--- title: "Eragon" year: 2006 kind: "film" canonical: "https://film.one/film/eragon" fi1m_id: "eragon" imdb_id: "tt0449010" tmdb_id: 2486 wikidata_id: "Q239296" fi1m_score: 35 critics_score: 33 critics_reviews: 8 published: "2026-10-05T04:17:23.895094+00:00" updated: "2026-10-05T04:17:32.245248+00:00" region: "TH" licence: "© Fi1m Ltd. Written by AI under a human editor; checked against sources before publication. Quote with attribution and a link to the canonical URL." --- # Eragon (2006) Directed by Stefen Fangmeier · 1h 44m · Fantasy, Action, Adventure, Family ## Identity Eragon - **Canonical:** https://film.one/film/eragon - **Type:** Film - **Fi1m ID:** eragon - **IMDb ID:** tt0449010 - **TMDB ID:** 2486 - **Wikidata ID:** Q239296 - **Same entity:** https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0449010/, https://www.themoviedb.org/movie/2486, https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q239296 **Fi1m score: 35** · Critics 33 from 8 reviews *In a sentence:* Jeremy Irons seems to have brought a sense of humour to the wrong dragon film > Jeremy Irons brings welcome dryness to a fantasy that hurries through its characters and still feels slow. *Eragon* offers some competent spectacle, but too little reason to care what happens to anyone. ## Synopsis As darkness falls, the last dragon chooses its rider. Eragon (Ed Speleers), Brom (Jeremy Irons) and Arya (Sienna Guillory) feature in this fantasy adventure adapted from Christopher Paolini’s novel. John Malkovich plays King Galbatorix, with Robert Carlyle as Durza and Rachel Weisz as the voice of Saphira. Eragon’s story also includes Murtagh (Garrett Hedlund), Uncle Garrow (Alun Armstrong) and Roran (Chris Egan). It is a family adventure built around a dragon and its rider, with Eragon at the centre of the action. ## Review Stefen Fangmeier’s *Eragon* is a poor fantasy adventure that gives its characters too little time to become interesting. Peter Buchman adapts Christopher Paolini’s novel around the promise of a dragon choosing its rider, a premise with enough appeal to earn a willing audience. The film then seems to expect that willingness to last without much encouragement. We can accept familiar ingredients; what wears us down is how little personality the people handling them are allowed. Ed Speleers, as Eragon, has the thankless task of finding a personality in a part that the writing keeps moving along. The screenplay leaves too little room for decisions to register or relationships to acquire weight. It wants the importance of events to be understood immediately, without doing the slower work of letting us know the people involved. That leaves him with too little to play beyond his place in the story, and gives the audience little opportunity to become attached to him. Jeremy Irons gives Brom the dry humour that the rest of the film badly needs. We laughed at his delivery, and were grateful for the interruption. He makes Brom sound capable of questioning what is happening around him, useful in a film that takes its fantasy business so solemnly. This is a modest pleasure, but it makes the character easier to spend time with. Much of the surrounding cast is left to convey importance without being given similarly distinctive behaviour. The editing, credited to Roger Barton, Masahiro Hirakubo and Chris Lebenzon, keeps the story moving, which at least limits how long individual weaknesses can linger. But the quick progression gives relationships little chance to develop, and important developments arrive before the film has prepared us to feel much about them. At 104 minutes, this ought to be an economical evening. The film could use some quieter time with its characters, even if that meant less action. Hugh Johnson’s cinematography and Wolf Kroeger’s production design supply the expected fantasy surroundings without giving them much individuality. The images are legible enough, but there is little pleasure in looking around the edges of a scene. A fantasy setting ought to suggest that people live there when the lead character is elsewhere; here, it seldom does. The familiar-looking surroundings compound the screenplay’s problems, because there is so little to discover while waiting for the people to become interesting. The computer-generated spectacle is competent in places, and it is fair to count that among the film’s limited pleasures. It does not have enough surprise to compensate for the weak dramatic groundwork. Rachel Weisz supplies Saphira’s voice, but the thin writing does not give even this casting much room to help. Patrick Doyle’s music supplies more feeling than the scenes have earned, leaving us aware of how urgently the film wants us to respond. Family fantasy can be simple without leaving its characters so poorly defined. A new viewer deserves time to discover why a strange creature matters, why someone should be trusted, or what makes a decision difficult. Those are pleasures the genre can offer alongside the action, and this adaptation spends too little time on them. For a family evening, we would choose a fantasy more interested in the people taking part. *Fi1m score 35, published 5 October 2026.* ## What the critics say The available verdicts are firmly negative: most critics find Eragon derivative, dramatically weak and short of the magic its fantasy story needs. Complaints repeatedly centre on thin characterisation and a failure to earn its characters’ development, leaving familiar genre ingredients with little life of their own. Praise clusters around Jeremy Irons, whose dry humour and authority offer some relief from performances and storytelling that otherwise attract little enthusiasm. The differences concern individual strengths rather than the overall judgement. Slant Magazine finds the computer-generated spectacle competent and the brisk pace helpful in limiting the damage; Empire considers the dragon unconvincing, while Variety and Eye for Film find the storytelling rushed. There is no clearly favourable dissent in the accessible material. The New York Times and Screen Daily texts are unavailable, so their listed scores cannot establish what either publication praises or objects to. ## Straight answers **Is Eragon worth watching?** *Eragon* is a poor fantasy adventure that we score 35/100, with too little character development to recommend it for a family evening. Jeremy Irons’s dry humour and some competent dragon spectacle offer limited pleasures for fantasy enthusiasts, but the hurried storytelling gives us little reason to care about its rider. **How long is Eragon, and what is it rated?** *Eragon* runs 1h 44m. It is a fantasy and action film. **Where can I watch Eragon in Thailand?** *Eragon* is not on any streaming or rental service in Thailand at the moment. It is available in 48 other countries; change your country at the top of the page to see where. Availability is checked daily. **How does Eragon compare to Warriors of the Wind?** *Eragon* is the weaker choice beside [*Warriors of the Wind*](https://film.one/film/warriors-of-the-wind), which we recommend for its interest in understanding creatures and giving its young heroine difficult choices. Its plotting frays towards the end, and the 95-minute version is incomplete, but it offers more to care about than *Eragon*’s thin characters and competent spectacle. **Is Eragon based on a true story or a book?** *Eragon* is adapted from Christopher Paolini’s fantasy novel, rather than a true story. We find the film too hurried to develop its characters and relationships properly; the problem for newcomers is how little reason it gives them to care, rather than any need to know the book beforehand. **What should I watch after Eragon?** After *Eragon*, try [*Nausicaä of the Valley of the Wind*](https://film.one/film/warriors-of-the-wind) (1984, Fi1m 85): For creatures worth understanding, and a young heroine with difficult choices. Then [*The Secret of Kells*](https://film.one/film/the-secret-of-kells) (2009, Fi1m 76): A smaller adventure whose drawings make an unfamiliar world feel worth exploring. ### Reviews we read (8) - **Screen Daily**, John Hazelton (64/100, inferred): The review text is behind a paywall, so its verdict is unavailable. No specific praise or complaint can be identified from the accessible page. [Read](https://www.screendaily.com/eragon/4029964.article) - **The New York Times** (64/100, inferred): The page could not be accessed, so the critic’s verdict cannot be established. No specific praise or complaint is available from the supplied text. [Read](https://www.nytimes.com/2006/12/15/arts/movies/film-in-review-eragon.html) - **Radio Times**, Stella Papamichael (2/5): Papamichael finds that the fantasy fails to conjure the magic of its source novel. She praises Jeremy Irons’s dry humour for easing some of the tedium. [Read](https://www.radiotimes.com/movie-guide/b-jv3dgm/eragon/) - **Slant Magazine**, Nick Schager (1/4): Schager finds the film derivative and dramatically clumsy, though its brisk pace helps keep its flaws from lingering. He singles out the competent computer-generated spectacles as a relative strength. [Read](https://www.slantmagazine.com/film/eragon/) - **Time Out**, Nigel Floyd (20/100, inferred): The critic gives the film a strongly negative verdict. They complain that its cut-and-paste fantasy feels like a painful reminder of the genre’s shortcomings. [Read](https://www.timeout.com/movies/eragon) - **Empire**, Chris Hewitt (15/100, inferred): Hewitt finds Eragon lifeless, derivative and unable to make its fantasy feel magical. He singles out the weak characterization and the unconvincing CGI dragon as major flaws. [Read](https://www.empireonline.com/movies/reviews/eragon-review/) - **Variety**, Justin Chang (10/100, inferred): Chang pans the film as a leaden, derivative fantasy that lacks the wonder and soul of its inspirations. He singles out Jeremy Irons for a resonant performance, while criticizing the rushed pacing and unearned character development. [Read](https://variety.com/2006/film/awards/eragon-2-1200511505/) - **Eye for Film**, Ben Sillis (20/100, inferred): The critic finds the film a derivative, unsuccessful fantasy whose rushed storytelling undermines its potential. He singles out Jeremy Irons as the one strong performance, while criticizing the other actors and the lack of character development. [Read](https://www.eyeforfilm.co.uk/review/eragon-film-review-by-ben-sillis) ## Details - **Director:** Stefen Fangmeier - **Director:** Stefen Fangmeier - **Screenplay:** Peter Buchman - **Novel:** Christopher Paolini - **Cinematography:** Hugh Johnson - **Editor:** Roger Barton, Masahiro Hirakubo, Chris Lebenzon - **Music:** Patrick Doyle - **Production design:** Wolf Kroeger - **Costume design:** Kym Barrett - **Producer:** John Davis, Wyck Godfrey, Kevin Halloran - **Cast:** Ed Speleers as Eragon; Jeremy Irons as Brom; Sienna Guillory as Arya; Robert Carlyle as Durza; John Malkovich as King Galbatorix; Garrett Hedlund as Murtagh; Alun Armstrong as Uncle Garrow; Djimon Hounsou as Ajihad - **Runtime:** 1h 44m - **First release (Germany):** 14 December 2006 - **Genres:** Fantasy, Action, Adventure, Family - **Budget:** $100 million - **Box office:** $250 million ## Where to watch in Thailand Not streaming, renting or buying in Thailand at the last check. Also available in: AE, AR, AT, AU, BE, BG, BR, CA, CH, CL, CO, CZ, DE, DK, EC, EE, ES, FI, FR, GB, GR, HK, HR, HU, IE, IL, IS, IT, JP, KR, LT, MX, NL, NO, NZ, PA, PE, PL, PT, RO, RS, SE, SG, SI, TR, UA, US, ZA. Add `?region=XX` to this URL for another country. ## If you liked this - *Dragonheart* (1996): Another speaking dragon, but this time the relationship has some warmth. - *Dragonslayer* (1981): A sterner dragon adventure, with danger that may unsettle younger viewers. - *The Thief of Bagdad* (1940): A fantasy adventure that gives its wonders room to be enjoyed. - *Nausicaä of the Valley of the Wind* (1984), Fi1m 85: For creatures worth understanding, and a young heroine with difficult choices. — [Fi1m page](https://film.one/film/warriors-of-the-wind.md) - *The Secret of Kells* (2009), Fi1m 76: A smaller adventure whose drawings make an unfamiliar world feel worth exploring. — [Fi1m page](https://film.one/film/the-secret-of-kells.md) --- © Fi1m Ltd. Written by AI under a human editor; checked against sources before publication. Quote with attribution and a link to the canonical URL. Canonical: https://film.one/film/eragon