DH and I are on our way to see Eragon right now. I have no idea why -- I think it's mostly out of spite that the studio made sure to schedule all the press screenings too last minute for anyone to actually attend. And partially we want to get the most use out of our AMC pass before it expires at the end of the year. And the theatre's in the same direction as the party we're going to later.

I just watched Beyond Borders and I can't believe this is bothering me--when she first leaves to stalk Clive Owen's character, has she already had a child? I thought she was newly-wed when he stormed the party, and that she left soon after her inspiration.

I've been skimming reviews (because I want people to agree with me that it was awful), and they seem to think she left a kid behind. It's not a big point, just one I read differently.

Aaaaaaaand, Eragon kind of sucked, but in an entertaining way. I don't think I'd recommend anyone paying $10 to see it, but if you've ever been a 15 year old boy reading Anne McCaffrey and thought "This would be SO AWESOME if it were about ME!" then this is the movie for you.

It's also fun to play the "identify the movie this shot was lifted from" game. Peter Jackson and George Lucas should be getting their royalty checks in the mail any day now...

I sort of want to see it just to play that game. Because, in theory, Star Wars meets Lord of the Rings should be awesome, right?

I'm pretty sure Blood Diamond beats out Eragon in the shirtless department. I have already read a review of Eragon that bemoaned the film for it's lack of shirtlessness.

I know everybody is saying the film sucked. I know it's A New Hope with dragons. Still the more I hear about it the more I think I'd love it. Is the acting horrible or is it just the writing that sucks?

Is the acting horrible or is it just the writing that sucks?

The acting is pretty horrible, but better writing could have saved at least some of it. (The kid playing Eragon is wretched, but since several of his scenes involve him doing nothing but looking intensely offscreen while he has a telepathic conversation with the dragon, it's hard to blame the actor.)

Eragon is the only character who gets shirtless. Very disappointing.

if you've ever been a 15 year old boy reading Anne McCaffrey and thought "This would be SO AWESOME if it were about ME!" then this is the movie for you.

That's what everything I've ever seen, heard or read about both the book and the movie has me think.

I mean, I'm quite certain the kid writes better than Dan Brown, but his age alone has made me question whether it's worth even trying to read the book. Was there no better manuscript in the slush pile? Honestly? Did you read more than the top two or three on the pile?

It's not that I'm opposed to give young voices a break. Actually, I'm really glad he got it. I just know what kind of fantasy stuff I was coming up with at that age, and the kind of fantasy written by everybody else that age, or with a 17-year-old mentality. It (almost) universally sucks.

The movie was made because the book was popular, not because it was good.

To which I can respond only by looking at Dan Brown again and heaving an exasperated sigh.

Looking at Amazon and Wikipedia, the critical reviews of the book were mixed as far as it being full of fantasy cliches and so forth, but they all seem to agree that he's a talented writer.