Which franchise did Hollywood ruin more? Twilight or Eragon?

[sallene]

Is it possible to ruin a mormon's book about repressed sexuality any more than the concept already makes it a terrible topic to make a book series based off of?

 

[G1eet]

No. No, no, no No, NO, no no.

Neither was 'charming' or 'well written.'

They were both shitty books with shitty ideas written by shitty authors. Shitty.

Don't comment if you don't like the books.

 

[Kasawd]

I actually found myself enjoying Eragon(the book) and could not believe some of the things they did in the movie(Kill the Razac?!).

Twilight, however is just one big shitstorm. I even have a friend whose opinion on literature I value as closely as my own say that twilight is a good read(Mercifully, she admits how horrible the writing is and doesnt suggest it to someone who wants to read, as she puts it, real books).

Then again, this is coming from someone who reads alot of old literature like Tolstoy and Dostoevsky.

 

[TheTygerfire]

Both Twilight and Eragon had humble beginnings as charming, well written, and fairly successful fantasy novels.

AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAAAAA, good one!

Oh, sorry, you were serious? :\

 

[DrWilhelm]

Both Eragon and Twilight are spectular wastes of good paper written by talentless hacks with over-inflated egos. There was honestly nothing for Hollywood to ruin.

That said, I appreciate the author's intent in Eragon more (and he was, what, 17 when he wrote it)

Also, please don't say that Paolini being young excuses him. There are plenty of young aspiring authors who could write something as good as Eragon, but it doesn't mean that they should get published, and it certainly doesn't excuse Eragon's sequels.

 

[Riding on Thermals]

1. tsk, it happens.

2. and again, i agree. the basis of vampires, as creatures of the night, was completely demolished by her brilliant idea to make them sparkle. ridiculous. i don't think anyone but her thought that was a good idea. though you don't think she studied them? i would have to assume she's read some vampire literature for her to have any knowledge of them, and rather than stick to the general principle of the vampire, she decided to change it. why? who knows.

3. ugh, feminists. *gags* i think that perhaps her fame has gotten to her head? i suppose she thinks since she's made millions she had the right to criticize real writers, who've managed to develop fully dimensional relationships / romance, whatever. and yes, i do understand your point, mon ami.

and it's not really that off topic, we're simply discussing the finer points of the subject at hand.

though i will apologize to the fellow escapists who might be rolling their eyes at this discussion.

What she said in an interview was that she couldn't compare her work to other vampire stories out there -- to Anne Rice's or "the few that I've read." Her implication was that she didn't even bother to read Rice. In a different interview she said she didn't consider whether her vampires were either too close or too far from canon vampires until she was already published. So, yes, apparently she has read a bit but just enough to know there's something to do with blood and immortality, but apparently missed the part about sunlight and garlic and crucifixes. But honestly, not reading Rice before you write about vampires is like not reading Tolkien before writing about elves.

I don't want to speculate at the thoughts of Stephanie Meyer, but I couldn't believe some of the things I've read about her criticisms of other writers. Now this obviously has nothing to do with Twilight, but it surely characterizes Meyer and is distressing that someone with an English degree can seem to totally miss the point of some famous literature.

On an unrelated note: Meyer has cited Orson Scott Card's work as inspiration for her own, as well as some music by Muse. Since I loved Ender's Game when I was a kid, and would give my left arm to see Muse this is somewhat disturbing...

 

[mendokusai]

Also, please don't say that Paolini being young excuses him. There are plenty of young aspiring authors who could write something as good as Eragon, but it doesn't mean that they should get published, and it certainly doesn't excuse Eragon's sequels.

Fair enough. But compared to Stephenie Mayer, his work is more, um, excusable?

 

[SecretTacoNinja]

...Twlight could be made worse...?

I think they made a mess of Harry Potter, well, the director of the last one made a mess of it. I mean why the fuck did they let people break into the Room of Requirement? That's going to come back and bite them in the ass...

 

[alcherion]

Neither were destroyed as much as The Dark is Rising by Susan Cooper, turned from a charming series of English books that were well paced and well-written to the most godawful stereotypical American bull, even Christopher Eccleston couldn't save that monstrosity.
Honourable mention also goes to The Golden Compass, although that was somewhat salvaged by Ian Mckellan and Christopher Lee.

 

[AmrasCalmacil]

Personally, this thread can be seen as a bit of a waste of time. For you see, it's nearly impossible to ruin something that was crap from the get-go.

Eragon, in addition to the obvious copying a more familiar story involving Wookies and X-wings, features a protagonist completely unlikable and a sense of morality that frankly rivals Richard Rahl in how terrifying it is. While especially apparent in the third book, Eragon's unsympathetic nature was still clear to me by the end of the first book, where I was wondering when Saphira would realize how whiny he was and eat him before joining up with Murtagh.

Thank god someone said this before I had to. How could Hollywood ruin these franchises when they were dead before they hit the ground?

 

[Grassassassin]

You've got it all backwards. Twilight ruined Hollywood.

hahah... and this ^

I second that!

Eragon had a humble beginning as a DECENT and fairly successful fantasy novel.

Fixed it.

We can just pretend like Twilight was never written or adapted.

 

[Charley]

Twilight is the sole cause of the Inuyasha Yaoi fanfic drought. Fact.

So in a strange way, I'm grateful that someone had the common sense to mobilise emo girls into the movie theaters.

 

[Fenixhart]

Both Twilight and Eragon had humble beginnings as charming, well written, and fairly successful fantasy novels.

You're joking, right? Eragon is one of the few books I've read that I found to be so bad that reading it was literally painful.

the kid ripped off of star wars & lord of the rings.
it's interesting to watch the movie after that fact has been pointed out.

gave me a laugh, for sure.

Oh he did far worse than that.

My friend would go on rampant tirades on just how many things Paloni stitched together or outright copied. I can't recall any off-hand but the list was rather impressive...

..oh, and he also apparetnly can't use adjectives to save his life. "Raven Billows" and "Beguiling Drums," seriously?

 

[GrinningManiac]

I like to think Twilight screenplay was written by people just like us, who had gone under cover years ago when the book was released, slowly gaining control of whatever script was under wraps for the film adaptation, taking it over at the last second and making it as bad as it could possibly be so as to ward off people with hope of redemption.

God bless those unsung heroes "salute"

 

[DarkFenix]

I read both and eragon was much better.
with twilight I kept telling myself it'll get better big fight at the end lots dead and cain will come back with all the antidiluvians and smite them for being sparkly...but they never came....they never came *huddles in corner*

 

[teutonicman]

I think you diserve some kind of medal for using Twilight and well-written in the same sentence. However I have not seen Twilight, just parts of the fight scenes and the glitter scene. So I'm going to have to go with Eragon.

 

[Queen Michael]

The way I see it, Eragon and Twilight are the kind of books which are successful when they are fairly new, because being new adds relevance, but after a few years pass people stop caring because there are other writers who have written new books which are just as good and newer.

 

[Riding on Thermals]

The way I see it, Eragon and Twilight are the kind of books which are successful when they are fairly new, because being new adds relevance, but after a few years pass people stop caring because there are other writers who have written new books which are just as good and newer.

The problem is, both series are getting movie deals. If they were left as books there would stay far less relevant and fade into the background like they ought to. Now there's more proof that they existed.

 

[Rajin Cajun]

Starship Troopers was easily more destroyed then any. I mean the director only read One Chapter of the book and said, "Fuck it I'm doing the movie I wanted to do originally but call it Starship Troopers." Damn Dutchmen.

Of the two I would say Eragon though.

 

[Tartarga]

i'd say eragon was much better than twilight because to me twilight had no fucking point just a bunch of random story elements thrown together to make stupid vampire popycock