I find it a rather telling statement of our times that the only obvious editing that had to be done to secure a PG-13 rating wasn't cutting out the images of people being mutilated in a variety of ways, but the CGI cock of Beowulf.

I think it says more about the audience the movie was designed for than anything else. It's the same reason Angeline Jolie was cast in her role, and why the marketing has been practically built around her nudity.

There isn't anything a middle-school aged boy wants to see less than another man's cock, and nothing they want to see more than boobs and blood.

I don't think Zemeckis ever intended to show Beowulf's dick and only edited it to get to PG-13. I'd bet it was a planned gag from the beginning, just comic relief.

I don't doubt that it wasn't planned from the beginning, but I don't think the motivation behind it was comic relief.

That was way-too-subtle humor for such an unsubtle film.

I don't know about you folks, but I found the endless penis jokes hilarious. A theatre full of people entranced by penis helps too.

quite the assumption there. Some middle-school aged boys..

My monthly cock quota was filled by 101 Reykjavik.

Awesome film. Probably the most fun I've had in a theater this year, besides Grindhouse. And I saw it in 2D!!! I imagine that it must be glorious to see in 3D! The action sequences are unlike anything you've ever seen and sooo insanely over the top that you can't help having a big goofy smile on your face. One scene in particular, when Beowulf comes out a monster's eye after stabbing it to bits and yells HIS OWN FUCKING NAME, had my friends and I cheering and laughing our collective asses off. Sooo bad-ass, Beowulf is. The animation of the film is gorgeous and, at times, almost photorealistic. Fine acting from all (especially Ray Winstone as Beowulf and Anthony Hopkins). The film is also quite tragic and mature- a welcome change from a studio-financed animated film. A

On a second viewing, it was definitely completely planned from the start. And it was also most definitely used to purposeful comic effect.

In a few days after I've submitted it for college I may post the five page essay I've written about this film, but my second viewing only solidfied it as some of the best blockbusters of the decade. And this goes beyond the visuals. The storytelling is really excellently done, the score is the best I've heard all year, the acting is all very strong and I'm going to disagree with you Jon and say that there are subtle themes concerning religion and the forbidden fruit. I even liked 90% of the dialogue. Yes it's very brash and direct, but perfectly fitting the setting and epic legend qualities of the film.

I hope Zemeckis never makes a live action film again, and I can't wait to see the way all the other biggest and brightest commercial directors one up one another over the next decade with this technology. Like it or not, digital 3D and motion capture are both big movers and shakers in movie making. If they are not here to stay, they are at least ushering in a new way for directors to have their imaginations soar to new heights, and for studios to finally start shattering records again.

I agree with Moviedude the humour was intentional in every scene it was present.

That whole dragon sequence was just spectacular.

I really hope that I get around to seeing this in 3-D, just from noting how much ass it kicked in 2-D.

Wow!!!

What a great demo reel for some mind-blowing future technologies.




But I do have one question:

Why does this Beowulf garner so much attention?



What makes it so different from the recent Beowulf & Grendel which grossed only $92,000 worldwide? Certainly not it's lack of a name brand hero, what with Beowulf in that version being portrayed by none other than Gerard Butler, the star of that other cgi phenomena, 300. Both the new Beowulf and 300 share two things in common - - a BO that decimates Beowulf & Grendel and the use of shiny new technology. Ooooo... "look at the pretty pictures!!" "Is that 3D sword tip gonna touch me!?!" "It almost looks real."

So, it's certainly not the kiloclassic (ie: 1,000+ years bestseller) epic poem that is the source material for this new cartoon. Nope. It's not that; though it certainly does add a bit of class to the spectacle. It's really just another simple bastardization of classic literature ("Can you say LOTR? I knew ya could!") as a shortcut to quality copyright-free drama - - if the writer's strike carries on too much long, we may all be treated to a steady diet of nothing but Norse epic poetry!

So, I guess it really is just all about them fancy pictures they got to retell the tale.

And here's the most pitiful quote from a review of Beowulf I just read:



Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha !!!!!!!!!

How ridiculous.

"Limitations of storytelling" - - Can you believe that?!?!?!?!?!?

Plus, I had a peek into the 2D screening and it was the same freakin' movie, dudes! As to all the blather about it being a waste to see this movie in anything but it's 3D incarnation? Well, that just goes to further reinforce my point that this is nothing but a tech demo for 2017...

BAD.



(PS: Mo-cap humans are creepier than the most demonic horror movie monsters yet created!)

WARNING: Disturbingly humorous post...




(I just hope I never have to hear about any future months!!! )

Oh You shall Bradford you shall!!!

I actually didn't get the point of that. Two seconds later he just swung all the way in anyways. His arm being attached wouldn't have affected him. Probably made him die even faster.

I found it odd that his sword couldn't reach it with his arm attached, but with his arm cut off he was able to reach the heart...with no sword.

Doesn't change the fact that the whole dragon sequence is probably the most thrilling action sequence of the year, but yeah.

It did, but he lost at least a foot, maybe two, when he dropped the sword.

seriously? that's what you're discussing? how many feet he gained/lost by cutting his arm?? oy vey.

It's symbolism, duh.

actually, you're all wrong. the whole heart scene made no sense

beowulf with sword and no unsevered arm. tries and fails
beowulf with sword and severed arm. also tries actually. but fails.
beowulf, no sword and severed arm. tries and succeeds.

but all this is plausable cause HE IS BEOWULF!

That sounds like a truly frightening costume on you loyal...

WORTH IT

Aaah yes I remember Loyal detailing his sleuthing on the matter. Most impressive the results.

Is there anything more exciting than forum trolls exposed? No, no there isn't.

This better be more exciting than the BKB reveal.