![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
A couple of days ago I watched the movie Eragon, because one of my nieces was curious what my reaction to it would be. I don't know what she expected from me, but I have to say I was heartily bored with it. It did have some nice scenery. But the story just didn't do anything for me; very nice dressing on a forgettable cheesy story. The Eragon books I understand are written for teens, so I presume if you are young and haven't seen/read much the same story over and over again, you might like it much better than I did.
So what's the plot? Well, the original Star Wars to be blunt. But not told nearly so elegantly. So why was Star Wars a giant hit and Eragon a so-so kiddie adventure? Does the answer tell us anything about why the second series of Star Wars lacked the impact of the first three?
Both Eragon and Star Wars begin with the tried and true Beautiful Princess (TM) fleeing, carrying the last hope of the Rebels(TM) before we fully understand what the rebels are all about. Both of these young ladies are captured with a significant amount of co-lateral damage so we know that the bad guys mean business. In Eragon the princess' companions just ride fast along with her until the time is convenient for them to be disposed of. In Star Wars on the other hand, there enough time to show a hint of personality on the face one of them before Vader's troopers blast them all. It doesn't take much, but the difference in the effect is like night and day. In Star Wars you start thinking about the menace that's coming, in Eragon you start thinking what you would like to have for dinner. At this point both the Beautiful Princesses are captured. In Star Wars the action slides away to some new interesting characters. In Eragon we see the Princess fret briefly.
Next we cut away to the hero working on the farm of the Doomed Uncle (TM). Eragon has a cousin who is introduced apparently just so he can reappear in a later book. Doomed Uncle in both is fearful of the evil folks in power. In Star Wars we get a hint of a real person from the uncle. He expresses the very old, but very understandable, "Kid, you should mind your work and not get involved with the political crazies (on either side)." In Eragon, the swinging 60's Doomed Uncle says, "Do your own thing kid. It's all cool.' Either approach is okay, if you understand that Eragon Uncle is a lot less believable. He runs a fantasy farm where all the work gets done by magic. The farm in Star Wars doesn't look like prosperous farm, so no one is about to question that the Uncle needs the help. Instead of having the Uncle say make your own choices as in Eragon, we have Understanding Aunt in Star Wars, who knows how much the farm needs Luke and knows how much Luke wants to see what's beyond. Eragon, unlike Luke, proclaims he wants to stay at home and farm. Well, there's an interesting guy for you.
In both the plot falls in the hero's lap. In Star Wars, Luke very understandably needs some tools for the farm. So he buys the robots of fate. In Eragon, Beautiful Princess zaps the obviously misnamed Stone into the air and somehow it lands next to the person who has been fated to receive it for a thousand years. The coincidences are pretty wild in both cases, but at least in Star Wars the flow of the action seems like it is perfectly normal. In Eragon it borders on totally unbelievable given that we know nothing of the extent of magic in the Eragon world as yet. This is why believability, which I keep stressing, is important. The more the story sucks you in with action flowing on without jolts and jerks to your understanding, the better the wild and woolly coincidences go over.
Next we meet Crusty Wise Old Man. Both of these guys are retired super soldiers. Over the course of three movies we learn that the CWOM in Star Wars made a major goof which helped send the universe into badness. CWOM in Eragon tells us that his revenge against a traitor, did the same thing to his world. But if you listen closely to what he says, his world was already shot to hell. He just wasn't too satisfied with his revenge afterward, which isn't the same thing, at all. Both involve somewhat justifiable decisions that don't turn out well, because of their rashness. Star Wars was talking about the rashness of youth, the story Eragon was telling people not to seek revenge. Moral for story writers? Don't confuse a moral or political position no matter how dear, with a universal concept. Both have their places in stories. But one is to preach with and the other is to pull the reader/viewer deeper into the story. If your story is already deep you can preach. If not, your viewer/reader turns up his nose and thinks about watching/reading something less pedantic.
Crusty Wise Old Man has to teach the hero something about his powers in both stories. In both the hero has miraculous powers he doesn't know about. In Star Wars we get a taste of a new mythology, in Eragon we get a shop-worn rehash of Names Have Power. Not everyone can dream up a new mythology, but there are ways of redoing an old one better than the ham-fisted presentation in Eragon.
The Princess is tortured, they go rescue her, the CWOM dies nobly so the other's can escape and live on. I have to give Eragon credit for at least mentioning how crazy it is to invade the bad guys' stronghold to rescue the princess. Han Solo says much the same thing. But it was not Luke's intention to enter the Death Star in the first place. He get's a little crazy once inside and after he learns the Princess is there. Eragon having totally missed the lesson about rashness from his CWOM, goes charging off with no knowledge of his enemy what-so-ever. Both heroes are rash, both use a disguise, both need the help of a friend to pull off the rescue. But somehow Luke comes off better. Again the steps matter for believabitly. Luke has the help of someone older and wiser in the beginning and two people (Han and the Princess) later to make things go more smoothly. Eragon basically does it all himself except for a timely bow shot. Tough to believe, tough to think of Eragon as anything but lucky.
The most important villain of both stories is an underling. It's obvious in Eragon and a bit understated in Star Wars. Keeping the head villain hidden in the original Star Wars works well. The other way could have worked, too. But in Eragon he is presented like every big villain in every bad piece of fantasy ever written, totally one dimensional, and interested in nothing but power. You'd think people would learn from Lord of the Rings where we never do get a good glimpse of the real villain; from good horror stories as well. What you can't see is often scarier than what you can. When we finally see the big villain in Star Wars he isn't much better than the one in Eragon, but by that time we've learned to fear him from afar, and have learned he can influence the hero to do things we don't want him to.
There are other parallels, but we don't need to go farther than to mention that in the final fight, both heroes fight private battles in the midst of a larger battle. Eragon has to use what he knows to defeat the bad guy. Luke does the same thing except he isn't fighting the bad guy directly. Both are risking their necks for other people. In both we see others getting killed in the same fight, but as in the beginning of the movies in Star Wars there is a hint of reality about the foks who are dying. In Eragon they are just stick figures.
So one reason why Eragon fails where Star Wars succeeds is that everyone on Luke's side, as represented by the ones we see, has some personality and reason for being. In Eragon the others including the princess are just there to glorify the hero. Conversely in Star Wars: The Phantom Menace, many viewers hated Jar Jar Binks and the accompanying racial stereotype of his kind so much, that I think it detracted from the fact that the Jedi were fighting for something worthwhile. In Attack of the Clones, the ex-Queen (read Beautiful Princess) gets ditzy, the story forgets she's one of Anakin's role models and things go downhill from there. Amadala-Padme loses much of what makes her seem real, drive and independence, and reverts to stick figure status. Much more could be said on the topic of what went wrong with Star Wars series two, but enough for now.
So what's the plot? Well, the original Star Wars to be blunt. But not told nearly so elegantly. So why was Star Wars a giant hit and Eragon a so-so kiddie adventure? Does the answer tell us anything about why the second series of Star Wars lacked the impact of the first three?
Both Eragon and Star Wars begin with the tried and true Beautiful Princess (TM) fleeing, carrying the last hope of the Rebels(TM) before we fully understand what the rebels are all about. Both of these young ladies are captured with a significant amount of co-lateral damage so we know that the bad guys mean business. In Eragon the princess' companions just ride fast along with her until the time is convenient for them to be disposed of. In Star Wars on the other hand, there enough time to show a hint of personality on the face one of them before Vader's troopers blast them all. It doesn't take much, but the difference in the effect is like night and day. In Star Wars you start thinking about the menace that's coming, in Eragon you start thinking what you would like to have for dinner. At this point both the Beautiful Princesses are captured. In Star Wars the action slides away to some new interesting characters. In Eragon we see the Princess fret briefly.
Next we cut away to the hero working on the farm of the Doomed Uncle (TM). Eragon has a cousin who is introduced apparently just so he can reappear in a later book. Doomed Uncle in both is fearful of the evil folks in power. In Star Wars we get a hint of a real person from the uncle. He expresses the very old, but very understandable, "Kid, you should mind your work and not get involved with the political crazies (on either side)." In Eragon, the swinging 60's Doomed Uncle says, "Do your own thing kid. It's all cool.' Either approach is okay, if you understand that Eragon Uncle is a lot less believable. He runs a fantasy farm where all the work gets done by magic. The farm in Star Wars doesn't look like prosperous farm, so no one is about to question that the Uncle needs the help. Instead of having the Uncle say make your own choices as in Eragon, we have Understanding Aunt in Star Wars, who knows how much the farm needs Luke and knows how much Luke wants to see what's beyond. Eragon, unlike Luke, proclaims he wants to stay at home and farm. Well, there's an interesting guy for you.
In both the plot falls in the hero's lap. In Star Wars, Luke very understandably needs some tools for the farm. So he buys the robots of fate. In Eragon, Beautiful Princess zaps the obviously misnamed Stone into the air and somehow it lands next to the person who has been fated to receive it for a thousand years. The coincidences are pretty wild in both cases, but at least in Star Wars the flow of the action seems like it is perfectly normal. In Eragon it borders on totally unbelievable given that we know nothing of the extent of magic in the Eragon world as yet. This is why believability, which I keep stressing, is important. The more the story sucks you in with action flowing on without jolts and jerks to your understanding, the better the wild and woolly coincidences go over.
Next we meet Crusty Wise Old Man. Both of these guys are retired super soldiers. Over the course of three movies we learn that the CWOM in Star Wars made a major goof which helped send the universe into badness. CWOM in Eragon tells us that his revenge against a traitor, did the same thing to his world. But if you listen closely to what he says, his world was already shot to hell. He just wasn't too satisfied with his revenge afterward, which isn't the same thing, at all. Both involve somewhat justifiable decisions that don't turn out well, because of their rashness. Star Wars was talking about the rashness of youth, the story Eragon was telling people not to seek revenge. Moral for story writers? Don't confuse a moral or political position no matter how dear, with a universal concept. Both have their places in stories. But one is to preach with and the other is to pull the reader/viewer deeper into the story. If your story is already deep you can preach. If not, your viewer/reader turns up his nose and thinks about watching/reading something less pedantic.
Crusty Wise Old Man has to teach the hero something about his powers in both stories. In both the hero has miraculous powers he doesn't know about. In Star Wars we get a taste of a new mythology, in Eragon we get a shop-worn rehash of Names Have Power. Not everyone can dream up a new mythology, but there are ways of redoing an old one better than the ham-fisted presentation in Eragon.
The Princess is tortured, they go rescue her, the CWOM dies nobly so the other's can escape and live on. I have to give Eragon credit for at least mentioning how crazy it is to invade the bad guys' stronghold to rescue the princess. Han Solo says much the same thing. But it was not Luke's intention to enter the Death Star in the first place. He get's a little crazy once inside and after he learns the Princess is there. Eragon having totally missed the lesson about rashness from his CWOM, goes charging off with no knowledge of his enemy what-so-ever. Both heroes are rash, both use a disguise, both need the help of a friend to pull off the rescue. But somehow Luke comes off better. Again the steps matter for believabitly. Luke has the help of someone older and wiser in the beginning and two people (Han and the Princess) later to make things go more smoothly. Eragon basically does it all himself except for a timely bow shot. Tough to believe, tough to think of Eragon as anything but lucky.
The most important villain of both stories is an underling. It's obvious in Eragon and a bit understated in Star Wars. Keeping the head villain hidden in the original Star Wars works well. The other way could have worked, too. But in Eragon he is presented like every big villain in every bad piece of fantasy ever written, totally one dimensional, and interested in nothing but power. You'd think people would learn from Lord of the Rings where we never do get a good glimpse of the real villain; from good horror stories as well. What you can't see is often scarier than what you can. When we finally see the big villain in Star Wars he isn't much better than the one in Eragon, but by that time we've learned to fear him from afar, and have learned he can influence the hero to do things we don't want him to.
There are other parallels, but we don't need to go farther than to mention that in the final fight, both heroes fight private battles in the midst of a larger battle. Eragon has to use what he knows to defeat the bad guy. Luke does the same thing except he isn't fighting the bad guy directly. Both are risking their necks for other people. In both we see others getting killed in the same fight, but as in the beginning of the movies in Star Wars there is a hint of reality about the foks who are dying. In Eragon they are just stick figures.
So one reason why Eragon fails where Star Wars succeeds is that everyone on Luke's side, as represented by the ones we see, has some personality and reason for being. In Eragon the others including the princess are just there to glorify the hero. Conversely in Star Wars: The Phantom Menace, many viewers hated Jar Jar Binks and the accompanying racial stereotype of his kind so much, that I think it detracted from the fact that the Jedi were fighting for something worthwhile. In Attack of the Clones, the ex-Queen (read Beautiful Princess) gets ditzy, the story forgets she's one of Anakin's role models and things go downhill from there. Amadala-Padme loses much of what makes her seem real, drive and independence, and reverts to stick figure status. Much more could be said on the topic of what went wrong with Star Wars series two, but enough for now.