So anyway: the titular Eragon (Speleers) is a farm boy living with his uncle (Alun Armstrong) and his cousin (Christopher Egan) in the mystical land of Alagaësia ruled over by the evil King Galbatorix (Malkovich, collecting a paycheck), his slimy vampire/mage servant Durza (Carlyle), and an army of...Urgals? Basically reddish orcs. Also some men.
Anyway, our Arwen analog, Arya (Guillory), fleeing from Durza with a big blue jellybean, magics it away and it winds up in Eragon's lap, and then soon hatches into a dragon named Safira (Wiesz), which is a cute little puppy-thing at first but grows up really quickly (apparently by magic). From there we get your standard hero's journey; Eragon hooks up with the village sad sack Brom (Irons, apparently enjoying himself) who turns out to be a disgraced dragon-rider and insists on taking Eragon to the Varden (the resistance living in the mountains, led by Djimon Hounsou before he learned to act).
Oh, dragon-riding is a big deal. Used to be that the dragon-riders were...you know, I don't actually know what their function in Analgesia was? Elite troops? Superheroes? Demigods? Likewise, this couldn't all have been that long ago because Brom was a dragon-rider and he's still alive (his dragon isn't; a rider can survive the death of a dragon but not vice versa, in a move we call the "one-sided Dragonheart"), but everyone in Eragon's village seems to regard them as myth? Anyway, Eragon is the first dragon-rider in a long time and that's a big screaming deal for getting the resistance to rally and go after the king or something.
This movie is bad, and I've been thinking about why. It's not the effects, those are actually pretty good. Obviously the dragon is CGI, but it looks decent - there were no moments that looked badly, obviously fake. The sound design when it's a puppy is actually really cute. The fight scenes are pretty shit, lots of jumpy cuts and these people clearly didn't do their own stunts, but whatever, not everything can be Lord of the Rings.
No, I think it's bad because it feels at once very familiar and like they're not telling us enough. We don't really learn much about the history and culture of Aphantasia, just the very broad strokes that set up the plot. But without the context of that history, it's hard to know what the stakes really are. And at the same time, it feels so much like a surface-level Lord of the Rings (or Star Wars, or Harry Potter, or whatever) knock-off that we feel like we're going through the motions.
If we had a lead that was charismatic and fun to spend time with, that might be something, but I'm sorry, Ed Speleers is no Daniel Radcliffe. He's OK, but he's blond and bland and...so, so white (as in bread), and it was another five years after this movie that he started getting work again (he has gone on to a fairly steady career, so presumably he learned to act at some point). Malkovich is phoning it in with an apathy that's almost inspiring; at least Carlyle and Irons muster the energy to chew the scenery. Guillory would have been more interesting with more to do, same for Hedlund as Murtagh, the rogue/ranger who shows up to follow Eragon around. I kept hoping they'd kiss, that at least would have been interesting.
I have no idea if the book is any better (it'd almost have to be, since a lot of my complaints cook down to the movie letting the audience's knowledge of other fantasy properties fill in the gaps and the book probably doesn't do that at least as much), but it's pretty telling that the planned sequels to this movie were cancelled. Throw it on the heap with Alex Rider.
My Grade: D
Rewatch Value: IINSIAIFWT
Rewatch Value: IINSIAIFWT
Next up: Siren