Beowulf in IMAX 3-D

Beowulf in IMAX 3-D

Rating

single starsingle starsingle starhalf star

Users Rating

single starsingle starhalf star
1 rating

Your Rating

Create an account or log in to rate this movie

Recent Ratings

It is important to note the title that this review is under – it is not simply Beowulf, or even Beowulf 3-D. The version of Robert Zemeckis’ latest film that I saw was in IMAX 3-D, and as such it is nearly impossible for me to even try and discuss any “ordinary” version of this epic tale. The 3-D effects, especially when digitally projected 60 feet high, are that integral to the finished product. And these same 3-D effects also help make this ultimately average storyline into something truly special.

Legendary yet drunken King Hrothgar (Anthony Hopkins) lives a life of revelry and debauchery, regularly feasting in his legendary mead hall with his Queen Wealtheow (Robin Wright Penn) and his many subjects. As singing echoes through the chambers it raises the ire of the fierce demon Grendel (Crispin Glover) living nearby, who storms the hall and slaughters countless innocents. Thus, Hrothgar and his lands are so cursed, until the heroic Beowulf (Ray Winstone) comes from the sea with 14 trusted warriors to slay the demonic beast. After a ferocious battle in the hall, Grendel is indeed defeated at the hands of Beowulf. But when Grendel’s demon mother (Angelina Jolie) learns of the fate of her son she comes to exact her revenge, felling almost all of Beowulf’s compatriots. Beowulf and his sole remaining sidekick Wiglaf (Brendan Gleeson) storm off after the woman, tracing her to her watery lair. There Beowulf intends to slaughter this murderer himself, but when presented with an enticing choice he finds himself unsure of just what to do. His decision brings him great power, but with it a powerful curse of his own.

The storyline of Roger Avary and Neil Gaiman’s adaptation of the centuries old epic poem is so linear and concise that it would be simple to outline the entire thing with just a few more added sentences. Though they made their fair share of changes to the oft-told tale (for those unfamiliar: the original poem is even more straightforward, with less of the curses and more of Beowulf being a badass) they nonetheless kept it simple. And though the script was not originally intended to be filmed as such, that is why this particular version of Beowulf was perfectly set up for implementation via director Robert Zemeckis’ newly beloved motion capture technology. The story is a spirited adventure to be sure, and the acting from the all-star cast is more than acceptable, but this is a movie that hinges on its visual appeal. Like this year’s hit 300, the look is stylized in an over the top way that makes it supremely eye-catching. But whereas 300 only drew in its backgrounds, Beowulf is basically an entirely animated piece of cinema (though motion capture was used to capture the movements and facial expressions of the thespians that provided the voices). And with the 3-D effects thrown in to boot, it is easy to see how the visual language of Beowulf literally makes this movie what it is.

The doll-like faces of the film’s characters border on expressionless, providing little in the way of human connection for the audience, but everything else on screen is so grand and striking that it is easy to dismiss this shortcoming (something that was not nearly as easy to overlook in Zemeckis’ maiden mo-cap effort, 2004’s Polar Express). The only other limitation to be found in the technology is that when things get moving fast and furious enough – as things often do in epic battles such as these – the 3-D can get a bit confusing and even painful to look at. But past that, this is some truly groundbreaking work; Zemeckis constantly challenges himself with interesting and innovative angles and shots that use the technology at his disposal to its fullest. An aerial shot of snow falling, for example, manages to use the 3-D as a strange short of reverse depth effect, as snow falls from sky to ground going farther back from our viewpoint. Aside from a few well-intentioned exceptions, these shots never come off as a Captain Eo kind of gimmicky that seeks to exploit the 3-D effect – instead they really just help immerse the audience into this particular world.

It’s hard to believe that Paramount managed to get a PG-13 rating for their Fall tentpole; the violence (and not to mention nudity) is focused on and flaunted enough to approach the levels of the aforementioned hard R-rated 300. No doubt the animated nature of the characters kept the MPAA from taking what we see too seriously, but nonetheless those who enjoy bodily dismemberment will have much to enjoy in Beowulf. Its grand themes get a bit muddied at times, and its success rests almost entirely on the shoulders of its gorgeous 3-D effects, but still Beowulf can be called nothing if not entertaining.

Grade: B+

- Jeff Latta

Comments

music soup
11/16/2007
02:52PM
Age: 30
Location
los angeles
go see Southland Tales! do it now!!!!

did they offer you buttsex?

cloudscollide
11/16/2007
03:08PM
Age: 23
Location
PA
I was thinking of seeing this tonight but i'm so fucking tired.
Michael Smer
11/16/2007
03:17PM
Age: 27
music soup
go see Southland Tales! do it now!!!!


I am a slave to reviews and Southland Tales got shit on. I'll pass.
music soup
11/16/2007
03:36PM
Age: 30
Location
los angeles
think for yourself man. those reviewers are all fucking stupid.

did they offer you buttsex?

jeff the baptist
11/16/2007
03:37PM
no, no they aren't.....expect my review soon.

but lets get back to beowulf, people!
cloudscollide
11/16/2007
05:01PM
Age: 23
Location
PA
Good review. But yeah I really do want to see this but I'm kind of mad it's only pg-13. The poem is extremely gory and if it's a CGI film, it better have some serious CGI gore. But if it's only pg 13, I don't know how much gore you can really put in it.
danal
11/17/2007
11:18AM
Age: 25
Location
Toronto, Ontario
I watched this movie last night. I would have much rather seen Gigli and Glitter simultaneously while blowing a small Japanese man.

I thought this movie was god awful and so insanely boring... Of the five of us, only one enjoyed it, another thought it was decent but they really fucked it up, and three of us thought it was utter garbage. Worst $11.95 I've spent.

"Use short sentences. Use short first paragraphs. Use vigorous English. Be positive, not negative."

MySpace / Facebook

GodzillaVsSinatra
11/20/2007
11:28AM
Location
Atlanta
I have said before with tongue full blown in cheek that due to all the cheapened hollywood remakes such as cinematic disasters ranging from Dukes Of Hazzard, to Herbie, to Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles, hollywood must be out of original ideas.
And wow, I guess I was right because we have told or more or less retold every story there is to tell in so many different forms that we have to revert all the way back to the beginning of storytelling time. I always laugh at the "entertainment" industry when I see how they attempt to rehash some tired old egg in the form of a film that should simply be left on the shelf, yet they put some blowjob queen like Angelina Jolie in it and try to pass it off as some revolutionary new-age shit. I mean what's next the epic of Gilgamesh with Eva Mendez and the Rock? Stop going to these movies and they will stop making them. Fuck creative adaptation as well. They will just keep rehashing, re-creating, and re-kindling the same old tired bullshit as long as people keep trading in their almighty dollars for the opportunity to cram their fat asses into a theater for two miserable hours. The non-creative idiots in hollywood will just keep laughing as they make their way over to the set where they're probably already making the movie "Oedipus" starring Brad Pitt as the tragic hero and Paris Hilton as his incestual mother. This Movie is no "event", it's just another laughable piece of excrement shat out of hollywood to be thoughtlessly consumed by the movie-going masses.
scott.m
11/20/2007
12:01PM
Hahaha, damn. What a tirade. However, news flash: Hollywood has arguably been low on "original" ideas from the very beginning. It's always been, first and foremost, an industry; motion pictures weren't even considered an art form initially, just a profitable technological revolution. The majority of great art has always come from the nitch filmmakers, with occasional noteworthy exceptions (a phenomenon that persists today). I really don't think there's been a noticeable decline (except maybe in the sheer amount of shitty straight-to-video movies coming out due to decreasing production costs); we simply remember the masterpieces from days gone by because those were the best of the best, but that doesn't mean Hollywood was ever averse to churning out flash in the pan money makers.
GodzillaVsSinatra
11/20/2007
12:08PM
Location
Atlanta
scott.m
Hahaha, damn. What a tirade. However, news flash: Hollywood has arguably been low on "original" ideas from the very beginning. It's always been, first and foremost, an industry; motion pictures weren't even considered an art form initially, just a profitable technological revolution. The majority of great art has always come from the nitch filmmakers, with occasional noteworthy exceptions (a phenomenon that persists today). I really don't think there's been a noticeable decline (except maybe in the sheer amount of shitty straight-to-video movies coming out due to decreasing production costs); we simply remember the masterpieces from days gone by because those were the best of the best, but that doesn't mean Hollywood was ever averse to churning out flash in the pan money makers.

Point taken, i'm just so tired of remakes.
scott.m
11/20/2007
12:17PM
I know, me too :(

But hey, I'm sure this is at least better than the Christopher Lambert adaptation.
GodzillaVsSinatra
11/20/2007
12:23PM
Location
Atlanta
It would be almost impossible for it not to. ;)
jeff the baptist
11/20/2007
01:25PM
good point scott, and let me follow it up further: since the dawn of cinema, remaking the same story over and over has been the norm. There were like 3 versions of Uncle Tom's Cabin just in the silent era, I believe. and countless other examples. Movies arent (for better or worse) treated like books, where the original idea is key. Remaking a book would be stupid, but its totally different for movies. Movies have always been about presenting ideas visually, not necessarily creating them. It's perfectly normal in all the history of film that the same story (or same characters) get used every few years. film noir had philip marlowe....now we get the teenage mutant ninja turtles.
cloudscollide
11/20/2007
06:37PM
Age: 23
Location
PA
We basically needed ONE good Beowulf movie and hopefully this is the one. All the movies of Beowulf we have so far are embarrassing. It's one of the greatest pieces of literature ever, and we can't make one good fucking movie from it. I still haven't seen the new one yet but I can't wait.
indecentbass
11/20/2007
08:18PM
Location
portland, or
I saw this in 3-D and if I wouldn't have it probably would have not nearly been as good. This movie was better than expected. I just keep thinking I wish this wasn't computer animation...Angelina Jolie....booya!
GodzillaVsSinatra
11/20/2007
09:38PM
Location
Atlanta
Angelina just does nothing for me, maybe because she came from Jon Voight's balls. Who's to say.