Eragon's Recent Activity

list Eragon's Recent Activity - Spout http://www.spout.com/ Recent community activity around Eragon on Spout Copyright 2005-9 Spout, LLC Spout RSS http://www.spout.com/images/SpoutLogoRSS.jpg Eragon's Recent Activity - Spout http://www.spout.com/ 136 30 Film:Eragon http://www.spout.com/films/Eragon/261817/default.aspx

Title: Eragon
Year: 2006
Director: Stefen Fangmeier
Plot: Industrial Light and Magic special-effects wizard Stefen Fangmeier makes the leap into the director's chair with this coming-of-age fantasy concerning a young boy whose discovery of a mysterious dragon egg leads him on a predestined journey to become a Dragon Rider and defend his peaceful world against an evil king. Based on the best-selling novel by Christopher Paolini, Eragon tells the tale of the titular character (Ed Speleers), a humble farm boy living in the land of Alagaësia, whose life is forever changed when he discovers that he has been chosen to fight the most powerful enemy his world has ever known. Jeremy Irons, John Malkovich, and Djimon Hounsou co-star in a film produced by Davis Entertainment and adapted from the novel by screenwriters Peter Buchman, Larry Konner, and Mark Rosenthal. ~ Jason Buchanan, All Movie Guide
Times Tagged: 12
Number of Lists: 13
Number of blog posts: 11
Number of discussion threads: 1
SpoutRating: 2
]]>Sat, 25 Oct 2008 08:01:49 GMTEragon2006Stefen FangmeierIndustrial Light and Magic special-effects wizard Stefen Fangmeier makes the leap into the director's chair with this coming-of-age fantasy concerning a young boy whose discovery of a mysterious dragon egg leads him on a predestined journey to become a Dragon Rider and defend his peaceful world against an evil king. Based on the best-selling novel by Christopher Paolini, Eragon tells the tale of the titular character (Ed Speleers), a humble farm boy living in the land of Alagaësia, whose life is forever changed when he discovers that he has been chosen to fight the most powerful enemy his world has ever known. <a href="/players/P____34545/default.aspx" style='text-decoration:underline'>Jeremy Irons</a>, <a href="/players/P____44846/default.aspx" style='text-decoration:underline'>John Malkovich</a>, and <a href="/players/P____33391/default.aspx" style='text-decoration:underline'>Djimon Hounsou</a> co-star in a film produced by Davis Entertainment and adapted from the novel by screenwriters Peter Buchman, Larry Konner, and Mark Rosenthal. ~ Jason Buchanan, All Movie Guide12Tag Target (>10)131112http://www.spout.com/ProductImages/s261817.jpghttp://www.spout.com/films/Eragon/261817/default.aspxFilm Spout Post: Eragon (2006) http://www.spout.com/blogs/jj79/archive/2008/6/6/30690.aspx

Post By: JJ79
Post To: JJ79 Blog
Post Date: 6/6/2008 3:10:28 PM
Body: Released: December 15, 2006Director: Stefan Fangmeier*****It is appropriate, looking at the movie version of Christopher Paolini's Eragon, to know the original novel was started when the author was only 15 years old (it was published in 2003). The film, all 104-minutes, seem ripped from other fantasy epics far better and adventurous than anything on the screen. An egg is stolen from evil King Galbatorix (John Malkovich) and put in the care of a young farmboy, Eragon (Edward Speleers). When the egg hatches, a baby dragon is born, the last such creature in the world. It instantly bonds with Eragon. Together, picking up allies along the way, the Saphira the dragon and Eragon find their way to the rebel base in an attempt to stop Galbatorix once and for all.If movies were made in a vacuum, Eragon would undoubtedly be a hit. Fantasy creatures, a far off world, action, a little bit of romance, armies fighting each other...the problem is we've seen all this before done 100% better. Themes from Star Wars and The Lord of the Rings, not to mention Dragonslayer and Dragonheart are lifted wholesale with little regard for a cohesive story. The plot comes directly from A New Hope, to be perfectly honest: a creature needs to get into the hands of rebels in order to defeat the controlling ruler. Sound a bit familiar? It should.At under two hours, the film never properly develops any of the characters or gives the adventure an epic feeling. There are no sweeping vistas akin to Peter Jackson's Middle Earth adventures, nor world-changing stakes. We're told Galbatorix is a bad man, he snarls and shouts, sits shrouded in darkness and fire...and that's the extent of his actions. A potential romance between Eragon and Arya doesn't get off the ground while Djimon Hounsou, playing the rebel leader Ajihad, is wasted with three lines of dialogue and a laughable wig. For its part, though, the special effects are as seamless as they can be in the film. The CGI Saphira taking flight in the finale is gorgeous to behold, never betraying her computer origins. There is detail and texture to her body, leathery wings flying through the air as fireballs and strands of energy rush to capture her. Even the on-set dragon models are better than expected, though not as good as the computer creation. Eragon can't rise above the intentions of the its author because he doesn't know any better. A generation raised on Tolkien, Lucas and other fantasy epics plunders from them instead of creating a new world for us to explore. A missed opportunity.
]]>Fri, 06 Jun 2008 19:10:28 GMTJJ79JJ79 Blog6/6/2008 3:10:28 PMReleased: December 15, 2006Director: Stefan Fangmeier*****It is appropriate, looking at the movie version of Christopher Paolini's Eragon, to know the original novel was started when the author was only 15 years old (it was published in 2003). The film, all 104-minutes, seem ripped from other fantasy epics far better and adventurous than anything on the screen. An egg is stolen from evil King Galbatorix (John Malkovich) and put in the care of a young farmboy, Eragon (Edward Speleers). When the egg hatches, a baby dragon is born, the last such creature in the world. It instantly bonds with Eragon. Together, picking up allies along the way, the Saphira the dragon and Eragon find their way to the rebel base in an attempt to stop Galbatorix once and for all.If movies were made in a vacuum, Eragon would undoubtedly be a hit. Fantasy creatures, a far off world, action, a little bit of romance, armies fighting each other...the problem is we've seen all this before done 100% better. Themes from Star Wars and The Lord of the Rings, not to mention Dragonslayer and Dragonheart are lifted wholesale with little regard for a cohesive story. The plot comes directly from A New Hope, to be perfectly honest: a creature needs to get into the hands of rebels in order to defeat the controlling ruler. Sound a bit familiar? It should.At under two hours, the film never properly develops any of the characters or gives the adventure an epic feeling. There are no sweeping vistas akin to Peter Jackson's Middle Earth adventures, nor world-changing stakes. We're told Galbatorix is a bad man, he snarls and shouts, sits shrouded in darkness and fire...and that's the extent of his actions. A potential romance between Eragon and Arya doesn't get off the ground while Djimon Hounsou, playing the rebel leader Ajihad, is wasted with three lines of dialogue and a laughable wig. For its part, though, the special effects are as seamless as they can be in the film. The CGI Saphira taking flight in the finale is gorgeous to behold, never betraying her computer origins. There is detail and texture to her body, leathery wings flying through the air as fireballs and strands of energy rush to capture her. Even the on-set dragon models are better than expected, though not as good as the computer creation. Eragon can't rise above the intentions of the its author because he doesn't know any better. A generation raised on Tolkien, Lucas and other fantasy epics plunders from them instead of creating a new world for us to explore. A missed opportunity. Spout Post: Review: Eragon http://www.spout.com/blogs/mswallack/archive/2008/1/28/24456.aspx

Post By: MSWallack
Post To: MSWallack Blog
Post Date: 1/28/2008 1:52:47 PM
Body: I've heard that the book Eragon is very good. I've heard that its sequel Eldest is not. Unforutnately, the movie falls into the latter category. Eragon (the movie) wasn't actually bad; it just wasn't good. Everything felt like something that I'd seen before. The worst part of the movie is that I'm not sure that I want to keep the novel on my reading list. I was disappointed when I missed Eragon in the theater. Thankfully, I saved myself some money and only had to be disappointed at the cost of a Blockbuster rental.
]]>Mon, 28 Jan 2008 18:52:47 GMTMSWallackMSWallack Blog1/28/2008 1:52:47 PMI've heard that the book Eragon is very good. I've heard that its sequel Eldest is not. Unforutnately, the movie falls into the latter category. Eragon (the movie) wasn't actually bad; it just wasn't good. Everything felt like something that I'd seen before. The worst part of the movie is that I'm not sure that I want to keep the novel on my reading list. I was disappointed when I missed Eragon in the theater. Thankfully, I saved myself some money and only had to be disappointed at the cost of a Blockbuster rental. Spout Post: Mediocre, At Best http://www.spout.com/blogs/jakestevens/archive/2007/10/9/20516.aspx

Post By: JakeStevens
Post To: JakeStevens Blog
Post Date: 10/9/2007 12:55:25 AM
Body: The Lord of the Rings Trilogy raised the bar so high for fantasy films that any film in that particular genre has a lot to live up to. So it's no surprise that Eragon felt rushed and a bit shallow to me, like Diet Lord of the Rings. There's scant character development and less than scintillating visual effects. It all felt so generic and derivative, and neither Jeremy Irons or Robert Carlyle could save this one. I was deeply disappointed with much of the acting, and the plot was Star Wars meets The Neverending Story. If, by the end, you don't realize this film is aimed squarely at 13-16 year olds, the Avril Lavigne song uncomfortably pasted on at the end should give it away. This is a very mediocre film, indeed.
]]>Tue, 09 Oct 2007 04:55:25 GMTJakeStevensJakeStevens Blog10/9/2007 12:55:25 AMThe Lord of the Rings Trilogy raised the bar so high for fantasy films that any film in that particular genre has a lot to live up to. So it's no surprise that Eragon felt rushed and a bit shallow to me, like Diet Lord of the Rings. There's scant character development and less than scintillating visual effects. It all felt so generic and derivative, and neither Jeremy Irons or Robert Carlyle could save this one. I was deeply disappointed with much of the acting, and the plot was Star Wars meets The Neverending Story. If, by the end, you don't realize this film is aimed squarely at 13-16 year olds, the Avril Lavigne song uncomfortably pasted on at the end should give it away. This is a very mediocre film, indeed. Spout Post: Excruciatingly predictable http://www.spout.com/blogs/billshroyer/archive/2007/9/8/19529.aspx

Post By: BillShroyer
Post To: BillShroyer Blog
Post Date: 9/8/2007 7:25:00 PM
Body: I must've seen this movie at least 20 times - during the 1990's. The visual effects were fantastic, but the story itself was so excruciatingly unoriginal that I couldn't bear to watch it all the way through - "wise old cynical teacher", "eager young man too big for his own britches", "dark king with predictably freakish-looking attendant" - the list just goes on and on and on and on. I've never read the book, but I hope it's very different from the movie. It was like watching "Lord of the Rings" combined with "Oprah on Queludes". A perfect waste of time - though the actors aren't to blame for that. They acted their parts fairly well, it's just that the parts, _themselves_, should never have seen the light of day. Again.
]]>Sat, 08 Sep 2007 23:25:00 GMTBillShroyerBillShroyer Blog9/8/2007 7:25:00 PMI must've seen this movie at least 20 times - during the 1990's. The visual effects were fantastic, but the story itself was so excruciatingly unoriginal that I couldn't bear to watch it all the way through - "wise old cynical teacher", "eager young man too big for his own britches", "dark king with predictably freakish-looking attendant" - the list just goes on and on and on and on. I've never read the book, but I hope it's very different from the movie. It was like watching "Lord of the Rings" combined with "Oprah on Queludes". A perfect waste of time - though the actors aren't to blame for that. They acted their parts fairly well, it's just that the parts, _themselves_, should never have seen the light of day. Again. Spout Post: Eragon http://www.spout.com/blogs/moviebabe/archive/2007/7/19/15386.aspx

Post By: MovieBabe
Post To: MovieBabe Blog
Post Date: 7/19/2007 11:37:00 PM
Body: By Tricia Olszewski Regardless of your feelings about the fantasy genre, there’s one thing everyone can agree on: Elves should not be 5-foot-6. But in Eragon, key elf Arya (Sienna Guillory) stands tall next to her fellow characters; she even has human ears. (Whoops!) This sloppiness is indicative of director Stefen Fangmeier and scripter Peter Buchman’s butchering of Christopher Paolini’s popular novel of the same name. The book, which the now-23-year-old Paolini began writing at 15, is full of magic and lore, yet it hardly gets the intensive Harry Potter treatment. Instead, its 544 pages are crushed into a 104-minute film, with characters dropped and plots manipulated. And at the center of it all is a talking dragon, Saphira, voiced by Rachel Weisz. (Perhaps another universal opinion: Fierce, fire-breathing dragons should not drop one-liners, especially Buchman’s.) When she shuts up and races across the sky, Saphira is the biggest wow factor in the film, but she doesn’t have a lot of competition: Her rider, Eragon (a Tiger Beat–ready Edward Speleers), is the boy of disinterest here, a 17-year-old farmhand who’s hunting when an ovular blue thing appears on the ground through a portal, I suppose, since it’s smoking. Eragon gapes at it then brings it to his shack, where he gapes at it some more. Soon it hatches into a cute widdle feathered dragon, and—blah blah—Eragon discovers with the help of Brom, a grizzled former dragon rider (Jeremy Irons), that he’s been chosen to resurrect this...mode of transportation, which became extinct when Brom’s own flying beast was intentionally killed. The plot also involves an occupation, the aforementioned guess-who’s-she’s-destined-for elf who’d been carrying the egg, and a black-magic dude (Robert Carlyle) who’s trying to get Saphira back to her rightful owner, the evil King Galbatorix (John Malkovich, using his haughty purr to make his few minutes of screen time seem Oscar-worthy compared to the rest of the cast). The movie is as beautiful—it was filmed mostly in the green mountains of Hungary—as the story is predictable, and it also gets points for Saphira’s CG and an intense battle scene. But this skeletal rendering of Paolini’s vivid book is ultimately the equivalent of Fantasy for Dummies. The filmmakers should have taken advice from the script: As Brom first says to Eragon, “Mind your corn.”
]]>Fri, 20 Jul 2007 03:37:00 GMTMovieBabeMovieBabe Blog7/19/2007 11:37:00 PM By Tricia Olszewski Regardless of your feelings about the fantasy genre, there’s one thing everyone can agree on: Elves should not be 5-foot-6. But in Eragon, key elf Arya (Sienna Guillory) stands tall next to her fellow characters; she even has human ears. (Whoops!) This sloppiness is indicative of director Stefen Fangmeier and scripter Peter Buchman’s butchering of Christopher Paolini’s popular novel of the same name. The book, which the now-23-year-old Paolini began writing at 15, is full of magic and lore, yet it hardly gets the intensive Harry Potter treatment. Instead, its 544 pages are crushed into a 104-minute film, with characters dropped and plots manipulated. And at the center of it all is a talking dragon, Saphira, voiced by Rachel Weisz. (Perhaps another universal opinion: Fierce, fire-breathing dragons should not drop one-liners, especially Buchman’s.) When she shuts up and races across the sky, Saphira is the biggest wow factor in the film, but she doesn’t have a lot of competition: Her rider, Eragon (a Tiger Beat–ready Edward Speleers), is the boy of disinterest here, a 17-year-old farmhand who’s hunting when an ovular blue thing appears on the ground through a portal, I suppose, since it’s smoking. Eragon gapes at it then brings it to his shack, where he gapes at it some more. Soon it hatches into a cute widdle feathered dragon, and—blah blah—Eragon discovers with the help of Brom, a grizzled former dragon rider (Jeremy Irons), that he’s been chosen to resurrect this...mode of transportation, which became extinct when Brom’s own flying beast was intentionally killed. The plot also involves an occupation, the aforementioned guess-who’s-she’s-destined-for elf who’d been carrying the egg, and a black-magic dude (Robert Carlyle) who’s trying to get Saphira back to her rightful owner, the evil King Galbatorix (John Malkovich, using his haughty purr to make his few minutes of screen time seem Oscar-worthy compared to the rest of the cast). The movie is as beautiful—it was filmed mostly in the green mountains of Hungary—as the story is predictable, and it also gets points for Saphira’s CG and an intense battle scene. But this skeletal rendering of Paolini’s vivid book is ultimately the equivalent of Fantasy for Dummies. The filmmakers should have taken advice from the script: As Brom first says to Eragon, “Mind your corn.” Spout Post: What Happened? http://www.spout.com/blogs/amp-bic/archive/2007/5/14/8788.aspx

Post By: amp-bic
Post To: amp-bic Blog
Post Date: 5/14/2007 8:28:36 PM
Body: Well right off the bat im just gunna say this movie (like most book-based films) was absolutly off plot line. I have been a huge Eragon fan since i read the book about 2 years ago and i heard rumors this film was coming out so I wanted to see if it was gunna match up to it... Boy was I diasappointed... It was a "visually entertaining" movie but pissed me off. When i pictured Farthen Dur i pictured a magnificant city with a figgin castle in the middle of it but i got three slave huts and a not very impressive building. And the Urgals were protrayed in the book to essentially be like the LOTR Orcs, not fat white guys with face paint on. Im sure many other book fans see my point when i say What Happened? PS: Read the book... you'll find out what im talking about
]]>Tue, 15 May 2007 00:28:36 GMTamp-bicamp-bic Blog5/14/2007 8:28:36 PMWell right off the bat im just gunna say this movie (like most book-based films) was absolutly off plot line. I have been a huge Eragon fan since i read the book about 2 years ago and i heard rumors this film was coming out so I wanted to see if it was gunna match up to it... Boy was I diasappointed... It was a "visually entertaining" movie but pissed me off. When i pictured Farthen Dur i pictured a magnificant city with a figgin castle in the middle of it but i got three slave huts and a not very impressive building. And the Urgals were protrayed in the book to essentially be like the LOTR Orcs, not fat white guys with face paint on. Im sure many other book fans see my point when i say What Happened? PS: Read the book... you'll find out what im talking about Spout Post: Good, but seemed rushed http://www.spout.com/blogs/amateurx/archive/2007/5/14/8753.aspx

Post By: AmateurX
Post To: AmateurX Blog
Post Date: 5/14/2007 9:18:12 AM
Body: Before seeing this movie, I had never heard about the story. I thought the idea was pretty cool, but it was missing something. You could tell that there was a lot of content that the director wanted to get through, but didn't have the time. Every scene seemed to lack detail & development - as if they were rushing through. Watching the movie sparked my interest in the book(s), really only because I could tell there was a ton of stuff missing.
]]>Mon, 14 May 2007 13:18:12 GMTAmateurXAmateurX Blog5/14/2007 9:18:12 AMBefore seeing this movie, I had never heard about the story. I thought the idea was pretty cool, but it was missing something. You could tell that there was a lot of content that the director wanted to get through, but didn't have the time. Every scene seemed to lack detail & development - as if they were rushing through. Watching the movie sparked my interest in the book(s), really only because I could tell there was a ton of stuff missing. Spout Post: Had Potential... http://www.spout.com/blogs/ackio/archive/2007/5/14/8751.aspx

Post By: ackio
Post To: ackio Blog
Post Date: 5/14/2007 8:52:47 AM
Body: I've heard rampant rumors that Eragon is nothing more then Star Wars set with dragons. I'll be honest I have seen every Star Wars movie and thought little about them. Yes I said it, stone me if you must. I only bring this up to prove a point, I don't know every similarity between the two movies because I just don't care enough about Star Wars to sit there and pick apart its mythos. Also, if you sit there and tell me Eragon is nothing more then Star Wars I will just turn around and tell you to give me one day and I will find twenty different myths that Star Wars was derived from. It doesn't bother me to say "this movie was a lot like this movie but only different in said ways" because ultimately that’s the only thing we can produce. Don't believe me? Run down to your local library and look up Joseph Campbell's "A Hero With a Thousand Faces". Now granted I'm not saying originality is dead, because we can use these mythos as blue prints to alter and create new experiences (even though they may seem similar). Now Eragon does an all right job with its creativity even though it relies heavily on a lot of cliched fantasy elements. I have read some of the book and found the story much more detailed and interesting in the book form rather than the movie. The whole Dragon Rider process seemed too pushed and rushed and I never really felt that amazing "epic" feeling like when I watched Star Wars, Harry Potter, or the Lord of the Rings. In the end I think the movie fizzled because of this. If they decide to do the sequels which I'm sure they will, I hope they are able to translate between the two mediums a little smoother.
]]>Mon, 14 May 2007 12:52:47 GMTackioackio Blog5/14/2007 8:52:47 AMI've heard rampant rumors that Eragon is nothing more then Star Wars set with dragons. I'll be honest I have seen every Star Wars movie and thought little about them. Yes I said it, stone me if you must. I only bring this up to prove a point, I don't know every similarity between the two movies because I just don't care enough about Star Wars to sit there and pick apart its mythos. Also, if you sit there and tell me Eragon is nothing more then Star Wars I will just turn around and tell you to give me one day and I will find twenty different myths that Star Wars was derived from. It doesn't bother me to say "this movie was a lot like this movie but only different in said ways" because ultimately that’s the only thing we can produce. Don't believe me? Run down to your local library and look up Joseph Campbell's "A Hero With a Thousand Faces". Now granted I'm not saying originality is dead, because we can use these mythos as blue prints to alter and create new experiences (even though they may seem similar). Now Eragon does an all right job with its creativity even though it relies heavily on a lot of cliched fantasy elements. I have read some of the book and found the story much more detailed and interesting in the book form rather than the movie. The whole Dragon Rider process seemed too pushed and rushed and I never really felt that amazing "epic" feeling like when I watched Star Wars, Harry Potter, or the Lord of the Rings. In the end I think the movie fizzled because of this. If they decide to do the sequels which I'm sure they will, I hope they are able to translate between the two mediums a little smoother. Spout Post: Upcoming films and midnight shows http://www.spout.com/blogs/yrfunnyvalentine/archive/2007/4/25/7622.aspx

Post By: yrfunnyvalentine
Post To: yrfunnyvalentine Blog
Post Date: 4/25/2007 1:54:00 PM
Body: I found out yesterday that I have to work 5 to close on Thursday May 3rd, which means I have to work for the midnight showings of Spiderman 3. I'm kind of disappointed, because I wanted to see it at midnight, but at the same time, I LOVE working midnight shows of movies that people are really excited to see. I remember last year I worked for the midnight shows of Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Man's Chest, and it was an awesomely fun time. Sure, the theater was busy as all-get-out, but the people who came to see the film were really into it all and some were dressed up and whatnot, so that was really great. However, working midnights for movies that nobody really wants to see right at midnight (Eragon and Casino Royale) are a real drag, especially since it means being at the theater until around 3 am. Oh! Speaking of Pirates of the Caribbean, the theater I work at already has tickets on sale for the midnight show of At World's End, as well as tickets for opening weekend, and I also think Shrek the Third tickets are on sale. As soon as Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix tickets go on sale, I'm buying some for the midnight, and then asking for that day off. I saw two new trailers for it earlier this week and I don't want to wait until that weekend is over just so that I can see it for free. Also, I found out that the last twenty minutes of that movie are going to be in 3D on the IMAX, which I find pretty awesome and also pretty lame at the same time. It means that we have to hand out the stupid 3D glasses at the beginning of the movie, and then hope that the people holding on to them for the next two and a half hours don't chew on the arms, or try to fold them, or drop them on the floor. Those glasses aren't cheap. And I wouldn't want to be holding on to them for that long just for a 20 minute scene at the end, even though that scene is going to be amazing. I think I'd rather just go see it in digital first because the 3D in Superman Returns was almost as disappointing as the movie itself, and I hope the 3D in HP: OOtP isn't nearly as lame and craptastic as that. Also, I want to see Year of the Dog and I found out yesterday that it's actually coming to Grand Rapids! Yay for indie movies that actually get played at my theater! There are a bunch more I'm looking forward too, also, but this blog would end up being about a zillion years long, so I'll just end it by saying Neil Gaiman rules! Go see Stardust when it comes out!
]]>Wed, 25 Apr 2007 17:54:00 GMTyrfunnyvalentineyrfunnyvalentine Blog4/25/2007 1:54:00 PMI found out yesterday that I have to work 5 to close on Thursday May 3rd, which means I have to work for the midnight showings of Spiderman 3. I'm kind of disappointed, because I wanted to see it at midnight, but at the same time, I LOVE working midnight shows of movies that people are really excited to see. I remember last year I worked for the midnight shows of Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Man's Chest, and it was an awesomely fun time. Sure, the theater was busy as all-get-out, but the people who came to see the film were really into it all and some were dressed up and whatnot, so that was really great. However, working midnights for movies that nobody really wants to see right at midnight (Eragon and Casino Royale) are a real drag, especially since it means being at the theater until around 3 am. Oh! Speaking of Pirates of the Caribbean, the theater I work at already has tickets on sale for the midnight show of At World's End, as well as tickets for opening weekend, and I also think Shrek the Third tickets are on sale. As soon as Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix tickets go on sale, I'm buying some for the midnight, and then asking for that day off. I saw two new trailers for it earlier this week and I don't want to wait until that weekend is over just so that I can see it for free. Also, I found out that the last twenty minutes of that movie are going to be in 3D on the IMAX, which I find pretty awesome and also pretty lame at the same time. It means that we have to hand out the stupid 3D glasses at the beginning of the movie, and then hope that the people holding on to them for the next two and a half hours don't chew on the arms, or try to fold them, or drop them on the floor. Those glasses aren't cheap. And I wouldn't want to be holding on to them for that long just for a 20 minute scene at the end, even though that scene is going to be amazing. I think I'd rather just go see it in digital first because the 3D in Superman Returns was almost as disappointing as the movie itself, and I hope the 3D in HP: OOtP isn't nearly as lame and craptastic as that. Also, I want to see Year of the Dog and I found out yesterday that it's actually coming to Grand Rapids! Yay for indie movies that actually get played at my theater! There are a bunch more I'm looking forward too, also, but this blog would end up being about a zillion years long, so I'll just end it by saying Neil Gaiman rules! Go see Stardust when it comes out! Spout Post: Did anyone read the book first?! http://www.spout.com/blogs/urtown2/archive/2007/3/25/6490.aspx

Post By: urtown2
Post To: urtown2 Blog
Post Date: 3/25/2007 7:31:37 PM
Body: As with the first Harry Potter movies, Rent and several other recent adaptations, I feel that the creator of this movie just didn't get it. The first Harry Potter films neglected the playful humor of the books, leading the magical world of wizardry to be portrayed a lot darker a lot earlier on than in the novels. In addition Rent, a completely musical work about New York life of poor artists in the mid nineties was totally ruined once again by another Christopher Columbus interpretation. For one, they were no longer young artists, but decade conflicted middle aged stage performers struggling to adapt their original roles to the spoken lines and new 80’s surroundings. In addition, all of New York was ON FIRE- I could go on. But for this movie, which was Columbus free, the simple question that enraged my mind as a viewer remained. Did anyone take the time to read the book? Did anyone really read it for what it was, not as its potential for a new blockbuster. Did anyone sit there and recognize that one of the main points of the book is choice? That, though he was not given the choice to be a dragon rider, that he did have a choice to go towards good or evil? The plot is similar to Star Wars in the way that it is a battle of good and evil, but the book is much more rich than the movie indicates. The movie’s plot, which is twisted and simple reflects nothing of the exciting journey and hardships Eragon goes through in the book. You grow to care nothing for the characters or what happens to them. At least the Harry Potter and Rent films found their own audience outside of the fans of the original works. The CGI in the film was mediocre and gave the audience nothing new. The images presented paled to the ones described skillfully in the text. Major motifs and characters were left out, or their importance shifted. This movie is nothing compared to the original story, and nothing on its own. In the end, it was a watered down version of the book fitting nicely into a film time frame, but hardly into the mold the book laid out for it.
]]>Sun, 25 Mar 2007 23:31:37 GMTurtown2urtown2 Blog3/25/2007 7:31:37 PMAs with the first Harry Potter movies, Rent and several other recent adaptations, I feel that the creator of this movie just didn't get it. The first Harry Potter films neglected the playful humor of the books, leading the magical world of wizardry to be portrayed a lot darker a lot earlier on than in the novels. In addition Rent, a completely musical work about New York life of poor artists in the mid nineties was totally ruined once again by another Christopher Columbus interpretation. For one, they were no longer young artists, but decade conflicted middle aged stage performers struggling to adapt their original roles to the spoken lines and new 80’s surroundings. In addition, all of New York was ON FIRE- I could go on. But for this movie, which was Columbus free, the simple question that enraged my mind as a viewer remained. Did anyone take the time to read the book? Did anyone really read it for what it was, not as its potential for a new blockbuster. Did anyone sit there and recognize that one of the main points of the book is choice? That, though he was not given the choice to be a dragon rider, that he did have a choice to go towards good or evil? The plot is similar to Star Wars in the way that it is a battle of good and evil, but the book is much more rich than the movie indicates. The movie’s plot, which is twisted and simple reflects nothing of the exciting journey and hardships Eragon goes through in the book. You grow to care nothing for the characters or what happens to them. At least the Harry Potter and Rent films found their own audience outside of the fans of the original works. The CGI in the film was mediocre and gave the audience nothing new. The images presented paled to the ones described skillfully in the text. Major motifs and characters were left out, or their importance shifted. This movie is nothing compared to the original story, and nothing on its own. In the end, it was a watered down version of the book fitting nicely into a film time frame, but hardly into the mold the book laid out for it. Spout Tag:Loved-It http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/Loved-It/MemberTagFilms.aspxLoved-It
Number of films tagged: 509

Number of people who tagged: 179

Number of times used: 921

]]>Tue, 03 Nov 2009 17:56:35 GMT509179921Tag Spout Tag:awesome http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/awesome/MemberTagFilms.aspxawesome
Number of films tagged: 187

Number of people who tagged: 158

Number of times used: 291

]]>Wed, 25 Nov 2009 22:23:33 GMT187158291Tag Spout Tag:fantasy http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/fantasy/MemberTagFilms.aspxfantasy
Number of films tagged: 1044

Number of people who tagged: 128

Number of times used: 480

]]>Mon, 30 Nov 2009 19:54:25 GMT1044128480Tag Spout Tag:Crazy http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/Crazy/MemberTagFilms.aspxCrazy
Number of films tagged: 133

Number of people who tagged: 98

Number of times used: 180

]]>Tue, 15 Sep 2009 19:53:36 GMT13398180Tag Spout Tag:magic http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/magic/MemberTagFilms.aspxmagic
Number of films tagged: 818

Number of people who tagged: 69

Number of times used: 173

]]>Mon, 09 Nov 2009 18:58:47 GMT81869173Tag Spout Tag:awful http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/awful/MemberTagFilms.aspxawful
Number of films tagged: 81

Number of people who tagged: 41

Number of times used: 88

]]>Mon, 06 Oct 2008 18:48:37 GMT814188Tag Spout Tag:king http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/king/MemberTagFilms.aspxking
Number of films tagged: 619

Number of people who tagged: 29

Number of times used: 54

]]>Tue, 30 Jun 2009 13:07:18 GMT6192954Tag Spout Tag:dragon http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/dragon/MemberTagFilms.aspxdragon
Number of films tagged: 170

Number of people who tagged: 15

Number of times used: 21

]]>Mon, 09 Nov 2009 18:57:49 GMT1701521Tag Spout Tag:visual-feast http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/visual-feast/MemberTagFilms.aspxvisual-feast
Number of films tagged: 28

Number of people who tagged: 14

Number of times used: 36

]]>Sat, 09 Jun 2007 20:22:47 GMT281436Tag Spout Tag:battle-war http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/battle-war/MemberTagFilms.aspxbattle-war
Number of films tagged: 1931

Number of people who tagged: 7

Number of times used: 10

]]>Fri, 31 Jul 2009 13:03:15 GMT1931710Tag Spout Tag:ruined http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/ruined/MemberTagFilms.aspxruined
Number of films tagged: 4

Number of people who tagged: 4

Number of times used: 4

]]>Sat, 04 Aug 2007 01:56:36 GMT444Tag Spout Tag:hahaha http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/hahaha/MemberTagFilms.aspxhahaha
Number of films tagged: 3

Number of people who tagged: 3

Number of times used: 3

]]>Thu, 08 May 2008 01:38:11 GMT333Tag Spout Tag:unintentionally-hilarious http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/unintentionally-hilarious/MemberTagFilms.aspxunintentionally-hilarious
Number of films tagged: 2

Number of people who tagged: 2

Number of times used: 2

]]>Sat, 20 Jan 2007 17:19:12 GMT222Tag Spout Tag:butchered http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/butchered/MemberTagFilms.aspxbutchered
Number of films tagged: 1

Number of people who tagged: 1

Number of times used: 1

]]>Mon, 04 Jun 2007 04:44:46 GMT111Tag Spout Tag:farmboy http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/farmboy/MemberTagFilms.aspxfarmboy
Number of films tagged: 30

Number of people who tagged: 1

Number of times used: 1

]]>Thu, 04 Jun 2009 13:02:33 GMT3011Tag