Write your own review!
Clare T.
Flaws I found in Eragon
I would say that Eragon has some potential if put in the hands of a more mature writer, but some of dialouge is immature and the ancient language which Eragon is learning is downright idiotic. His characters are not complex or deep and the developing romance between Arya and Eragon is out place with the close mental link sharing of pain ect. of Saphira and Eragon. Not to mention he makes Eragon 15 in the begining of the book and 16 at the end, and Paolini is not clear on Arya's age, but one gets the impression that she's in her 20's or early 30's, hardly compatable with a teenager. Murtagh is 18 and has the temprament of someone in their late 20's or early 30's as well. He overdoes the magical powers of the elves, the battles are dissapointing. The urgals are just another name for goblins with horns, and the kull elite are just another name for hybrids like the Uruk-Hai from the lord of the rings. Eragon is really just another lukewarm fantasy book that no one will remember in 10 yrs, unlike the lord of the rings which has been remembered with fervour since 1954.
Mark
The plot, with it's many holes, wasn't all that bad. The description I actually liked, in some places. I have to admire the worldbuilding that was done.
But, the writing itself made me wanted to scream in places, and the dialogue was bad. When all is said and done, this book only barely gets a 2.
quote: "Other then the fact that Eragon has elves and dwarves in it, it is nothing like LOTR and especially not Harry Potter."
Yeah, besides the fact that Eragon has lotr elves and dwarves and names and story elements and places and characters in it... its really a lot different. Jeff, I see your point that Harry potter not aparently evident in Paolini's book. But the fact is, Lord of The Rings was obviously copied - yes copied for many ideas as well as word for word names. Tolkien's writing does not deserve to be cut off and hacked together with such crude writing (by comparison) that is Eragon, it just makes the book a bad read for anyone who has read lotr.
But I'd like to say that I am hopefull that the next book will not have such blatent copying and Paolini's writing will improve.
dude
I agree with johny west on this one.
Come on guys, read more books! You just cant compare lotr with Eragon, its like comparing celery to steak (or something like that).
I've seen a lot of *5* reviews that compliment Eragon's moving plot. Well sure the plot moves fast but its not the speed that counts, its the quality. Am I right? Besides, If you want a quick read at least go for a good quick read. Try Ender's Game, it's ten times better that Eragon.
Reading it anyway
I am currently reading "Eragon" and am a little more than 100 pages from the ending.
I have yet to come across a character that isn't flat or a walking cliche. Brom-wise old man who is occationaly cranky. Eragon-naive lad good at hunting and likes dragons. Murtagh- full of angst and had a bad childhood. There is very little to those characters outside of the category they've been put in. I have spent most of my reading barly caring what happens to the characters. Though most of the chase and fight scences I was left with a feeling of "can we please come to a part with some actual character development soon?" It's too obvious who is allowed to die and who isn't.
The method of communication with dragons is ripped from the Pern series and the plot looks alot like Star Wars (the original 1st movie). Naive hero, friend with a tainted past, wise mentor who dies, father figure who isn't his father dying, 'mysterious' biological origins, the last hope of the rebels. I mean heck, he even moves things with his mind even.
The job of creating the world around the story is a slash and run job at best. The only detail there are on the general culture is in one city. In all other places visited aparently this is a world with out religion or holidays.
There are good elements to the story thus far, but I'm mainly bothering to continue out of hope it will improve.
someone again
I felt cheated. THis was a mishmash of LOTR, Dragonriders of Pern, and whatever else the untalented hack who cobbled together this mess could think of. Anyone who liked it is probably too young to have read the better books it was taken from. They say imitation is the sincerest form of flattery but give me a break!
Mark
I thought Eragon was horrible. Granted, it has some things good about it – some of the descriptions are fairly good, and the plot wasn’t all that bad – but the dialogue was ghastly, and about 50% of all the characters, all the descriptions, and all the plot was, as well.
Someone
Suilad! I am 14. I think that this book was horrible. I concur however that as a first attempt, Paolini's book was pretty good. But it bothers me because there are so many inconsistencies. He's a horrible writer(I mean I can write better than he can), but the plot is interesting. It'd be a better book if a more experienced writer wrote it. I think he did take some things from other fantasy works, not enough however to merit him the title of copyer. Being a writer myself, I agree with what someone said about names being similar because of working with similar languages, as I have found that evident in my writing, particularily concerning Norse, Celtic, and Anglo lanuages. I think younger readers will enjoy it but I certainly didn't. I couldn't really get into the story because of the lack of description and emotion in it. Indeed I do not think at all that Eragon compares with any of Tolkien's, Edding's, Rowling's, or Lloyd Alexander's works, but It's a good start for a young writer. Better luck next time, Paolini. Namariae.
Mansca!
Bjorn!
Grrrr...
.png)
