:
Well, I read the first one when I was 8, and it was Harry Potter and The Stoned Philosophers, and it was still booming back then (around 2001, back when the first movie was being released). I loved the first 3-4 books (especially the second one), but the latter ones were gradually less interesting to the point I gave up on reading the last one completely. It's really weird, when I think about it.
Lotr and Hobbit books were obviously amazing.
If you've never read the Witcher toms, you should definitely do so. It's the best (...the only?) thing Polish fantasy books have to offer. Books were far better than the games (at least the first two games, as I haven't played W3 yet). However, I don't know if the translation might affect your read.
|
I actually bought "Blood of Elves" back in 2012 without knowing it had been turned into a video game, but it went to the bottom of the reading pile and hasn't resurfaced yet. I will get to it at some point, haha.
:
Back to Eragon: As I was reading this, and it was not many years after the premiere, so I'm guessing 2004-06, and I was around 12, I got the same impression as you - it really did feel like it was written by a teenager. I don't know how ratings at goodreads.com work, but still, I don't think it deserves the lowest possible rating. It's hard to defend the book I barely remember (I'm really, really bad at remembering books), but in my memory it was more of a pleasant read than not.
|
The rating system at GoodReads is really whatever the reviewer wishes it to be, so there's always a little inconsistency. I sometimes rate a book one-star, but have a few positive things to say; at other times I rate it five stars, and have a lot of negative things to say.
The reason is I always use a five-point scale, with one star awarded for Characters, Worldbuilding, Story, Style and Execution (what I believe to be the five core elements of any good story). Personally, I don't feel as if Paolini handled any of these well enough, though if I read it again, I'd probably be a bit more lenient. I was expecting to be blown away by all of the positive suggestions I'd been given, and was sorely disappointed.
I was equally upset with Harry Potter when I finally read it two year back.
:
What I do remember is that I actually very liked the way the books handles magic and spellcasting (with the emotional and physical impact), it's unlike anything I have seen at the time... which could basically mean nothing, because I haven't read that many books in my life, but it's one of best things about this book in my opinion.
|
The magic was handled well, actually, but the implementation of the magic was where I encountered a huge problem. It seems that instead of the characters uncovering genuine solutions to their problems, they could always "magick" their way out of it. For example, when crossing the desert, they briefly fret about a lack of water, only to brush their fears away by summoning it out of the Earth. Not a bad solution if you can do that, but it makes for an incredibly stale story.
I'm a little biased, however, because I'm not a huge fan of magic. I like fantasy, but more often than not I find authors having designed far too convoluted (or convenient) magic systems.