Did anyone else find this bothersome. I really liked that the dragons were a proud and important species. The idea introduced by the movie version that dragons only live as long their riders live seems to de-value them. it is the idea that they exist for us rather than in their own right . Not as enlightened as the book. So many changes that were really unnecessary. I know some of you like the movie. Wish I did. Too fast, too wrong, stilted dialogue, hard to follow, unbelievable. Lord of the Rings and the Harry Potter films did a much better job of staying true to the books.

DILLY

Maybe the film producers have done it for a dramatic ending to one of the next films ...

Maybe the rider and his dragon become separated, the camera pans in for a close-up of the dragon, the dragon (who’s not fatally wounded) dies, so you know the rider has too. I can already feel my eyes watering!!!

BTW … I agree. The first part of this trilogy was a poor visual representation of the film, and will probably not increase the number of people who read the books.

i agree on that the movie sucked, but not the thing about dragons, when a dragon or rider dies, there is like a 95 % chance their partner dies, and it goes both ways.

I don't think so ... at least not from the direction the movie's taking us ... Brom lived!!!

95% Means Brom could survived

no that's not true, they just put that in so they wouldn't have to make a bond between eragon and saphira.

Both dragon and rider can live if either dies, in the book it tries to say it is nearly unbearable to live on without your partner, so they usually end up dying.

but probly because they kill themselves, not death of depreshion

Your right, the movie doesnt leave room for wild and proud dragons

oh yeah
no offence on different topic but wats up wit the razac arent they supposed to be under cloaks?
and
wer is katrina?

It's like this rider if the rider dies, the dragon dies because Brom said when he killed Morzan his dragon died at the same moment. If the dragon dies, the rider lives because Brom's dragon died protecting him from one of Galbatorix's blows. If both are alive both will live for a very long time.

I think the movies make the dragons seem like their not as important
in the books Eragon and Saphira were Partners not a Rider and his dragon
it seems like Saphira isn't as important as Eragon and that makes me MAD

yer dragons die if there rider dies but if they die then there rider does not thats why the dragons are ment too protect there rider not there rider protect them.

Well if that's the case, why didn't Galby's now-dragon die when he stole it from it's original rider and killed the rider?

It was put rather clear in both books, as the rider and dragon grow up together there 'Bond' gets stronger, when Galbys first dragon was killed he was in a depressed time (Think if Half of your self was to Vanish in mid-air) the 2nd rider wasnt with his dragon for to long and if galby didnt use dark magic his dragon wouldnt follow what he says (isnt as strong as any other riders as well, it is a counterfit you could say...

I agree but the part about the dragons living as long as their riders is true. That part was in the books. If the rider dies...so does their dragon, but if the dragon dies the rider lives on.

I agree but the part about the dragons living as long as their riders is true. That part was in the books. If the rider dies...so does their dragon, but if the dragon dies the rider lives on.[/quote]

it is a fact of the bond. with Galbys 2nd dragon if i am wrong then 'Why didnt he die?' He was young and with a weak bond and didnt get to learn much of eachother....

Dragons die once thier riders die, plain and simple.

Hey people, you know...How's that. I wished Brom lived. He was a great guy, yer know. And...who watched the movie? at last, Galbatorix was angry about the winning of the fight with the Vardens and Eragon. Then,Galbatorix used his sword and ripped of the wall, and then, a dragon came out. Galbatorix was perhaps the most powerful Dragon Rider. Do you think Eragon and Saphria can win?

2 b honest i dont reckon dragons hav 2 die wen their rider dies because otherwise there would've been no dragons except those in eggs b4 teh riders because wild dragons couldn't exist wivout teh riders. so if wild dragons survived without riders y couldn't the others?
I reckon galby's dragon only survived cuz of the black magin galby used cuz wivout it shruikan would've died wen Galby killed his uva rider unless of corse shruikan was an evil dragon 2 begin with and thought hey galby seems like a nice bloke lets kill this uva dude and go wiv galby. but athst unliekly.

You think???

If a dragon doesnt have a rider, it doesnt have a bond, therefore will not die when the rider does.