sidkfjjteidlkkf
Mongoose
Simply fantasy and simply FANTASTIC. keeps you watching the screen. Animations is superb, very realistic in some parts. Dragon ROCKS..
Conanesqe type flick!
Conanesqe type flick!
Beowulf the Movie
- Thread starter sidkfjjteidlkkf
- Start date
FailedSpotCheck
Mongoose
Zemeckis is a steaming pile for ruining a masterpiece of literature. :evil:
sidkfjjteidlkkf
Mongoose
Yeah, it did not stick to the myths (writings) but still a damned good flick,,, Joli coould course me any day...
Greg Smith
Mongoose
FailedSpotCheck said:
So are Peter Jackson, Terence Young, Ron Howard, David Lynch... :roll:
Zemeckis didn't ruin a masterpeice of literature - he didn't set light the original manuscript with a match. He simply made a film that didn't live up to your expectations.
And if altering the storyline is what you disliked, surely Niel Gaiman and Roger Avery, the script writers, are more responsible for that?
Personally I thoroughly enjoyed it. I knew it wouldn't be particularly faithful to the original, afterall we are talking about a Hollywood movie made 1300 years after the original was written - and both society and storytelling techniques have changed somewhat.
Clovenhoof
Mongoose
I'm looking forward to seeing this in the 3D IMAX version... probably next week. The FX are said to be fantastic.
librarycharlie
Mongoose
I used to be a film critic for the college newpaper, and I watched hundreds of movies over my 5 years working for them.
This movie, in 3d, was an
11 out of 10.
Hands down, it was the most amazing movie, visually, I've ever seen. If you see it on a flat screen, I imagine it would be sort of vanilla.
With a script by world-fantasy-award winner Neil Gaiman, and acting by Anthony Hopkins, Angelina Jolie, and a stellar performance from Brendon Gleeson, it is, without a doubt, the most entertaining and engaging incarnation of this particular story in history.
And I've read at least 5 versions and seen other visual representations, including the related "13th Warrior."
The wife, who is NOT a movie buff, also felt the same way, saying the characters, effects, and in particular the 3D design of the film simply blew her away.
In the literature, there was never a reason for Grendel's fury or Hrothgar's surviving the night... it was always just a given. Gaiman takes all the classic elements and weaves a coherent modern story, just as he did for Snow White in "Snow, Glass, Apples."
See it. And see it in 3D, even if you have to drive an extra 30 minutes to do so.
This movie, in 3d, was an
11 out of 10.
Hands down, it was the most amazing movie, visually, I've ever seen. If you see it on a flat screen, I imagine it would be sort of vanilla.
With a script by world-fantasy-award winner Neil Gaiman, and acting by Anthony Hopkins, Angelina Jolie, and a stellar performance from Brendon Gleeson, it is, without a doubt, the most entertaining and engaging incarnation of this particular story in history.
And I've read at least 5 versions and seen other visual representations, including the related "13th Warrior."
The wife, who is NOT a movie buff, also felt the same way, saying the characters, effects, and in particular the 3D design of the film simply blew her away.
In the literature, there was never a reason for Grendel's fury or Hrothgar's surviving the night... it was always just a given. Gaiman takes all the classic elements and weaves a coherent modern story, just as he did for Snow White in "Snow, Glass, Apples."
See it. And see it in 3D, even if you have to drive an extra 30 minutes to do so.
librarycharlie
Mongoose
Tathlum said:
Indeed, and I mentioned 13th because it was such a fine movie.
Just had a friend see it in regular flat screen, he said it was an 8 of 10. FWIW.
I am very much a purist so I was rather unhappy with it.
I thought they could have done it in live action just as well. Animation just doesn't work for me. I agree the animation was superb and lifelike but I prefer life over animation.
It was much more medieval era than 5th century Denmark (namely the stone castle and walls did not exist in 5ht century Denmark).
I was unhappy the story line diverted from the original, but that did not 'make too mad, after all it was someone's interpretation, but the fact that they could have live action and didn't along with historicla inconsistencies made me think 'nice try, but it fell short.'
At least the thirteenth warrior tried to place it in a historical context. Now that movie/ book was terrific!
I thought they could have done it in live action just as well. Animation just doesn't work for me. I agree the animation was superb and lifelike but I prefer life over animation.
It was much more medieval era than 5th century Denmark (namely the stone castle and walls did not exist in 5ht century Denmark).
I was unhappy the story line diverted from the original, but that did not 'make too mad, after all it was someone's interpretation, but the fact that they could have live action and didn't along with historicla inconsistencies made me think 'nice try, but it fell short.'
At least the thirteenth warrior tried to place it in a historical context. Now that movie/ book was terrific!
Clovenhoof
Mongoose
There, I saw it last weekend.
First off: 13th Warrior was not more historical than this Beowulf. It is built on the historical manuscript of Ibn Fadlan, true, but that one breaks off shortly after meeting the Vikings by the Volga river. And the Vikings' armour was totally off in about 11 of 12 cases.
But still, I totally love that movie, make no mistake about that. (and the book isn't bad either)
So, now for Beowulf.
Frankly, I was a bit disappointed. I was unaware that it was a CGI movie, not having seen a single trailer or screenshot. Had I known that, I might not have even gone for it. I was expecting something in the style and colour of the 13th Warrior (which in turn was inspired by the original Beowulf), and what I saw was Shrek with less humour. Okay, maybe that's too harsh, but I just don't think that animation/CGI can do this material justice.
The 3D was pretty cool, sure. No complaints there.
The idea about Grendel's mom fits in smoothly with the original Beowulf story, and makes for a great link between Hrothgar, Grendel, and the dragon at the end.
If only it were a live action movie and not animation. :/
First off: 13th Warrior was not more historical than this Beowulf. It is built on the historical manuscript of Ibn Fadlan, true, but that one breaks off shortly after meeting the Vikings by the Volga river. And the Vikings' armour was totally off in about 11 of 12 cases.
But still, I totally love that movie, make no mistake about that. (and the book isn't bad either)
So, now for Beowulf.
Frankly, I was a bit disappointed. I was unaware that it was a CGI movie, not having seen a single trailer or screenshot. Had I known that, I might not have even gone for it. I was expecting something in the style and colour of the 13th Warrior (which in turn was inspired by the original Beowulf), and what I saw was Shrek with less humour. Okay, maybe that's too harsh, but I just don't think that animation/CGI can do this material justice.
The 3D was pretty cool, sure. No complaints there.
The idea about Grendel's mom fits in smoothly with the original Beowulf story, and makes for a great link between Hrothgar, Grendel, and the dragon at the end.
If only it were a live action movie and not animation. :/
Similar threads
