Talk:Eragon (film)

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Archive 01 created[edit]

Whew. This looks better. I also re-assessed the article to Start for the Inheritance Cycle Wikiproject for the reasons given by the last assessment (see the archive). Una LagunaTalk 06:06, 7 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A little point...[edit]

Could we remove the 'based on the novel of the same name' bit please? The book and film are two completely different things, and the film is a discredit to the novel. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.104.13.228 (talk) 15:46, 12 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The film is an adaptation of the book. Your opinion of this film doesn't change that. Lots of book adaptations are very different from the books they're based on. So I don't think we could remove the 'based on the novel of the same name' bit. Una LagunaTalk 16:06, 13 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]


The Film and book are completely different. For one thing, Roran goes away to wander, why and how will he know to come back. the ra'zac are dead so who will capture katrina? If it's ordinary soldiers, why will he need Eragon. This will have ruined half the second movie (roran's half) and the first few scenes of the third movie (attacking helgrind and leaving.)Why is there no difference between kull and urgals in the movie and why is eragons back not spasming, and is the cripple who is whole not supposed to talk to eragon when he is unconscious. Another thing is, at the end of the movie, why did eragon have to ask about saphira, their minds are linked and why did she grow up so fast? There are many other things and those are but a few flaws. XX EOIN XXTalk 18:12, April 12 2009 —Preceding undated comment added 17:12, 12 April 2009 (UTC).[reply]

Indeed, the adaptation kind of crippled the opportunity of coming up with a sequel based on Eldest or Brisingr. If they are to come with one, it would probably be even more contrasting to the original story.--Faitudum (talk) 17:47, 29 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Remake of Star War Episode IV: A New Hope[edit]

I think it should be clearly stated in the first paragraph that this movie is a complete ripoff from Star Wars Episode IV: A New Hope. The plot is identical and all they did was replace the following:


The Jedi with Dragonriders.
Millennium Falcon with a dragon.
Light sabre with magical dragonslaying sword.
The Force with dragon magic.
Obi Wan Kenobi with Brom.
Luke Skywalker with Eragon.
Princess Leia with Princess Arya.
Emperor Palpatine with King Galbatorix.
Han Solo with Murtagh.
Darth Vader with Lord Durza.
The Death Star with an army.

And the vulnerable hole in the death star with Durza's heart.

Durza even blows up in a little explosion, quite a bit like the Death Star blowing up.

The author obviously has no imagination and completely ripped off his favourite Star Wars movie.


Amosjo (talk) 18:32, 25 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]


Wikipedia is not a place for words like "Essentially" without facts taken from interviews or such. Wikipedia is not a place for fan opinions, unless they are sourced in the reception section from a credible source.Flap Jackson (talk) 15:27, 26 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]



I LOL'd

Yep, that is a good, lol-worthy point. But it might be a better obsevation to make on the page for the book, even though Christopher Paolini was kind of creative with it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Daganolson (talk • contribs) 00:48, 11 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Eragon's age[edit]

Eragon was 15 in the book but 17 in the film.

The book: ...a fifteen-year-old boy of unknown lineage called Eragon finds a mysterious stone...

The film: Brom: I hardly think a boy of 15, 16.../Eragon: Seventeen!/Brom: Seventeen, forgive me. But I hardly think a boy of SEVENTEEN could handle it.

...which is why I'm reverting the change from 17 to 15. Una LagunaTalk 05:59, 12 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That's fine. I always get them confused. I questioned my revert, but didn't have time to look it up. Thanks! However, is there a way we can just...omit the age? We could just say "teenage" instead. I don't think it's entirely necessary to have his exact age and it was a source of confusion for quite a while on the book's article. I think there was eventually an invisible warning between the number 1 and 7 that said not to change the age. --132 22:59, 12 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Using the word "teenage" is probably safer and easier than going to the trouble of sticking invisible warnings all over the page. Looking through the archive, I've found someone suggested this once before, but the suggestion seems to have fallen on deaf ears. It does seem like the most sensible solution - I'll go implement it now. Una LagunaTalk 06:18, 13 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

character looks[edit]

should it be noted that almost none of the characters resemble their appearances in the novel? for example: brom had a longer beard, eragon wasnt blond, and arya didnt have red hair. in fact, the only character accurately portrayed was durza —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.108.93.57 (talk) 07:12, 2 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

We can only include this information if it's discussed in reliable sources; such details would otherwise count as original research. Una LagunaTalk 11:51, 2 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]


What about the fact there were no dwarves and Ayra didn't have prominent pointed ears? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.46.55.6 (talk) 03:18, 31 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

actually there were dwarves but they looked just like the humans. 69.115.204.217 (talk) 02:04, 21 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Opening Sentence[edit]

Is it really necessary to say it's "live-action/CGI"?74.33.174.133 (talk) 01:53, 18 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sequel[edit]

The article states: "Stefen Fangmeier will return to direct Eldest, which has already been announced as a Direct-To-DVD and will be released on 3 November 2009." However, there is no reference to where this information is gathered from. I can find no information on Fangmeier directing any future films, period, nor anything on the possibility of a sequel. Probably this is just speculation, but either way it seems completely false information. I have added a citation needed tag, though, on the off chance it is valid. Otherwise I propose it be deleted. -- Ceotty (talk) 17:45, 27 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I went ahead and deleted it. The same fact popped up on another Inheritance-related article a few days ago, but the lack of a reliable source to back it up suggests this is wishful thinking. I've found no information about this sequel on any of the major Inheritance websites. Una LagunaTalk 19:21, 27 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Book cover[edit]

Is it worth noting that when the film was released, the original book cover was deemed too childish for the older viewers, and so a new cover was designed for the book as well as the cover with the movie photo on it? --Stripy Socks (talk) 10:29, 26 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

If that fact is mentioned in a reliable source, then yes. It would probably fit in somewhere in the Production section. Una LagunaTalk 10:57, 26 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, it sucked, but why?[edit]

Everybody knows this movie sucked. But why did it suck so bad? It might be good to find some critical reviews that go into more detail. Eragon is a story that should have done better on film.

No. Eragon is a book that was too good to be a movie directed by anyone with directorial experience that included such TOTALLY botched book-to-film attempts as ""A Series of Unfortunate Events"". Will somebody back me up on this, that it sucked because of the director? Or am I nuts?Daganolson (talk) 00:44, 11 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Its possible because the movie was panned by critics, it deterred others from seeing the movie. Only those loyal to the book & the book series itself went to see it, apart from the few that like dragons. For me the movie was good, but its just my opinion. I read the entire series and its my second favorite book series. But the first book dragged on for several chapters, basically at some point where Brom & Eragon are on their journey up till the point where Eragon & Murtagh arrived at the Vardan camp. From that point forward, the series is a fantastic read. Perhaps because of the slow start of the story where it dragged could have played a part in the film's lack of success. Just my opinion. Aidensdaddy2k9 (talk) 23:50, 11 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Too much?[edit]

Box office segment says:

"Eragon grossed approximately $75 million in the US and $173.9 million elsewhere, totalling $249 million worldwide.[12] Films need to gross roughly twice their production and distribution costs to break even:[13] Eragon, which had a production budget of $100 million and distribution costs of an estimated $30 million,[14] did not reach this threshold."

This may be true, but I've never seen it pointed out in any other movie articles. This belongs more to an article about box office and movie actual costs. I think someone was too upset at Eragon here... Simanos (talk) 15:56, 17 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Plot Summary[edit]

I mean, I know almost no-one saw the bloody thing, but isn't there someone who can re-write the plot summary so it...isn't what it is now? I mean, "The evil king Galbatorix, then send the Ra'zac (His monster minions) after Eragon and his dragon because he wants to be the only dragon rider in existence. " ...Really? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.77.146.125 (talk) 22:06, 30 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I agree, if I had seen this movie, (I am still reading eldest) I would re-write it.... If I get some time to watch the movie, I will re-write it myself...

Alpedio (talk) 00:59, 21 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I, too, agree that the plot summary needs much improvement. It is unbalanced, focusing on the early part of the movie. Dont have time to fix :( Bellagio99 (talk) 16:37, 21 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I saw this in the talk section and I took the time to fix it, being careful not to be too lengthy in the summary, inputting the rest of the story, replacing some unnecessary sentences, while still leaving part of what was already there. I even fixed the "Angela" link in the cast list. It was previously a bad link. I hope the new summary is satisfactory. Aidensdaddy2k9 (talk) 00:51, 12 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Who is Dylan?[edit]

Can anyone tell me who is the mysterious Dylan that is mentioned once (or twice, earlier) in the article - or was a troll under us? --Kuer.gee (talk) 13:46, 30 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It was vandalism. I've fixed that instance. Erik (talk | contribs) 14:16, 30 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Steep Turns[edit]

As with many others, this film doesn't address the 'g' effect of the dragon's steep turns. The riders seem impervious to the effect. 68.148.93.15 (talk) 00:44, 10 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I would like to know when the next movie will come out? My grandchildren just love this movie. I have read all four books and I truely hope they continue the movies. Too me, this is as good as the Harry Potter series. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dladyhawke (talk • contribs) 22:33, 4 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Eragon (film). Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 13:11, 10 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on Eragon (film). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 07:25, 25 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 6 external links on Eragon (film). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 06:18, 22 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

VHS?[edit]

"It is notable for being the last film to be released on VHS in the United States."

Because VHS was dead at this point, did it get an actual (small- or wide-) release in that format? Any sources? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:191:300:36D0:BD5E:8C6F:32E5:784C (talk) 05:08, 31 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Eragon_(film)&oldid=1195505337"