Critique

Although I didn’t really like the book, I actually enjoyed the movie. I was expecting the same far too long escape and recapture scenes between Mo and Capricorn, many of which were still there but significantly shortened. There were plenty of changes to the movie, especially at the end, but overall, I think they were an improvement to the original story. My favorite aspects, however, were the camera effects and the soundtrack.

Critique

Usually, the films in this genre stray too much from the original books, or add unnecessary things to the story. However, in this case, the addition of the magical elements and the slight tweaks to the story overall were good, and helped to tell a wonderfully enrapturing tale. Roscuro’s character especially is good, because in the book, he’s a little too dark. Here, though, he’s good-natured and one minor mistake from the princess is what sets him off. I recommend this movie to all families with children under 10. 

Critique

After reading the book, I was interested to see what the film was going to be like and how much it was going to stick to the original storyline. It’s relatively close, although there are a few scenes that stray unnecessarily, and a few other things that actually make it better.

The studio picked good actors to represent the various characters, especially Lina and Doon who are convincing as the characters that DuPrau originally creates them to be. Also, the city itself looks very accurate to the picture that DuPrau paints through her story. Beyond that, though, there are some key things that the film missed, and I can imagine that people watching who haven’t read the book will have missed out on some of the necessary details.

There’s little to no explanation of how they got there, and the entire scene involving the diary that the kids find at the end of the book, which gives a lot of necessary history to the story as a whole isn’t in the movie at all. There are hints toward it, but the plot doesn’t delve in far enough to what’s actually going on in order to connect the audience with the underlying plot. Also, there’s no need to have a giant mole burrowing around through the tunnels and trying to kill the kids. There is enough drama through the story itself, and the addition of the mole seems like a gimmick rather than adding something.  

The addition of the subplot of their parents having looked for a way out previously was good, because it does seem a little far fetched that over the course of more than 240 years, no one would try to figure out the world around them and explore unknown things and places. It’s simply human nature. Also, the Rube Goldberg-style machine involving the boats at the end was a good addition, making that whole scene more visually appealing. Overall, not the best adaptation possible, but still a decent watch.

Critique

In part, this film didn’t do as well as I’m sure New Line Cinema has hoped because of the perceived anti-Christian sentiment that weaves itself throughout the story. Let’s face it, the group that is most enthusiastic about these fantasy movies is often Christian considering that this genre was largely born from the minds of two of the most famous Christian men of the 20^th century, C.S. Lewis and J.R.R. Tolkein. This group of Christian parents are quick to jump on the band wagon of anything they perceive as lining up with their worldview, and even quicker to denounce en masse anything that does not.

However, a bigger factor to its unsuccessful flight both for in theater and DVD sales is the simple fact that it’s not nearly as compelling as the books. Overall, the story moves too quickly and doesn’t explore the beautiful and original fantasy world that Pullman created. Movies like Harry Potter can carry through the naysayers because the imaginative world is captured impeccably on the screen. That’s largely what will make or break movies like these. The Lord of the Rings Trilogy, the two Narnia films thus far, that Harry Potter films, and even Coraline have given a little more time and energy toward taking the text and bringing it to life on screen both in storyline and special effects.

There are some great special effects, and the polar bear fight is great. However, it moves through the plot too quickly and doesn’t take the time to establish the world and the characters there within. Give it another 30 minutes and all of that is easily accomplishable, plus the film doesn’t have to end in a weird and awkward place that just seems like it’s cutting everything off completely. End it where Pullman ended the book.

Critique

Not that the book is a masterpiece of classic literature, but the movie is terrible. Relying far too heavily on computer graphics and ‘epic’ battles to carry the weight of the film, Eragon’s story is basically nonexistent. It rushes through the dialogue and the connection of the characters that happens at least at some level throughout the book, not to mention that the movie and book differ significantly throughout the process.

Saphira suddenly becomes a full-sized dragon just after learning to fly as a small baby dragon; much of the journey that Brom and Eragon go through is nonexistent, so when he dies you don’t care; Eragon and Murtagh have no bonding time, so you don’t care about Murtagh either, and the dwarves look stupid, not to mention that the elves don’t have pointed ears.

The biggest faux pas, though, was that Shade uses magic to conjure up his own ‘smoke dragon’ in order to fight Saphira in the air. Not only was it cheesy, but it diminishes any of the difficulty in the fight between Shade and Eragon, which basically sets up one of the major themes throughout the next book.

The acting was fine for what it was. Sometimes the bad high British accents used so often in films like these gets tiresome, but there’s not much more one would expect. However, great actors like Jeremy Irons and John Malkovich don’t need to be in a film like this, especially since John Malkovich only appears for about 5 minutes max. They don’t add anything to the experience.

All in all, it’s a terrible movie, and even hardcore Paolini fans will be sorely disappointed, and real film aficionados will likely not be able to stomach more than 5 minutes.

Critique

As a Sci-Fi mini-series, this film isn’t as bad as it could be. However, the film strays pretty far away from the content of the original two books that it combines in order to make up much of the story. At some level, the two are so different that one could almost consider them separate entities entirely. 

Which brings me to the real critique. The writing quality of the film isn’t really that great. There are a lot of elements added in order to make the television appeal higher, like sex, conspiracy, murder, etc. that aren’t in the original story, and mostly make the film seem cheesy rather than creating a dramatic appeal. The lines that the characters deliver are predictable and often don’t add much to the story as a whole. It’s almost as if the script is based off of a formula or checklist for the elements that need to be in a fantasy film in order to make it successful. However, rather than adding to the story, they make it seem forced and fake.

The Earthsea stories aren’t compelling in the same kind of way that other epic fantasy tales are, and so they don’t really translate well to film. Unlike the Narnia stories or Lord of The Rings, the tales of Ged are more of an account of the various things he did as a wizard, and don’t have the same kind of major build to the ultimate climax. 

If you do want to watch it, be prepared for a very, very long (3 hours) movie that moves at a slow pace and will often make you cringe at the bad CG or cheesy dramatic sequences.