Beowulf - REVIEW

Ah yes, I broke down and saw it. I've now seen three movies this Thanksgiving week and each one has been weaker than the one before it. Now, I've heard that seeing Beowulf in 3-D is really amazing, but I was only able to find a normal showing so that's what I'll be commenting on. To make things easier, I'll split the review into 4 sections: 1 for each part of the story, and a final one for general statements/wrap up blah blah blee.

Part 1 - Grendel: The weakest part of the film. Ignoring the innacurate portrayals of the Danes and what not, there was a general feel of trashiness to this whole segment. Though Grendel is pretty creep-tacular in appearence, it's hilarious everytime he speaks because you can't understand anything. When he was trying to tell his mother that "beowulf tore off his arm" it comes out like "mmmrrrrskuuuuuuuuuuuwaaaaaaaaaaaaa jskdsuuuuuuuaswsuueuususa!!" Also, as Beowulf is fighting Grendel, he fights him naked. This in itself is not bad, and could actually implied from reading the poem, but where the film goes wrong is having conveniently placed objects always there to block out Beowulf's "privates" like something out of an Austin Powers movie.....except Austin Powers was intentionally funny. Also hilarious is the way Beowulf acts like a love sick puppy around Queen Wealtheow (Robin Wright Penn) as she sings a toned down version of the film's original song. Also, John Malkovich needs to go take acting lessons again. Terrible line delivery.

Part 2 - Grendel's Mother: Angelina doesn't have too much time on screen, so her bizarre Russian accent doesn't seem as ludicrous as it was in "Alexander". But it is in this segment that the whole motion capture technique first falters. As Grendel's Mother slowly circles around Beowulf and trying to seduce him there are times when the face lacks almost all resemblence to Angelina. However, this segment does start off with some nice camera work as we see (from a first person view) Grendel's Mother fly over to the Danes' meadhall and slink around. Some nice music from Alan Silvestri's score also helps the scene with Beowulf and Grendel's Mother.

Part 3 - The Fire Dragon: the best part of the film despite how wildly it deviates from the poem. The dragon is pretty cool and has a great design. However, the motion capture concept falters again because as Beowulf is hanging onto the dragon's back there's no tension or excitement, because the scene (and pretty much the whole movie) feels like a really lengthy cutscene in a videogame. However I can't deny that I felt just a little bit sad when Beowulf bites the dust at the end and saves his kingdom and yada yada yada. Oh, but that final scene.....so wildly innacurate...

Subsection A - The Credits: nothing special except we get bombarded with the full version of the film's original song ("A Hero Comes Home" performed by Idina Menzel of "Wicked"fame). The song is like an overwrought 80's pop ballad to end all overwrought 80's pop ballads. If this gets nominated for the Original Song Oscar, I'm hitting mute when it gets performed. Christ it's awful.

Part 4: Overall, the "groundbreaking animation" is impressive, but it hasn't come far enough to make us feel like this are people who can really "feel". Mr. Zemeckis makes some nice choices with the angles in certain shots, but the script tries a bit too hard to be hip and Beowulf often comes off like a bad imitation of Gerard Butler's King Leonidas from "300" (he was a much better yeller). A noble effort, but sadly a rather disconnected one that never really gets your pulse going like it should.

Grade: C+

Nominations: NONE

Number of 2007 films seen: 39

9 clips from Beowulf

They range from decent to "what the hell?". On one hand, the animation finally looks okay (or maybe I've finally warmed up to it). On the other hand, Angelina Jolie still has that damn Russian accent she used in "Alexander", and some of the dialogue (Exactly how many times is Beowulf going to say "I am Beowulf!"??) feels a little off. Just nine quick clips, and the seeds of another movie parody have already been planted....buwhahahahaha

9 Beowulf clips

A rant against the new Beowulf movie

Obviously when a book or play is adapted to the screen, there are bound to be some changes. Sometimes they're quite large (Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban) and sometimes rather minute (supposedly, December's "Atonement" is incredibly faithful to the book). Why are these changes made? Well, because books tend to have lots of things happen, and lots of subplots and characters involved in those subplots (The Goblet of Fire anyone?) and though they're cool, they don't need to be there because they aren't essential to the story. The story can still exist with its main events and overall themes and motifs intact when those delightful diversions are are altered, minimized, or removed all together. But those are for NOVELS...and Beowulf is no novel. What's more, is that it gets right to the point with little time spent on exposition (the poem is 3000 lines and spans roughly 60 pages. That's it.) Though lots of events happen, they are all more or less connected to the main story; there is little room for sub plots in legitimate epics. Why, you ask? Because legitimate epics (defined as: a long narrative poem composed orally in the elevated style about the deeds of a hero representative of a nation or race, with supernatural intervention) were well, orally composed, and were "stored" mentally in the brains of the scops (name for the official poet of a tribe in Anglo Saxon culture) and there wasn't room for superfluous side stories that didn't contribute to the overall plot. Now, for the next part of this post, I'm going to post several "events" that happen in the Beowulf MOVIE, and then explain the problem in each one.

1. King Hrothgar adopts Beowulf as his own son after he defeats (note: not kills. Grendel's real death occurs later in the poem and probably does the same in the movie.) Grendel because Hrothgar has no successors. This leads to Beowulf becoming King of the Danes, even though he is a Geat.

The Problem: Though Hrothgar does actually do this, it's merely a grand gesture of thanks. Beowulf does not become his successor and never intended to. Hrothgar has 2 sons named Hrethic and Hrothmund, a daughter, and an adopted nephew named Hrothhulf who is the son of Hrothgar's brother Halga. He's got PLENTY OF DAMN SUCCESSORS ALREADY. This also undermines the point that after Hrothgar's death (a natural death, and not SUICIDE as the movie shows) infighting and betrayal bring down the Danes of Hrothgar's tribe. If Beowulf is the Danes' new king, this cannot happen.

2. Beowulf goes to face Grendel's Mother wearing no armor.

The Problem: this essentially destroys one of the central themes of Beowulf. As each challenge (Grendel, his mother, the dragon) gets greater and more "mysterious" (ie Beowulf doesn't know what he'll have to do to defeat them) Beowulf becomes more cautious, protective, and HUMAN. The movie screws this up by a change involving one of the 3 enemies and makes the story more about redemption of a sin as opposed to Beowulf finally becoming a great king and sacrificing himself for his people against the ultimate evil. Beowulf's death is supposed to represent the end of the heroic age, not the redemption of a sin (which never happened).

3. Grendel's Mother is hot and succeeds in seducing Beowulf.

The Problem: last time I checked, creatures described as "troll wives" shouldn't look like naked Angelina Jolie (wearing high heels to boot...). Also, she seduces Beowulf and he doesn't kill her (this is the "sin") and since there was no birth control back then, she has a child...well just guess who it is!!!

4. #&@*$&@#@^#(*!^@-ing Fire Dragon is the offspring of Beowulf and Grendel's Mother (must've been one hell of a delivery what with the scales and claws and fangs and such...)

The Problem: uhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh. But seriously, the Dragon really only begins attacking Beowulf's people when a ceorl (second class of two class society. they would do lots of labor.) stole a flagon from the dragon's treasure. The dragon isn't out to get Beowulf like Mordred trying to kill King Arthur in The Once and Future King (sorry, just had a test over this today...). It's just a beast who gets seriously pissed off, and decides to let all hell loose on the kingdom of GEATS AND NOT THE DAMN DANES.

5. Wiglaf (Brendan Gleeson) is present throughout the entire story.

The Problem: Wiglaf only appears in the final episode with the dragon. He helps weaken the dragon so that old king Beowulf can finish it off before he dies. Wiglaf then becomes his successor. Wiglaf is supposed to be young (and not the same age as Beowulf) and represents the end of the age of heroes. He is a good person with a heart of gold, and true loyalty to his king, but he isn't supposed to be Beowulf's friend for life. He is supposed to lead the way as the heroic age ends, and the middle ages arrive, where great warriors are no longer called upon. Why no need for more "Beowulf"'s? Because the heroic age was (for "epics") about defeating monsters, creatures that did evil simply because it was all they knew. The middle ages is when men fight men; those who know they should not do evil, but choose to do so anyway. If Wiglaf is roughly the same age as Beowulf when he dies, he cannot lead the Geats for very long into the oncoming age.

6. Beowulf marries Hrothgar's wife, Queen Wealtheow, and then cheats on her later in life.

The Problem: none of it ever happened or could even be implied. Why? Queen Wealtheow was a real person. Beowulf was not. Beowulf also never had any romantic attraction to her, and was a noble enough figure to never cheat on his own wife, let alone the former wife of great Hrothgar (who commits suicide in the movie....what the hell?).

A realistic (and slightly profane) review of Beowulf

From the Latino Review.com. I have no idea how credible they are but they seem much more grounded than the aintitcoolnews.com guys who called the movie a "masterpiece that I'm totally gonna see 50 more time in theaters with Oscar caliber performances". Yeah right. Anyways, this one kind of surprised me; it claims that Beowulf should ONLY be viewed in 3D and not in normal 2D or 2D digital. He says that the 3D really immerses the viewer more in the story. The only thing that's troublesome though, is that this review talks about the story as though this is actually what happens in the poem. As you'll see in the rant in the above post, it's NOT. Anyways, the review:

Beowulf: Latino Review.com