and yes, Brinsigar does have a bit more originality, but I still don't like any of the characters except for Saphira and she's changing as well. The book was waaaaaay too confusing as well.

I personally liked Eragon. Less Star Wars than in the book.

Please, don't tell me you didn't notice the entire Copy-paste he did with Star Wars.

I didn't until someone expolained it to me in all honesty. I think that's largely due to the fact I'm not a Star Wars fan. But yeah, it's not full on copying though. At least Morzan's dead so they can never have a "ERAGON, I AM YOUR FATHER!" momment... XD

I think Paolini did break away from the Star wars formula more in the later books if that's any consolation to you... XD

-Firefly

I have a friend who took his buddies with him to see a movie that was originally a book (I dont remember what movie it was). they all never read the book but a girl with them did. after the movie they were really happy and talking about all the cool stuff that happened. every time they mentioned a part they liked the girl always had something bad to say about it. telling them how it really was in the book and how the movie was stupid. by doing that she ruin their good time. 

thats why I hate people like that

Please, don't tell me you didn't notice the entire Copy-paste he did with Star Wars.

Well my opinion is that The books are always better unless the book is written after the movie. Like Harry potter *only read first book and didn't care for it* the movie forgot that one ghost! Jabus or Janqus or Jeebs or something. Look at the Eragon movie. Characters were in the wrong spots, some never appeared, the added and removed to much, and Arya did have an altered looking face! she looked human!

For the Books that modeled after the movie or games... The arent ever as good as the movie because They try to add to much to make it a novel. They also kind of re make up some stuff and change what we saw from the movie. I believe the Books are better then the movies any day unless they are modeled after the movie. Movies of books are short, abridged version of the books that is based on the Directors imagination and how he interpreted the book. Thats why reading is so much better, you get your own interpretation of stuff you way. Like when i read Eragon. I imaged Brom as a slightly older guy who was bald, but i liked him. The brom from eragon looked nothing like how i visualized him.

You read any book and you get your own Take on the characters and setting, but a movie is from the directors take on it that he butchers and shortens it into about an hour and a half. IF you want proof, READ Wuthering Heights... Its as dry as a dead leaf, but When you watch the many versions of the movie you will see its all completely different.

It's because of the time limit though in some cases. Like they didn't forget Peeves in HP, he was actually cast and filmed, his scenes just didn't make it into the final cut of the movie. It wasn't a perfect movie, but the HP series is one of the better ones. They usually only stray from the plot because of time restraints. And while a perfectly made movie does sound appealing, it'd take ages to watch in certain books' cases. some wouldn't be so bad, but some books are so long it'd be next to impossible to make a flawless film adaption without it running a ridiculous amount of time(like seven hours or something crazy like that).

Also, Eragon is an ABNORMALLY AWFUL adaption. it is by far one of the worst I've ever seen. I didn't mind the cast too much personally, but the way they reworked the story was simply horrible. It's hard to enjoy the film after reading the book at any rate. It's probably an okay film if you aren't aware of how badly they are butchering the story...

We had to read I Am David one year in class, and the book was just dreadful, but I actually really liked to movie. So there are exceptions, it just depends on what changes are made and how you personally feel about them. If you liked the book and major changes are made, it's usually a bit frustrating, however if there are very few changes, or you find the changes improve the story(it can happen if you didn't really care for the book for example) the movie can be as good or better.

-Firefly

-Firefly

For the Books that modeled after the movie or games... The arent ever as good as the movie because They try to add to much to make it a novel. They also kind of re make up some stuff and change what we saw from the movie. I believe the Books are better then the movies any day unless they are modeled after the movie. Movies of books are short, abridged version of the books that is based on the Directors imagination and how he interpreted the book. Thats why reading is so much better, you get your own interpretation of stuff you way. Like when i read Eragon. I imaged Brom as a slightly older guy who was bald, but i liked him. The brom from eragon looked nothing like how i visualized him.

You read any book and you get your own Take on the characters and setting, but a movie is from the directors take on it that he butchers and shortens it into about an hour and a half. IF you want proof, READ Wuthering Heights... Its as dry as a dead leaf, but When you watch the many versions of the movie you will see its all completely different.

Movies have such a disadvantage though, you have to absorb an entire plotline, character building, location, and setting all in 2 hours. A book normally gets to set each of those upo individualy in a 2 hour block per subject. Problem is, reading takes alot more concentration then watching...