercenary who keeps appearing to save his ass at the last minute!!" "Let me guess. Flan Polo?" "Now we're cooking! What a team!" "You ARE shitting me, right...?" "So they rescue the princess but his old mentor is killed by Garth...bet you never saw that one coming! So they all get together to help the rebels fight the imperial forces in a big battle in a Keep built into a mountain side!!" "Exactly like The Two Towers you mean..." "Erm...ever heard of it..." "SECURITY!"
I enjoy a good fantastical story but I had avoided this one due to the bad things I'd heard of it. However, I eventually thought I should still give it go and see for myself. Seriously though, I wish I'd listened to the naysayers now. Young farmer Eragon (Ed Speleers) finds a dragon's egg, and teams up with the newborn dragon, Saphira (voiced by Rachel Weisz), a former Dragon Rider (Jeremy Irons) and a female Elf (Sienna Guillory) to tackle an evil king (John Malkovich) and his shady accomplice (Robert Carlyle). Bad dialogue, bad acting, bad movie. If your going to release a fantasy film these days then make sure it has some mileage, as "The Lord of the Rings" has set a very high benchmark. This was also based on a series of books by Christopher Paolini but it's not even in the same league as some of the quality we've recently been spoiled with. Admittedly, I've never read the books, leaving me unsure as to how the adaptation should be but I do know this... the voice of the dragon was a bad move. It made no effort to even look like the dragon was communicating and just came across as cheap and insulting. Although some were impressed with the special effects, I didn't find them to be anything special. Speelers doesn't really cut it as the hero of the tale, lacking charisma and any form of acting ability and the rest of the cast seem perplexed. You get the impression from Irons and Malkovich that they know they've made a mistake with this one. The same goes for Carlyle but he still manages to deliver a decidedly nasty villian that's way above this nonsense. Normally a fantasy yarn has something to hold your interest - no matter how poor - but it just goes to show there are exceptions to that. This is one, and quite possibly the definitive to those exceptions. The only positive that can be taken from this is that due to it's box-office and critical failure, we will probably be spared the adaptations to the rest of the series. A very bad film indeed and one that I'd rather rate with zero, but I'll through a half a star Robert Carlyle's way.
Not as bad as it could be. Yet they did cut a lot out of the book. a love or hate series i like. Not as good as LOTR but a decent fantasy story.
View All Quotes
View All