Why didn't he give it to Peter Jackson. Nothing happened, there is no movie, please proceed with your day.. I agree, its like the avatar movie for avatards and the DBZ movie for DBZ fans, why cant people just be content with awesome series/books instead of making crap the Movie is a lie
Upload
Login or register
Hide Comments
Leave a comment Refresh Comments (73)
[ 73 comments ]
> hey anon, wanna give your opinion?
asd
User avatar #2 - voltkills
Reply +16 123456789123345869
(02/18/2013) [-]
I agree, its like the avatar movie for avatards and the DBZ movie for DBZ fans, why cant people just be content with awesome series/books instead of making crappy movies.
User avatar #9 to #2 - jjrod
Reply -1 123456789123345869
(02/19/2013) [-]
Did you hear about the new DBZ movie? It's looks badass!
User avatar #4 to #2 - kikkelikeiju
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(02/18/2013) [-]
Amen.
User avatar #51 to #2 - vileghas
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(02/19/2013) [-]
Well, there are some awesome movie adaptions aswell.. So I don't mind them trying.. Not every film can be awesome like LOTR or Harry Potter (and many others)
#75 to #51 - anon id: bbecdce0
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(02/23/2013) [-]
Alien escape in 3 D dbz movie? Saw it..
#61 to #51 - swiftykidd **User deleted account**
-1 123456789123345869
has deleted their comment [-]
#53 to #2 - pjotor
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(02/19/2013) [-]
What Avatar movie?
What Avatar movie?
User avatar #3 to #2 - roderick
Reply +2 123456789123345869
(02/18/2013) [-]
I know right?
User avatar #28 - xzynth
Reply +13 123456789123345869
(02/19/2013) [-]
read the books, watched the movie.
loved the books, and that ****** movie was **** and concerous I got phiscally ill and died.

User avatar #31 to #28 - heliosnova
Reply -2 123456789123345869
(02/19/2013) [-]
Now, now, the movie wasn't total ****...

Eragon's studded leather armor was pretty cool

Yeah... that's all I've got
#32 to #31 - fukkenchaos
Reply -2 123456789123345869
(02/19/2013) [-]
And they made Saphira cute as hell when she was little.
User avatar #62 to #32 - BerryLicious
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(02/19/2013) [-]
Dude. She had feathers. Dragons are not birds.
#12 - deletedmyaccount
Reply +13 123456789123345869
(02/19/2013) [-]
I love how they make Saphira grow up in the movie.

She flies through a storm cloud. DONE.

It wasn't even clear whether she LITERALLY GREW UP in that time, or if it was supposed to be a different day.
User avatar #10 - tyrannis
Reply +7 123456789123345869
(02/19/2013) [-]
My most hated thing about this whole situation is that if I try to tell my friends how good the books were, they're put off by how bad the movie was.
#30 - foromil
Reply +6 123456789123345869
(02/19/2013) [-]
Wait... he could've given that movie to Peter Jackson?
Wait... he could've given that movie to Peter Jackson?
User avatar #70 to #30 - lelouchlamperouge [OP]
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(02/19/2013) [-]
I'm not sure but I think if Jackson did what he had with the LOTR series it would have turned out magnificently. I've attended a few of Paolini's book signings and he has stated how much he abhors the movie which makes most people laugh
User avatar #35 to #30 - pavwo
Reply +2 123456789123345869
(02/19/2013) [-]
Paolini had nothing to do with the movie. at least so i heard.
User avatar #22 - Dakafal
Reply +6 123456789123345869
(02/19/2013) [-]
I reread the whole series again a few months ago. To be honest, Paolini's writing was pretty poor in Eragon. Now, that said, you can definitely see him developing as an author with every chapter, and his writing got much better as the series progressed. And before anyone gets butthurt, I am a fan of the books and am not putting them down.
User avatar #23 to #22 - ThePrototank
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(02/19/2013) [-]
Oddly enough I do have to agree, the story was still awesome in the first one but his writing did get better as it went on. Do bad the movie was one of the worst flogging of a dead horse to hit the silver screen
User avatar #25 to #23 - Dakafal
Reply +2 123456789123345869
(02/19/2013) [-]
I don't even understand the logic behind the movie. Let's take this great story, and modify it to the point to where we literally could not make a sequel and still say it's based off the same book series. Then, we'll throw in some ****** acting, really confusing scene sequences, and make sure to completely ignore the author.

But seriously, why is it so hard to make film adaptations, to anything? It seems like it would be the simplest thing in the world. All you would have to do is say "script writers, copy the dialogue from the book, costume designers, work with the author and use the book for reference, casting directors, find actors that match the descriptions given by the book, and let's go." why is that so hard? M. Night Shyamolfalfjogal has even less of an excuse with Avatar. I mean he can already see what everything is supposed to look like. There is already a script. Just tell your staff to make everything look just like the cartoon. You don't even need a decent director to do that. "I" could do that.

/rant
User avatar #71 to #25 - lelouchlamperouge [OP]
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(02/19/2013) [-]
I'm disappointined by the fact it wasn't even an honest attempt at recreating the story. Peter Jackson didn't completely follow LOTR, he took the story and created his own image but kept true to the core details. That's what a successful book to movie adaptation is supposed to be, the producers take on a work while maintaining true to it but making it their own
User avatar #43 to #25 - gratrunka
Reply -1 123456789123345869
(02/19/2013) [-]
Well there are many problems with a book to movie idea:

The first problem is length: The book is too long for the movie. So, the director cuts it down a bit, removes a few scenes.

But it's still too long, yet if you cut it down anymore, it wont make any sense. So, what the director does, is edit some of the lesser scenes, makes them shorter, crams all the story and action of 100 pages into a 10 minute block.

But then the director realizes his budget is too small for such a blockbuster, and people are refusing to fund him unless he makes cuts. So, what he does is edit some of the costumes, say; instead of making people bird-like creatures he makes them a buzzing swarm. He can do buzzing swarms.

But then, when he thinks its all well and done, there comes another problem. Casting. His casting staff can not find the perfect person to match the story, or the character, so mr director has to compensate. The old guy isn't as old as he's meant to be, the blond guys a bit douche looking.

Finally, when the movie comes out of the editing room, past the test viewers, past the heads of the production companies who **** with the movie a bit more in an effort to make more money, it looks nothing like the book.
It looks horrible.
It looks dead. It should be dead

yet everybody blames Mr director, who was merely doing what was necessary. Some books don't work as movies.
User avatar #26 to #22 - Ankou
Reply +5 123456789123345869
(02/19/2013) [-]
Maybe cause he wrote it when he was 15
#48 - froggets
Reply +5 123456789123345869
(02/19/2013) [-]
I can do it for you guys! I very good director with great taste of how to do stuff with thing with lenses... I also can do back flips underwater
#52 to #48 - Deathscar
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(02/19/2013) [-]
And I love panning the camera across the scene! Even if its the same scene. Multiple. Times. In a row.
#18 - Mebeshe
Reply +5 123456789123345869
(02/19/2013) [-]
The best part about the movie was the actor who played Murtagh was much cuter then the one in my head. I pictured someone looking like a 6'6" Gilmi.
The best part about the movie was the actor who played Murtagh was much cuter then the one in my head. I pictured someone looking like a 6'6" Gilmi.
User avatar #72 to #18 - lelouchlamperouge [OP]
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(02/19/2013) [-]
hahaha, I was pleased too but I had always imagined him as a Prince of Persia looking character, I can't even remember how he looks in the movie know but I remember that was one of the things I wasn't really disappointed by
User avatar #5 - acidjunk
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(02/18/2013) [-]
TBH i liked it, but i didnt read the book.. thank god i didnt, everyone seems to hate it after the book :D
#19 to #5 - anon id: 9187cd30
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(02/19/2013) [-]
It's not even some snobby, "Oh, you were different from the books in these 4 scenes..." type of stuff.

If you renamed the characters, no one would even be able to tell what that horrible movie was supposed to be. They gutted the entire story.

Think of a song you like. Now replace all the instruments with vuvuzelas and tubas, accompanied by the harmonious vocals of a feral monkey.

That different.
User avatar #73 to #19 - lelouchlamperouge [OP]
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(02/19/2013) [-]
I loved his comment so much I made a post about it on instagram, I just wish you had an account so I could give credit where credit is due
User avatar #67 to #19 - Crusader
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(02/19/2013) [-]
It was pretty similar, the reason most people didn't like it is because it told that story, but cut out a lot.

Change the names of stuff and that general idea of a story can be applied to lots of stories, Star Wars, LotR, Harry Potter, etc.
#50 to #19 - dafunkad
Reply -1 123456789123345869
(02/19/2013) [-]
#6 to #5 - pulpunderground
Reply +4 123456789123345869
(02/19/2013) [-]
The movie. Sucked. ASS.
#7 to #6 - acidjunk
Reply +2 123456789123345869
(02/19/2013) [-]
I'll just go with this and hope i get some green thumbs.
User avatar #14 to #5 - Crusader
Reply +4 123456789123345869
(02/19/2013) [-]
They cut out
Teirm
Yazuac
Most of the battle of Farthen Dur
The twins
Job
The Ra'Zac (those were ******* abortions that were sent out)
Saphira growing up
Most of the history of the series
****** up Gilead
Missed Dras leona

They kept like 10% of the book, and made it so they can't have any actual sequels.
User avatar #29 to #14 - doctadoc
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(02/19/2013) [-]
Roran going to the Army instead of the Mill
User avatar #24 to #14 - SuperBobbis
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(02/19/2013) [-]
APPARENTLY, I read somewhere ages ago, the Twins WERE in there. But I can't pick them out at all.
User avatar #54 to #14 - ohemgeezus
Reply -1 123456789123345869
(02/19/2013) [-]
Did you not even watch the movie?
The twins were in it, Saphira grew up, Brom told the main portion of the history, and Gil'ead did get a bit torn up. As for the length of stuff they missed(battle of farthen dur) they can't do a 7 hour movie just to go by the entirety of the book.
User avatar #66 to #54 - Crusader
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(02/19/2013) [-]
1 - The twins were in it, but not as much as they should have been
2 - Saphira grew up in like 30 seconds instead of showing a growing relationship, i realize that if anything was cut, that needed to be
3 - All it said about the history is
- Big fight
- Galbatorix won it
- Galbatorix lost his dragon
It barely mentions anything about the elves and stuff
4 - They ****** up Gil'ead, there is no way around that. Eragon was supposed to be tortured, Murtagh was supposed to attack Durza and Brom was already dead by that point in the story, but no, they had Brom alive and killed there instead of by the Ra'Zac outside of dras-leona like he was in the book.

I realize that they couldn't make a 7 hour movie, but they shouldn't have cut it down to an hour and a half, they could have fit in almost everything if they had bumped it up to 2 and a half or even 3 hours
Look at the Lord of the Rings movies, they are each about 3 hours long, and most people love them because they actually tell a story rather than that abortion of an Eragon movie that is basically a bunch of fight scene and a love story slapped together to appeal to a bunch of kids.
User avatar #68 to #66 - ohemgeezus
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(02/19/2013) [-]
I agree completely, they ruined what could've been an amazing movie. They made Galb look like a whinny little boy instead of the great antagonist he was in the books.
User avatar #11 to #5 - ktbmnf
Reply +5 123456789123345869
(02/19/2013) [-]
if you read the book, you will want to **** all over the movie, like the movie did to the book.
User avatar #37 - jumytime
Reply +4 123456789123345869
(02/19/2013) [-]
I hated the movie. Arya wasn't an elf, she needed pointy ears. Durza didn't have that shadow dragon thing. Brom didn't die because of Durza, he died by the Ra'zac, and Angela wasn't in Yazuac, and the 2 Urgals attacked in an alleyway, and Eragon used Bringr. So many more things.
User avatar #38 to #37 - shunkahawolf
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(02/19/2013) [-]
they killed the ra'zac right away, they never shattered the star sapphire, they never even met the dwarves.
User avatar #39 to #38 - jumytime
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(02/19/2013) [-]
Worst part about it was Galbatorix says "I am very sad without my stone." WHAT THE FAK
User avatar #40 to #39 - shunkahawolf
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(02/19/2013) [-]
i know DX its a ******* egg not a stone...tho adam malkovich was an excellent choice for the role
User avatar #41 to #40 - jumytime
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(02/19/2013) [-]
No, they got Galbatorix wrong. OH! They didn't bury Brom right.
User avatar #42 to #41 - shunkahawolf
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(02/19/2013) [-]
actually they did bury him and then sapphira did her magic and turned his tomb into diamond thats the one part they got right but what do you mean the got galby wrong?
User avatar #69 to #42 - jumytime
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(02/19/2013) [-]
Galby had black hair and tan skin in the book. Plus, they did bury Brom wrong, It was a pit (that Eragon used magic to make), but Saphira did turn it into diamond. Also, they didn't put the twins in, neither do I think Murtagh was in it. Can't remember.
User avatar #74 to #69 - shunkahawolf
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(02/20/2013) [-]
murtagh was in there and if you watched the deleted scenes the twins are in there but arya never explains about true names and stuff like that
User avatar #55 to #37 - crazylance
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(02/19/2013) [-]
Before I go on wondering who all those guys are, might I ask what's the book you're talking about ? I'm having problems understanding from the post itself.
#58 to #55 - fuckyosixtyminutes
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(02/19/2013) [-]
I think he's talking about the book Eragon. As in the one that's pictured in the content? All the characters he named in this comment come from that book.
User avatar #59 to #58 - crazylance
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(02/19/2013) [-]
Yep, googled it now, 'tis indeed the name of the book.