The Instigator
Korashk
Pro (for)
Winning
12 Points
The Contender
trendem
Con (against)
Losing
0 Points

The Eragon Movie Butchered the Book

Do you like this debate?NoYes+1
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 2 votes the winner is...
Korashk
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 2/15/2010 Category: Entertainment
Updated: 7 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 7,491 times Debate No: 11197
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (26)
Votes (2)

 

Korashk

Pro

Full Resolution: The movie Eragon should have followed the book more closely, been longer, and been rated PG-13 instead of PG.

Contention 1:
Too much of the book was cut/edited from the movie to make it appeal to a younger audience.

The book Eragon was a fairly violent piece of literature. A few examples of the violence not depicted in the movie are:
*Eragon and Brom visit the town of Yazuac only to find all of its people slaughtered by Urgals. This is also the first instance in the book where Eragon uses magic [1].
*The filmmakers cut out the portion of the book where Eragon and Murtagh travel through the desert. On this trip they encounter slavers and proceed to trounce them in a fight. The lead slaver is defeated by Eragon and is then given the option of running away when Murtagh chops his head off rather than keep him as a hostage as Eragon would have. This part of the book illustrates Eragon's innocent character and introduces Murtagh's pragmatic one
*While this is not specifically violence in the book there are races of creatures called Urgals and Kull. In the movie these are just depicted as large men whereas in the book they are described as bipedal pig-like creatures [3]. This was most likely done to tone down the scariness factor.

Contention 2
The elves didn't even have pointed ears [4]

This may not be that big of a deal story-wise, but how can you make a movie with elves in it and not give them pointed ears. It even says in the book that their ears are pointed [5].

Contention 3
Eragon does not suffer a terrible injury at the end of the movie like he did in the book [6]

At the conclusion of the book Eragon receives a very bad wound from the character Durza. This would became a very important part of the second book and in fact encompasses about half of the book. It was because of this would that Eragon traveled to the land of the elves to be magically healed [7]. It is because of this healing that Eragon not only fully recovered from his wound, but he is partially transformed into an elf which gives him enhanced physical attributes. He would then proceed to use these attributes to better fight his enemies.

As a final point I will say that the movie only had a runtime of 104 minutes. The book was 497 pages long. This book was longer than The Lord of the Rings but had a runtime of almost half of what those movies had.

It is for these reasons that the resolution is affirmed.

[1] http://www.shurtugal.com...
[2] Eragon by Christopher Paolini, hardcover version page 351
[3] http://www.shurtugal.com...
[4] http://movies.mainetoday.com...
[5] http://en.wikipedia.org...(character)#Appearance_and_Characteristics
[6] http://www.shurtugal.com...(Movie)#Eragon
[7] http://en.wikipedia.org...
trendem

Con

"Full Resolution: The movie Eragon should have followed the book more closely, been longer, and been rated PG-13 instead of PG."

This is very unclear. Are you arguing that the "movie should have followed the book more closely" in order to (a) be a good movie? (b) or to avoid doing discredit to the book?

Since you haven't specified it, I'm going to assume (a).
=======================

Contention 1: Too much of the book was cut/edited from the movie to make it appeal to a younger audience.
Having less violence =/= being a bad movie.

Contention 2:The elves didn't have pointed ears.
The elves didn't have pointy ears? Oh.
My.
God.
Immaterial detail.

Contention 3: Eragon did not suffer a terrible injury at the end of the movie.
To argue that an omission in this movie MIGHT have a harmful impact in later movies is baseless speculation. The lack of an injury doesn't worsen THIS movie significantly, and in the NEXT movie, who knows, the producer might come up with a twist that will be better than the one in the book...

==============

If you're arguing from a (b) standpoint, you need to make your arguments much, much more clearer.
Debate Round No. 1
Korashk

Pro

I apologize for the confusing resolution. Between the title of the debate and the full resolution I thought I made my intent clear.

Definitions:
Affront - to insult especially to the face by behavior or language. http://www.merriam-webster.com...

This debate was not intended to be about whether or not the movie was a good one or not. From an objective standpoint if I had seen the movie without reading the book I likely would have enjoyed it. This debate is more about the fact that so much was changed from book to movie and the movie therefore affronts the book.

It is actually my personal opinion that the movie should not even have been called Eragon because of the glaring and numerous dissimilarities.

These dissimilarities include not only all of the points mentioned in the book but there are also many, many more. If my opponent has read the Eragon book and seen the movie then he can attest to the truth of the following descriptions of both book and movie, if he hasn't then in the last round I will provide a source for all of them.

More important, and not so important, differences:

*In the book Eragon hatches Saphira from an egg and then spends the next few months raising her and bonding with her while in the movie she hatches, flies into the air, and lands a full grown dragon. This bonding sequence is important because it shows how Eragon and Saphira gained the level of trust that they have in the movie.
*In the movie the Ra'zac are more like beasts than they are sentient creatures. Eragon and Brom also kill them in the movie which again hinders any plans for a sequel as the Ra'zac are important to it's plot.
*Other than events there are many people important to the plot of the sequel books that are not even included in the movies. The include following excluded characters make it literally impossible for a sequel to be accurately made unless they are awkwardly introduced:
- Katrina, Roran's wife
- Orik, Eragon's dwarf friend
- Jeod, Brom's merchant friend
- Helen, Jeod's wife
- Elva, a girl Eragon accidentally curses
- Solembum, a werecat
*Saphira breathing fire was a big deal in the book. In fact she didn't do it even once until it was used in saving Eragon's life near the book's end. The fire was not an important portion of the movie.
*Perhaps the most downplayed element of the book was the character of Brom. In the book Brom was a very important character. He was Eragon's mentor and only friend for a majority of the book. They spend months together training and Brom teaches Eragon everything he knows about being a Rider, magic, and swordplay. He does this so well that Eragon becomes one of the most powerful humans in the world when using magic and one of the most skilled swordsmen. However in the movie Brom's personal relationship with Eragon is greatly downplayed and not nearly as much is taught.

All of these differences, and those listed in round 1 mean that the director took way, way, too many creative liberties with his screenplay that affronts the book and that story-accurate sequels to this movie can not be made.

I look forward to my opponent's response.
trendem

Con

trendem forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 2
Korashk

Pro

That is unfortunate. Since I believe that my intentions for this debate were clear based on the title of the debate, the debates resolotion, and my clarification in round two and my opponent has provided no arguments to support this resolution. With this being said he can still argue his side in this round but I will not have the chance to refute them. For this reason I strongly urge a Pro vote.
trendem

Con

trendem forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
26 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by Korashk 7 years ago
Korashk
Ya, if you haven't seen the movie and liked the book do not see the movie. It completely butchered the book.
Posted by Frish 7 years ago
Frish
Korashk, in response to most of your points, I am glad to see that a sequel could not easily be made, since, as an Eragon book fan, I don't think I could stand the shame of another eye-wateringly bad movie.
Posted by Korashk 7 years ago
Korashk
I apologize for taking so much time to respond. I'm in 3 debates right now and can't gt to this one until tommorow afternoon.
Posted by Kinesis 7 years ago
Kinesis
Yeah, you're going to own this debate Korashk.
Posted by Korashk 7 years ago
Korashk
That was really more of a joke contention but really. Not giving the freaking elves pointed ears is just plain lazy.
Posted by Kinesis 7 years ago
Kinesis
'The elves didn't have pointy ears? Oh.
My.
God.'

Win.
Posted by manga_rocks123456789 7 years ago
manga_rocks123456789
the eragon book was good, the movie bad
Posted by Puck 7 years ago
Puck
Eh not so much in this case, where there is a lot of literary techniques to show how it is either good or bad either way. Still, up to you.
Posted by Korashk 7 years ago
Korashk
I would, but I'm bad at debating on opinions because of the fact that they're opinions.
Posted by Puck 7 years ago
Puck
Just change it to, the Eragon book is awesome, and I'll take it. :P
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by I-am-a-panda 7 years ago
I-am-a-panda
KorashktrendemTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:60 
Vote Placed by Korashk 7 years ago
Korashk
KorashktrendemTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:60