That's the question on the cover of the December issue of Premier magazine. Is this shameless hyperbole or what? My first response was "only in the sense that LotR is the grandfather of fantasy stories and Eragon is fantasy", but seeing as this is Premiere, I suspect they're speculating other comparisons (box office draw, buzz, etc.)
I realize Eragon was a popular book, and I've seen the posters for months, but "this year's Lord of the Rings? C'mon. I'm not even expecting it to be this year's Harry Potter.
Posted by Scott R (Member # 567) on :
Although I panned Eragon and Eldest, I actually think they'd make good movies.
Just need a good screenwriter to write believable dialogue...
Posted by KarlEd (Member # 571) on :
Oh, I'm not trashing the movie itself, just the (IMO) ridiculous comparison to LotR.
LotR - Timeless (and time tested) classic that spurred an entire genre with unparalleled cross-generational and international appeal which finally got a deserving treatment on the big screen, to the joy of long anticipating fans.
Eragon - A movie about a dragon based on a relatively mildly popular book.
Posted by mr_porteiro_head (Member # 4644) on :
Even though you only said it to rail against it, it still galls me that you even wrote that question, Karl.
Just seeing it there is like fingernails on a chalkboard.
Posted by Uprooted (Member # 8353) on :
LotR movies: Wonderful epic films that could never capture all the beauty and power of the work they were based on.
Eragon movie: Has the potential to be a wonderful epic film that will far surpass the work it was based on.
As movies, I can see them meriting a comparison. However, you're right about the generations of devoted fandom awaiting the LotR films. I can't see Eragon ever being the same kind of phenomenon in that sense.
After watching RotK I thought, OK, what do I have to look forward to next year now that I've seen all of them?
Posted by Shan (Member # 4550) on :
That's easy. The extended super-deluxe, no holds barred let it all hang out filmimg of the trilogy. Neh? *grin*
I shudder at the comparison between LOTR and E and devoutly hope that the movie is better than the book. Since my son is fascinated and will want to see it.
Posted by KarlEd (Member # 571) on :
quote:Originally posted by mr_porteiro_head: Even though you only said it to rail against it, it still galls me that you even wrote that question, Karl.
Just seeing it there is like fingernails on a chalkboard.
Just sharing my pain, brother. Posted by mr_porteiro_head (Member # 4644) on :
quote:Just sharing my pain, brother.
Posted by Icarus (Member # 3162) on :
quote:Originally posted by Uprooted: After watching RotK I thought, OK, what do I have to look forward to next year now that I've seen all of them?
Prequels, my friend. The prequels.
How did Sauron get to be such a bad sort, anyway?
Posted by romanylass (Member # 6306) on :
quote:Originally posted by Shan:
I shudder at the comparison between LOTR and E and devoutly hope that the movie is better than the book. Since my son is fascinated and will want to see it.
And I share your pain, sister. Want to make a date of it?
Posted by Luet13 (Member # 9274) on :
LoTR prequels, eh?
Someone filming the Silmarillion could either do it really well, or it would be a total trainwreck. I mean the book itself has some continuity issues, so the movie would be hard to plot. I'd see it though, fo' sho. Posted by Libbie (Member # 9529) on :
quote:Originally posted by KarlEd: That's the question on the cover of the December issue of Premier magazine. Is this shameless hyperbole or what? My first response was "only in the sense that LotR is the grandfather of fantasy stories and Eragon is fantasy", but seeing as this is Premiere, I suspect they're speculating other comparisons (box office draw, buzz, etc.)
I realize Eragon was a popular book, and I've seen the posters for months, but "this year's Lord of the Rings? C'mon. I'm not even expecting it to be this year's Harry Potter.
Lordy Lou. That's downright insulting to Lord of the Rings.
Just because a whole bunch of kids who probably haven't yet been exposed to really good fantasy like reading Eragon doesn't mean it's anywhere near on par with LOTR. Yes, LOTR is not for everybody, but at least it was creative .
Posted by Libbie (Member # 9529) on :
quote:Originally posted by Shan: I shudder at the comparison between LOTR and E and devoutly hope that the movie is better than the book. Since my son is fascinated and will want to see it.
I shudder at the fact that my boyfriend, Jeremy Irons, will be in Eragon. Didn't he learn anything from Dungeons and Dragons: The Movie?
Posted by KarlEd (Member # 571) on :
quote:Just because a whole bunch of kids who probably haven't yet been exposed to really good fantasy like reading Eragon doesn't mean it's anywhere near on par with LOTR. Yes, LOTR is not for everybody, but at least it was creative .
My initial point wasn't so much a comparison of the relative merits of the books as it was a comparison of the general phenomenon each has become. One was a long-anticipated blockbuster with enormous appeal. The other is a movie looked forward to mainly by fans of the book, and only casually known about by everyone else.
I'm sure Premier was talking about buzz and box-office in their comparison rather than quality of source material, but even so I think the comparison is unwarranted hyperbole at best.
Posted by Mrs.M (Member # 2943) on :
I think that Jeremy Irons has a crooked accountant. Either that, or they drove a dump truck full of money to his house.
I never had any desire to read this series, so I might enjoy the movie. Though I'm wary of any movie whose marketing relies on comparisons to other popular movies.
Posted by Jon Boy (Member # 4284) on :
quote:Originally posted by Libbie: I shudder at the fact that my boyfriend, Jeremy Irons, will be in Eragon. Didn't he learn anything from Dungeons and Dragons: The Movie?
See, my first thought when I saw the trailer was "this year's Dungeons and Dragons."
Posted by katdog42 (Member # 4773) on :
To answer succinctly: No.
Posted by 777 (Member # 9506) on :
I wonder if they'll be able to keep the audience and critics from connecting lines between this movie and the Star Wars trilogy...
Nah. In order to do that, they would have to rip Eragon's plot apart.
And the shameless knock-off LOTR themes don't help any, either. At least we won't have to go through with Paolini's horrible prose.
Posted by mr_porteiro_head (Member # 4644) on :
quote:See, my first thought when I saw the trailer was "this year's Dungeons and Dragons."
I haven't seen the trailer, but that's exactly what I thought when I saw the poster.
Here's my favorite line from Eric Snider's review of the movie Dungeons and Dragons:
quote:This film is an all-you-can-eat buffet of bad acting, and Jeremy Irons is going back for seconds, chewing up the scenery with utter shamelessness.
Posted by Lyrhawn (Member # 7039) on :
quote:Originally posted by Luet13: LoTR prequels, eh?
Someone filming the Silmarillion could either do it really well, or it would be a total trainwreck. I mean the book itself has some continuity issues, so the movie would be hard to plot. I'd see it though, fo' sho.
We'll see The Hobbit before 2009 I'm betting, or during it.
Which indeed leaves the Silmarillion and The Unfinished Tales, if you really want to stretch it.
I've said it before, and I'll say it again, the Silmarillion predestined before birth to become the best, greatest, television show in the history of television.
It takes place over the course of what, like nine thousand years? I know primarily it is the story of the Elves in the First age, and a sprinkling of the Second Age, but how would you make even just three movies about it? The First Kinslaying in Alqualonde and the events that lead up to it alone is more than enough for a trilogy. And you have to cover Feanor if you're going to do the rest of it. Then you have to do all the battles, including the massive Nirnaeth. There's dozens of characters (Finrod Felagund was always my favorite). Massive amount of area, different factions all playing a role, and this is all before the coming of men.
Then you get to do the three main Houses of men, and what I would probably look forward to most of all, Turin and Tuor, who both have amazing stories. To say nothing of the stories of the two Elf/Human couplings, with Beren and Luthien, and Tuor and Idril.
Then there's some cool stuff to be done in the Second Age with Numinor, the founding of Gondor and the other Kingdoms of Men, and Gil-Galad. The forging of the Rings of Power by Celebrimbor and the other Elves in Eregion, etc etc leading up to the Dagor-Lad.
It's just WAY too much information to possibly try and stuff in a movie. It would have to be done with the help of Christopher Tolkien, even after reading all the Histories of Middle Earth, I still find myself with tons of questions about what took place between the big events.
The only problem I see with it being a television show is that it takes place over such a long period of time. Few thousand years for the first age, then you lose almost all your main characters, then a few thousand years for the second, ending in what would probably be the best battle scene in the history of cinema (If the Nirnaeth didn't qualify for that). Then 3,000 years of Third Age, leading up to the LOTR movies.
The best ideas that come to mind, would be to do a season that chronicles the events leading up to each big even, such as the huge battles, the felling of the trees, the kinslaying, leaving Valinor for Middle Earth, the Dagor Bragollach, the death of Morgoth, the drowning of Numinor, etc, and then at the end of each season have the television company do a partnership with a major film studio to create a huge movie to cap off each year. I really don't think it'd be that hard, the sets and everything would already be there.
Then the next season would start with a minor introduction to explain what has happened in between the last big battle and the present, and then off you go again towards the next big event. They could spend six or seven seasons on the First Age alone (Which the most is written about anyway).
What I think most people would love to see is the extended story of the end of the Third Age. We all know about the battles of Helm's Deep, Isengard and the Ents, the Fields of the Pellennor and the Fields of Cormallen (the battle at the Morannan), but wouldn't you all like to see the First and Second Assault on Lorien from Dol Guldur? Or the attack on the Lonely Mountain from Mt Gundabad, in a massve Orc vs. the Men of Dale/Dain III Ironfoot of the Dwarves?
There's a lot of untold story there, and I think a few Sil movies would wickedly shortchange it.
Posted by Earendil18 (Member # 3180) on :
I think doing The Silmarillion with a storybook kind of feel, would be awesome. I er...already started a thread though... Posted by Telperion the Silver (Member # 6074) on :
quote:Even though you only said it to rail against it, it still galls me that you even wrote that question, Karl.
Just seeing it there is like fingernails on a chalkboard.
Hear hear Porter!
((KarlEd))
Eragon... bah... upstart.
Posted by Telperion the Silver (Member # 6074) on :
quote:[The Silmarillion] takes place over the course of what, like nine thousand years?
It's actually ALOT longer, depending if you count the formation of the universe by the Valar. And there were many ages on Earth that the Valar battled Melkor before the Elves were born. And the Years of the Two Trees were much longer than our current year, the Years of the Sun.
Posted by Lyrhawn (Member # 7039) on :
Oh yeah, I forgot about all the time that took place before they took the light from the trees and made the sun and the moon, when Aule made the Dwarves.
I think everything that happened with the Trees, the Unchaining of Melkor and Ungoliant would have to be covered in an introduction, or foreward to any movie, and then maybe a 10 minute introduction, like was done in the third LOTR movie with Smeagol and Deagol, about the making of the Silmarils, and the death if Fingwe at the hands of Melkor, and his naming by Feanor of Morgoth.
Then things can get started from that point, and you end the first season at the beginnin of the Watchful Peace, the building of the great Elf strongholds, such as Nargothrond, Gondolin, and Menegroth. Though I don't think Gondolin was built until later, but the Havens were built at that time by Cirdan.
Not sure where in there it'd cover the Sindarin Elves, but they could show that in a flashback too when the Noldor get there.
Posted by Shan (Member # 4550) on :
quote:Originally posted by romanylass:
quote:Originally posted by Shan:
I shudder at the comparison between LOTR and E and devoutly hope that the movie is better than the book. Since my son is fascinated and will want to see it.
And I share your pain, sister. Want to make a date of it?
Hey! Good idea! It's been about a year since our last movie with the kids, neh?
Posted by romanylass (Member # 6306) on :
Yep! I know S and C will want to join us again. It starts the same day Hannukah does so we'll have to look at scheduling.
Posted by Telperion the Silver (Member # 6074) on :
quote:Then things can get started from that point, and you end the first season at the beginnin of the Watchful Peace, the building of the great Elf strongholds, such as Nargothrond, Gondolin, and Menegroth. Though I don't think Gondolin was built until later, but the Havens were built at that time by Cirdan.
Let's not forget the great nation of Hithlum and the fortress-city of Barad Eithel, home of the Elven High Kings. Posted by Nathan2006 (Member # 9387) on :
I hate Eragon with a vengeance... So many times, especially with Paolini giving 'tours' of the culture, it's so shallow... And all of the characters are irrelevent. They just take turns spouting information about this beautiful land... It's like Paolini put on two sock-puppets, and named them Arya and whatever that dwarve's name is. Don't get me wrong, it was the book that got me interested in speculative fiction, and, however indirectly, introduced me to OSC. I think that the movie will be much better than the book, and I think that Paolini will be pliant and agree with all the changes made to the script... He's no fool. He knows that what he's written is substandard... But, even being substandard, I'm still engrossed in the books, and waiting for the third one to come out, so that I may simultaneously enjoy and critisize it.
I think the reason the book was so popular, was because he's so young. Many kids, especially today, have put their imagination to writing books, rather than playing 'pretend'. Or maybe that's just their way of 'playing pretend' once they grow up and are too 'cool' to do it anymore. In any case, Paolini was homeschooled (Me too), wrote stories (me too), and is probably the person every story-writing teenybopper wants to be. But, I digress.
The new 'Lord of the Rings'? LOL
Posted by Lyrhawn (Member # 7039) on :
quote:Originally posted by Telperion the Silver:
quote:Then things can get started from that point, and you end the first season at the beginnin of the Watchful Peace, the building of the great Elf strongholds, such as Nargothrond, Gondolin, and Menegroth. Though I don't think Gondolin was built until later, but the Havens were built at that time by Cirdan.
Let's not forget the great nation of Hithlum and the fortress-city of Barad Eithel, home of the Elven High Kings.
Aw, most of what I reread is after Hithlum lies in ruin.
Posted by Teshi (Member # 5024) on :
Not intendeding to be offensive to homeschoolers and the homeschooled- learning at home is important- I read Christopher Paolini's writing and his newsletter (from his website) and knew immediately that he had been homeschooled.
I was also stunned to discover that he's older than I am. I thought he was younger. Like, fifteen.
Posted by Shan (Member # 4550) on :
quote:Originally posted by romanylass: Yep! I know S and C will want to join us again. It starts the same day Hannukah does so we'll have to look at scheduling.
Sounds like a plan -- let me know what works best for you!
Posted by mr_porteiro_head (Member # 4644) on :
quote: I thought he was younger. Like, fifteen.
Well, he used to be. Posted by B34N (Member # 9597) on :
I know nothing of this Eargon stuff but I know this...Any movie with Malkovich and Irons in it has to be good on some level, cool site for the movie also! Posted by Libbie (Member # 9529) on :
quote:Originally posted by KarlEd:
quote:Just because a whole bunch of kids who probably haven't yet been exposed to really good fantasy like reading Eragon doesn't mean it's anywhere near on par with LOTR. Yes, LOTR is not for everybody, but at least it was creative .
My initial point wasn't so much a comparison of the relative merits of the books as it was a comparison of the general phenomenon each has become. One was a long-anticipated blockbuster with enormous appeal. The other is a movie looked forward to mainly by fans of the book, and only casually known about by everyone else.
I'm sure Premier was talking about buzz and box-office in their comparison rather than quality of source material, but even so I think the comparison is unwarranted hyperbole at best.
Ahh, I see your point. In that respect, yes, I suppose it is like LOTR.
Posted by Libbie (Member # 9529) on :
quote:Originally posted by Mrs.M: I think that Jeremy Irons has a crooked accountant. Either that, or they drove a dump truck full of money to his house.
I never had any desire to read this series, so I might enjoy the movie. Though I'm wary of any movie whose marketing relies on comparisons to other popular movies.
Well, to be fair, I know he has kids, and I read an interview...somewhere...in which he admitted to loving roles in children's movies because he loves reading books to his kids.
He also owns a pink castle in Ireland, so he may be just a little touched.
Posted by Libbie (Member # 9529) on :
quote:Originally posted by Nathan2006: It's like Paolini put on two sock-puppets, and named them Arya and whatever that dwarve's name is.
What? He had a character named Arya?
quote: I think that the movie will be much better than the book,
Personally, I think the movie can't help but be better than the book. If Uwe Boll directed it, it would likely be better than the book.
quote: Many kids, especially today, have put their imagination to writing books, rather than playing 'pretend'.
Oh, definitely. I have an entire huge box full of typewritten novels (and some hand-written) that I created, from about age eight until I was about sixteen. The difference between Paolini and me is that I knew my novels were just child's play, and not worthy of being published (although I did qualify every year for the Young Authors' Conference!). And I guarantee you, the stuff I wrote when I was his age was leagues better than his Eragon trilogy, or at least better than the first book, which is the only one I've read (most of the way through). Yet my childhood books still aren't worth publication, even as a novelty, "Wow, a teen-ager wrote this" type of thing.
He got his novels published based on the strength of his and his parents' marketing. It was originally self-published, and then they pushed it hard, yes, largely playing up the "written by a kid" angle.
quote: Or maybe that's just their way of 'playing pretend' once they grow up and are too 'cool' to do it anymore.
I think it's every writer's way of playing pretend, no matter what their age!
quote: In any case, Paolini was homeschooled (Me too), wrote stories (me too), and is probably the person every story-writing teenybopper wants to be.
I'm sure he is! But I'm also sure that a good number of them can write better than he can. They just lack parents with the money and drive to self-publish their stories and then flog the living daylights out of them to book stores and large publishing houses.
Posted by libertygirl (Member # 8761) on :
I'm actually currently reading Eragon ( on a recommendation from a friend) and I could definetely tell it was written by a young person. I do think the plot and series has potential but the writing has been shallow and childlike so far. That said, I think the movie will be much much better. = D
Posted by Lyrhawn (Member # 7039) on :
quote:He got his novels published based on the strength of his and his parents' marketing. It was originally self-published, and then they pushed it hard, yes, largely playing up the "written by a kid" angle.
Well, their biggest push came when the son of a major publisher read it and told his dad about it.
I would say that's just luck, BUT, and the coincidence just occurred to me...
Tolkien's biggest fan in Britain before the LOTR was published was Raynar Unwin, the son of Stanley Unwin, the man who published most of his books in Britain. Unwin originally published The Hobbit as a kid's story, and it did well, but when he asked for a sequel from Tolkien, Tolkien gave him the beginnings of LOTR. Raynar ended up reading most of it AS Tolkien wrote it, and was his biggest supporter, and in many ways, valued go-between, from Tolkien to Stanley.
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Evil]](graemlins/evil.gif)
![[Grumble]](graemlins/grumble.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Mad]](mad.gif)