Beowulf (the movie)

  • Thread starter Thread starter BradW
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
On the other hand, it does give the actors something to do. And the director liked having actors:
Click to expand...
Code: 
"You have this wide open canvas where the actor can bring whatever he or she wants to the character because you're not under the same constraints that you'd have on a live-action film. The actors are liberated from the tyranny of a normal movie - it's not about lighting, it's not about setting up the camera, it's not about the hair and make-up or costumes. It is absolute performance and great actors, like the ones in this movie, relish that."
Click to expand...
Source: firstshowing.net/2007/11/…gy-of-beowulf/
Click to expand...
Code: 
The performers, I was told, treated it much like a play. They ran through whole scenes without stopping, their movements and voices being recorded.
Click to expand...
Source: aintitcool.com/node/22409
Click to expand...
That’s true, however, it still looks bad.

It would have looked a lot better if real flesh and blood animators took that mocap footage and tweaked it so:
  1. They actually had good facial animation and the characters wouldn’t look like zombies.
  2. They exaggerated the movements a little bit so it wouldn’t look so stiff. Exaggeration doesn’t mean Looney Tunes. It can be subtle as well as crazy.
As far as I know the only true genuinely ANIMATED character in this movie is the dragon. I’m sure that will be the only character in the movie that actually has a bit of life to it.
 
Glowwriter said:
I teach the poem, but I don’t know if I’ll see the film. I have a hard time thinking of Angelina Jolie as Grendel’s mother. I know she’s a bit odd, but a hideous monster?
Click to expand...
Don’t believe the hype.😃 In the movie, if you pay attention closely, you’ll see that Grendel’s mother is actually hideous.
 
It may have been just me, but I thought that the 3D really got in the way. Lots of times something that was background looked more like it was in the foreground. And having to wear two pairs of glasses was a royal pain. They ought to make clip-ons for people who already wear glasses.

I got about 2/3 of the way through the modern English translation of the poem at work today. The Christian influence in the poem is fantastic. In the movie the Danes are thoroughly pagan Norsemen, and nobody could out-pagan the Norse.

And Denmark doesn’t look anything like that–it’s very flat.
 
One of my students told me about the story in the film, and now I definitely do NOT want to see it. It’s not even close to the same thing! Forget it!
 
I saw the movie today and thoroughly enjoyed it. I’ve read Beowulf several times, always in the old english (even had to memorize and recite some for my ap english class my senior year of high school). There are a few minor spoilers in this, so be warned.

The first act of the movie is pretty faithful to the original work. It isn’t until Beowulf goes after Grendel’s mother that the story really deviates. But what I saw and took from it was more than just changes for the sake of Hollywood changes. These were intentional, and were done with the original poem in mind the entire time.

The writers seemed to be giving us the story of ‘what really happened’ in Beowulf’s adventures, and then showed how the word of mouth stories and tales evolved into the epic legend we have today. Through a combination of exaggeration, creative re-telling over the years, outright lies and omission of any dirty or embarassing details, the weak and all-too-human Beowulf who made a big mistake and was suffereing the consequences was transformed into this great, legendary warrior that would take on a life of its own. Even years later, when he tried to admit to Wiglaf what had happened with Grendel’s mother, Wiglaf would hear none of that and reaffirmed the story as everyone knew it.

I’ve always enjoyed this type of story, taking a look at the flawed human side of characters that are usually portrayed almost too-perfect, or that show some other version of a story or piece of history that is at odds with what the legends or story tells us. It makes you look past the surface of the story and really think in-depth about the characters or the circumstances in the story, or the history of the story, or the people who passed the story down, etc… It adds depth to the story.

At least, it does for me. Your mileage may vary.
 
SPOILERS AHEAD:

I saw the movie. I liked it, actually. Interesting take on the story. I had heard about the change made to the story, with Grendel’s mother and all that, so I knew what to expect. I also noticed, at particular points, like when Beowulf looks up at the cave ceiling and in the water when he first enters the cave, you see the mother as this ugly…thing. You know that the Angelina Jolie thing is a disguise meant to draw more victims in.

Also, you wonder whether the deal made is actually the work of the man or the work of the demon. You only know that there is a point where “the deal’s off” and Angelina Jolie sics her latest offspring on the kingdom.

The moral of the story is: Angelina Jolie should not have any children, or uncounted innocents will die!!!
 
Timmay said:
I saw the movie today and thoroughly enjoyed it. I’ve read Beowulf several times, always in the old english (even had to memorize and recite some for my ap english class my senior year of high school).

snip
Click to expand...
Maybe you can answer my question. The language Grendel was speaking was not modern English, but it didn’t sound foreign enough to be Old English. On the other hand, the bard who was reciting the poem at the party scene after Beo had aged–that sounded like it might have been actual Old English. What was your take on that?
 
The movie was 3d. Very disappointing. Scenes that showed naked women, very pornographic.
 
Saw it today with a discount movie pass, so I only paid $1.50.

Never having seen such a thing before, I rather liked the 3D animation.

The plot, however… Too discordant with the original epic poem for me to truly enjoy it. Let’s just say, they took the characters from Beowulf, mixed 'em all up, and wrote a brand new screenplay.

Overall: 4 out of 10; but worth $1.50.
 
alessandro said:
Saw it today with a discount movie pass, so I only paid $1.50.

Never having seen such a thing before, I rather liked the 3D animation.

The plot, however… Too discordant with the original epic poem for me to truly enjoy it. Let’s just say, they took the characters from Beowulf, mixed 'em all up, and wrote a brand new screenplay.

Overall: 4 out of 10; but worth $1.50.
Click to expand...
It’s been about 10 years since I’ve read Beowulf. I wasn’t aware they’d changed the characters up.
 
DaveBj said:
Maybe you can answer my question. The language Grendel was speaking was not modern English, but it didn’t sound foreign enough to be Old English. On the other hand, the bard who was reciting the poem at the party scene after Beo had aged–that sounded like it might have been actual Old English. What was your take on that?
Click to expand...
I had the same thought. Old English doesn’t always sound that foreign, especially in the most core words like “modor = mother”, and that’s what I thought Grendel was speaking in too. And the bard… I wouldn’t be surprised if that was taken straight from the poem.

I saw it last night, and did enjoy it. As for “the big changes”, I wasn’t keen on seeing an epic hero given feet of clay, or seeing Beowulf lose the Christianity that he had in the book (at least as I read it, I hope I wasn’t wrong). BUT, seeing Hunferth accept “the Roman God Jesus Christ” was interesting, and I DID like the fact that “the change” tied in the fight with the dragon to the one central plot. In the poem it felt more like “oh yeah, and then this happened too…”

Good catch on the person who pointed out that Grendel’s mother had a hidden ugly visage too. I thought so too, but wasn’t sure.

The CGI was good, but if I remember correctly Final Fantasy Spirits Within impressed me just a little more. Maybe I should pick it up next time I see it on the $5 rack and get a fresh look.

(PS for FFSW fans: Have you seen this? youtube.com/watch?v=fqEhFaBW4I8 )
 
bones_IV said:
😊 yipes. Don’t know how to get rid of it though. 🤷
Click to expand...
Don’t worry, bones. I can’t get my astrological sign off of my blog profile either.:o Infabilly, I don’t know what codes is/are.:crying: Send me a pm, I’d love to take mine off.
 
JimG said:
Yes, the book is always better. I just wish I could read Old English.
Click to expand...
Well, you could learn. I have been trying in a half-hearted way for years, and I can read it a little (a few months of serious effort and I would probably be quite good, but I have not had the time to do that and I’ve been trying to learn about a dozen other things at the same time!). The problem is that I really want to read Beowulf and keep trying to tackle it–I get a few dozen lines into the poem and bog down. Beowulf is one of the more difficult OE texts. I’ve read bits of the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle and that is much easier–some other prose texts as well.

You might want to tackle some Middle English texts first. If you start with Chaucer and work backwards, that would probably be better than jumping right into Beowulf, which is written in a very complex, allusive style with lots of words that even scholars don’t entirely understand.

Edwin
 
DaveBj said:
Maybe you can answer my question. The language Grendel was speaking was not modern English, but it didn’t sound foreign enough to be Old English. On the other hand, the bard who was reciting the poem at the party scene after Beo had aged–that sounded like it might have been actual Old English. What was your take on that?
Click to expand...
…upon further mental review, I believe that Grendel’s language may have been more like modern Norwegian (which I speak, but didn’t have that particular “valve” turned on when I was watching the movie) or Danish (Norwegian without the tones). I guess if I happen to see it again (but I’m not going to pay for it), I’ll listen more closely.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top