Hatrack River Forum: Eragon teaser trailer delayed again.

This is topic Eragon teaser trailer delayed again. in forum Books, Films, Food and Culture at Hatrack River Forum.

To visit this topic, use this URL:
http://www.hatrack.com/ubb/main/ultimatebb.php?ubb=get_topic;f=2;t=044535

Posted by Puffy Treat (Member # 7210) on :

First it was supposed to come out sometime in May. Then it was supposed to be attached to Superman Returns. Then (of all things) Snakes on a Plane.

Now the Eragon teaser is supposed to be attached to Walt Disney's Invincible next weekend.

Hmmm. I wonder if seeing Jeremy Irons onscreen with CGI dragons for a big Christmas release is invoking bad memories? [Wink]

Posted by Earendil18 (Member # 3180) on :

Fantasy movies have a bad mojo for a reason. (sigh)

Posted by ricree101 (Member # 7749) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Earendil18:
Fantasy movies have a bad mojo for a reason. (sigh)

<cough>
Lord of the Rings
</cough>

Posted by Earendil18 (Member # 3180) on :

I was thinking more like Delta Knights, Reign of Fire, or Dungeons and Dragons.

You obviously have some major points against the LOTR movies. [Wink]

Posted by Gwen (Member # 9551) on :

Hopefully the Eragon and Narnia and Coraline and Jonathon Strange movies will change all that.

Then again, that's what I hoped Ella Enchanted would do for fantasy, and the H2G2 movie for SF. Sigh.

Posted by FlyingCow (Member # 2150) on :

[quote]I wonder if seeing Jeremy Irons onscreen with CGI dragons for a big Christmas release is invoking bad memories?[/ugh]

::shudder::

Just the name Eragon invokes bad memories, and I only read about thirty pages before I returned it to Borders to get a refund.

Posted by Nighthawk (Member # 4176) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Earendil18:
I was thinking more like Delta Knights, Reign of Fire, or Dungeons and Dragons.

You obviously have some major points against the LOTR movies.

How 'bout they have bad mojo because they usually suck. You picked some bad examples there...

Posted by Jeesh (Member # 9163) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Gwen:
that's what I hoped Ella Enchanted would do for fantasy

I hate whoever came up with the idea to ruin Ella Enchanted. They are evil and out to destroy every good fantasy book I like. [Mad]

Posted by cmc (Member # 9549) on :

Wow. I really must live under a rock most of the time... Because EG + Eragon are going to be movies and it seems like everyone but me knew this a while back!!!

Posted by Earendil18 (Member # 3180) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Nighthawk:

quote:
Originally posted by Earendil18:
I was thinking more like Delta Knights, Reign of Fire, or Dungeons and Dragons.

You obviously have some major points against the LOTR movies.
How 'bout they have bad mojo because they usually suck. You picked some bad examples there...

Alright then.

Just Delta Knights & D&D.

Posted by FlyingCow (Member # 2150) on :

Eragon may be one of the few books that vastl improves in a film version - simply because it has nowhere to go but up. The inclusion of even a half-competent director should improve things dramatically.

Posted by Sterling (Member # 8096) on :

Um, I liked Ella Enchanted. But then, I never read the book. [Blushing]

It seems that far too many fantasy movies, given a choice between budget for a script or budget for FX, choose the latter.

And then the FX end up not looking very impressive anyway.

Posted by Puffy Treat (Member # 7210) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Sterling:

It seems that far too many fantasy movies, given a choice between budget for a script or budget for FX, choose the latter.

Or they choose a good budget for neither. [Wink]

Posted by Puffy Treat (Member # 7210) on :

The trailer has been delayed yet again.

Rumor has it that the FX for the dragon Sapphira just aren't coming together in a satisfactory manner.

(Personally, I think they should hire Wil Vinton's studio. A Claymation tm dragon would rock!)

Posted by Gwen (Member # 9551) on :

quote:
Um, I liked Ella Enchanted. But then, I never read the book.

Well, the movie wasn't too bad, divorced from the book, except for the internal inconsistencies like how the curse worked and so on. And if you just think of it as a cute family popcorn flick. Entertainment that doesn't make your brain work. (Unless you insist on noticing internal inconsistencies like how the curse worked and so on.)

But the book is about a hundred times better on so many levels. The heroine is more intelligent and more resourceful. (When my friend Victoria and I watched it, we kept talking about how book-Ella would have gotten around that order [held her tongue with her teeth, duh] or how that technically wasn't an order but a statement of fact.) Hattie gets her due. The plot makes sense. Char is nice. The politics of the kingdom make sense. It actually fits in with the Cinderella story. The ending dilemma makes a lot more sense, in keeping with an intelligent Ella (I'm sure you can imagine the dangers inherent in someone doomed to obey any order marrying the heir apparent, even without some stupid scheming uncle to order her to kill the prince). It's hilarious, but it's wit, not just jokes. And it's sad in the right parts. And it makes sense why she'd like Char. (Remember, he's nice in the book.) And she saves herself without resorting to the stupid "let's bounce it off a mirror" trick. Et cetera.

So...read the book! And mourn with us that Disney killed the chance for the good story to be made into a movie. And be glad that they haven't done Tamora Pierce's (for example) novels.

Posted by Miro (Member # 1178) on :

For those who are interested, the Eragon trailer is available at apple.com.

Looks like fun. John Malkovich seems a bit odd, though.

Posted by airmanfour (Member # 6111) on :

Fantastic potential. To go either way.

Posted by Boris (Member # 6935) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Miro:

Looks like fun. John Malkovich seems a bit odd, though.

Isn't he always a bit odd?

Posted by Jeesh (Member # 9163) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Gwen:
And be glad that they haven't done Tamora Pierce's (for example) novels.

*Shudder*

Posted by Libbie (Member # 9529) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Puffy Treat:
First it was supposed to come out sometime in May. Then it was supposed to be attached to Superman Returns. Then (of all things) Snakes on a Plane.

Now the Eragon teaser is supposed to be attached to Walt Disney's Invincible next weekend.

Hmmm. I wonder if seeing Jeremy Irons onscreen with CGI dragons for a big Christmas release is invoking bad memories?

I don't even want to see it. :'( It was bad enough that my boyfriend (Jeremy Irons) was in Dungeons and Dragons ("GIVE ME THE ROD!!!"). But now Eragon, my least favorite piece of literature ever.

I'm crying inside.

Posted by Libbie (Member # 9529) on :

quote:
Originally posted by FlyingCow:
Eragon may be one of the few books that vastl improves in a film version - simply because it has nowhere to go but up. The inclusion of even a half-competent director should improve things dramatically.

Yeah, but I think it'll get positively flamed by critics for having a totally inane, predictable plot.

I WONDER WHY? [Dont Know]

Posted by 777 (Member # 9506) on :

Eragon is going to be hilarious. Seriously.

I can't wait to see people's reactions when they finally look back and realize that they've already seen this trilogy, when all is said and done.

I can just imagine myself saying, I told you so...

[Spoilers, for those who haven't read the book--not that it matters, anyway]

Eragon is Star Wars. With a cheesy, LOTR-ripoff of a theme. I wasted about ten hours of my life getting through the first two books, and the similarities between Eragon and Star Wars are not only disturbing, but downright shocking.

You'd be amazed just how many lines you can draw between the two plots.

Posted by Libbie (Member # 9529) on :

YES, 777. I might actually go see it just to laugh at it, but I have a feeling I'll get stink-eye from angry ten-year-olds.

Posted by Lupus (Member # 6516) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Sterling:
Um, I liked Ella Enchanted. But then, I never read the book.

It seems that far too many fantasy movies, given a choice between budget for a script or budget for FX, choose the latter.

And then the FX end up not looking very impressive anyway.

I didn't mind it either. Though I watched it with a 5 year old cousin...so I watched it as a kid's movie. When you watch something as a kid's movie, you have a bit more patience with it. She (the 5 year old) loved it by the way.

Posted by Samprimary (Member # 8561) on :

I like to pretend that I can judge movies entirely by their previews. Surprisingly, these judgements rarely fall far off the mark, though occasionally they can be completely wrong*.

The principle is that a good movie will have the footage and the creative engineering necessary to splice scenes into an entertaining or intriguing sequence; if the movie makers can't even manage to hack a thirty second sequence with the footage of their movie, it's probably worth avoiding.

The Eragon movie had some fearsome red flags. Among them were a couple of scenes of obviously costumed soldiers smashing into each other on garishly lit movie sets.

Also, there were some moments of AS-Grade* dramatic cheese, usually poses or dramatic lines from the fawnish lead, some involving accompanying dragon cheese.

My totally unfair and pre-emptive verdict is that the movie couldn't possibly be better than a C+, best case scenario. Especially considering that -- from what you guys are telling me -- it's essentially working off of a source work which is jejune-flavored, with a rich and creamy cliché center.

* AS-Grade: Anakan Skywalker Grade

Posted by Belle (Member # 2314) on :

quote:
a source work which is jejune-flavored, with a rich and creamy cliché center.

That's such a perfect description of Eragon, I must try to remember it.

Posted by Orincoro (Member # 8854) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Samprimary:
I like to pretend that I can judge movies entirely by their previews. Surprisingly, these judgements rarely fall far off the mark, though occasionally they can be completely wrong*.

The principle is that a good movie will have the footage and the creative engineering necessary to splice scenes into an entertaining or intriguing sequence; if the movie makers can't even manage to hack a thirty second sequence with the footage of their movie, it's probably worth avoiding.

This happened with the Matrix movies. They lost some money in the opening few weeks because it was marketed as a kung fu flic with some fantasy elements.

:::Spoilers for THE MATRIX:::

ironically, the strategy ended up working, and they made that money back when the movie hit word of mouth (remember this is before the blogosphere) and everybody went to see it despite the cheesy ads. Probably an ad more honest to the movie would have A, spoiled the shocking moment where neo wakes up in a tube, and B, made the movie look TOO cerebral for those kung fu enthusiasts, who now like to claim that "The Matrix" is some kind of brilliant manifesto in the application of eastern philosophy.

On a side note, I prepared a presentation on the philosophy of sci-fi for a literature class, and "The Matrix" was one of my subjects in the "psuedo new age / eastern thought" category. If you really look into it, the movie is a sci-fi setting of Plato's parrable of the Cave Dwellers, mixed in with a good deal of Platonic/Christian doctrine. Funny.

I completely agree in general though- I can spot a stinker from the trailer a MILE away, and I am almost never wrong. I am trying to think of the last movie that I saw and liked, who's trailer I didn't like.. and I can't think of one. If you can't cut together 30 seconds, much less two minutes of good footage, then your movie sucks. The worst ones are the "comedies" that have horrible jokes in the trailers, or some stupid "shocking" catch phrase that is sure to bug the heck out of you for the next 6 months- Ie, "de didi", or ::shudder:: "get ir done"

Posted by Icarus (Member # 3162) on :

I judge books by their covers, too.