See it this way, Brad, how shall the technology be fixed without trying out several times before with films like this?

Maybe the movie is pretty cool in 3D, but in 2D I wasn't blown away. It was pretty boring in some parts and I didn't cared for any of the characters. The action at the end was nice to look at but didn't saved the movie. C-

BEOWULF - 3/10 (D)

This possibly could have been a cool experience on an IMAX screen, but on DVD it's an uninteresting bore and pretty ugly looking. This makes 300 seem really good.

One of the year's worst...

Here's my review from November (which I'm surprised I never posted here) after seeing the film twice: Once in 2-D, once in IMAX 3-D:

Those wondering where technology is going in Hollywood need look no further than “Beowulf.” In a deliciously ironic twist, director Robert Zemeckis takes the oldest tale of the English language and gives it a pricey, cutting edge facelift. The movie seems to be positioning itself as the representation of the future of moviegoing, as it debuts simultaneously on conventional 2-D, digital 3-D, and IMAX 3-D screens. Or the guinea pig, as it’s really the first movie to do this kind of thing on this wide a scale.

But how is the movie? That is a question whose answer lies entirely in what version is viewed. In 2-D (which is most likely the format that all future DVD and television incarnations of the film will be show in), “Beowulf” is not without its flaws, but ultimately prevails with a strong story and wicked entertainment from several fantastically realized set pieces.

But in 3-D, the movie transforms and becomes an entirely different sequence. Arrows, spears, blood, and mead just scratch the surface of the things launched at the eyes of the moviegoers. In IMAX 3-D, it’s a uniquely immersive experience not to be missed if it’s readily available to the viewer.

Either way, the story remains the same: A Danish kingdom is terrorized by the monster Grendel (voiced by Crispin Glover). Grendel is a hideous being who invades the mead hall and rips the limbs from unsuspecting humans. This, of course, presents a problem for King Hrothgar (voiced by Anthony Hopkins). Hrothgar, an old man whose glory days have long since passed, calls for a hero to come and save them. Enter Beowulf (voiced by Ray Winstone), a decidedly conceited warrior who comes to slay Grendel not for the gold, queen Wealthow (Robin Wright Penn), or inheritance of the throne Hrothgar promises him: He’s there for the glory. However, he gets more than he bargained for, as he must face not only Grendel, but the monster’s tempting, shape-shifting mother (voiced by Angelina Jolie).

Right off the bat, one of the things that makes “Beowulf” stand out is its animation. The movie is filmed in performance capture, which uses the movements captured from the actors the basis for the animation. Particularly noticeable is the hyper-realistic approach. Apart from the still dead-looking eyes and seemingly emotionless faces, “Beowulf” delivers the best work to date in the way of computer animated humans. The technique works particularly with the animation of the main Beowulf character. As cinephiles would know, Ray Winstone (who voices the character) does not have the same kind of physique possessed by the title character.

Though some have complained about the film being done in animation rather than live action, it’s a move that more often than not pays off. Too many big budget, CGI-heavy action films look like cartoons; this one is a cartoon. In that respect, believability is far easier to discard, and (perhaps surprisingly after trailers that had a less than savory appearance) the quality of the visuals is consistent. The Grendel and dragon characters don’t look as out of place as they would in a live action production, and the animators take numerous visually creative liberties, among those being the aforementioned appearance of Beowulf and Grendel’s mother having spike-heeled feet.

The casting works in some spots, while it is ineffective in others. The best casting of the film is in Ray Winstone voicing Beowulf. Winstone nails the role, breathing life into an animated character. It’s the conviction with which he delivers his lines that the film’s shift of tone and (gasp!) psychological self-reflection in the third act becomes not only believable, but compelling. Angelina Jolie uses the same accent she put to use in “Alexander,” but to much better effect in what could best be described as an extended cameo. John Malkovich has some fantastic moments as the doubtful Unferth, but the role is small and ultimately quite meaningless. Robin Wright Penn does a serviceable job as Wealthow. But it’s (surprisingly) Anthony Hopkins who is the weak link as Hrothgar. It can be chalked up as much to the script as it can be the way Hopkins delivers his lines, but the character falls flat.

But never mind the characters, the acting, or the story, which have their weak points. What will bring the crowds in is the action, and that action is splendid. Though there are only a handful of big action scenes in the film, they deliver an exhilarating jolt of adrenaline. The particular showstopper is the climactic showdown between Beowulf and a dragon (which provides perhaps the finest of the mighty eye candy in 3-D versions of the film), though the Grendel attacks aren’t without their high entertainment value. Beowulf’s battle with Grendel also turns out to be as hilarious as it is thrilling, as the animators employ “Austin Powers” techniques to hide the nude Beowulf’s family jewels from the eyes of the audience, likely in a move to ensure a lighter PG-13 rating.

But make no judgmental mistake in regards to the PG-13 rating. “Beowulf” is cheerily gory, with blood, severed limbs, and dead bodies flying all over the place. If the MPAA held it to the same standards it would a live action film, there’s no doubt this movie would have been rated R. This is definitely not one to take the kids to, particularly in IMAX 3-D where the picture and sound are even more massive.

Between “Beowulf” and 2004’s less technologically innovative (but still ahead of its time) “The Polar Express,” Robert Zemeckis seems to be driven to bring the technological future of moviegoing to screens today. Though “Beowulf” could use work with the story and vocal work, the visuals are mightily impressive, and the 3-D experience makes it incredibly well worth the price of admission. But even without the gimmick, it holds up well enough as an entertaining telling of the oldest tale in the English language.

Grade: B

do you mean this one?



As for the film, I thought it was pretty boring, with some interesting scenes scattered here and there (mainly, the final scene). However, the film had the best OST of the year.

C+

I watched Beowulf last weekend, and I'm still not sure what exactly what I think about it.

The whole look of the film was intriguing, but odd. At times it was distracting, other times I was impressed. Half of me thought live action would have been a better choice, the other half thought the look was the only thing that really kept the movie afloat.

After thinking about it for a week, I think I lean slightly toward thinking the visual digital style being the only thing that really made the it watchable. At it's core, I just don't think it was a terribly great movie, but the visual style did keep me watching it, and that is indeed what I remember most about it.

Grade: C+

Amazing. Easily one of the most creative and unique movies I have ever seen. The animation is near flawless. I wanted to see this in IMAX 3D but sadly only got to see it in 3D. What an amazing experience; Beowulf is not to be missed.


A-

I don't know why but I kinda wanted to see this again. But unlike the first time I've seen it I was bored to death this time, for almost the entire running time (the dragon fight was pretty cool though). The animation was great in some parts but when it comes to the actors it sucked big time. D-

Apart from the opening scene, which strangely had some awful CGI looking like the "not actual game play" footage of a 2004 video-game, Beowulf is a tremendous accomplishment. It just pulls you in, but you must be a sword and sandal lover to begin with, otherwise I can imagine it being as interesting as actually playing a battle strategy game. It is a mature take on the lore of the titular character with masterful storytelling and impressive visuals. It's a blast. And the extreme close-ups are breathtaking in their attention to detail. All the voice cast did a stellar job and I absolutely adored how close to the line they get with regards to nudity, extreme violence, and sex. Zemeckis is a bit of a genius, isn't he? Yet he has no where near the level of respect he should have.

Final caught it up and while the animation is gorgeous even for today's standards and it has a good premise its the execution and screenplay leaves much to be desired. The love angle with the queen should have been explored more here. As such its pretty look at but even with all the right ingredients fails to impress.