I'm sure if I had told either of the Wonder Twins I had an opportunity to see a film pertaining to the poem 'Beowulf' and did not go they would have strung me up and found interesting ways to make amends for my shortcoming. Keeping that in mind as I book my schedule this year I decided to give it a go and see what director Sturla Gunnarsson and his cast would do with the famed poem.
The kingdom of King Hrothgar [Stellan Skarsgård] is being terrorized by the troll, Grendel. Grendel is seeking revenge for the death of his father and the hands of Hrothgar. With superior strength and size Grendel cuts through Hrothgar's men like wheat and lays waste to the land. Desperate for help, Hrothgar calls for the aid of the great warrior, Beowulf [Gerard Butler], from Gaetland [which is now Sweden]. Beowulf gathers a small band of warriors with him and embarks on a journey to help Hrothgar. But his plans are foiled by a creature that will only take revenge upon those who have wronged him. Grendel will not engage in battle with Beowulf and his men at first. It is only upon meeting the seductive witch, Selma [Sarah Polley], that he begins to understand his supposed foe and all things will come to their inevitable end.
Having never read the poem that inspired this movie I cannot account for the accuracy of this film compared to the text. However, during the Q&A the scriptwriter did say that they took enormous liberties with the text and they felt what they were presenting in Bewoulf & Grendel was the 'bones' of the poem. There thoughts on this movie is that this could be the story that inspired the poem. My understanding of the nature of the poem is also limited. But Gunnarsson and guests did say that the poem has an aural history of 200 or so years, was committed to sheepskin, disappeared for 500 years and then was found in a burnt out English barn. I also understand though that poem has a devout and loyal readership. So the movie itself was inspired by the poem and made into the kind of story that could have inspired the poem. Follow?
Filmed on location in Iceland you've got to be pretty daft to screw up filming such gorgeous landscape. Iceland is breathtakingly beautiful and hostile at the same time. Gunnarsson recalled the number of base camps and vehicles lost to the weather but its hostility lends to create the appropriate atmosphere this film needs as the chain of events unfold in the story. A harsh and unforgiving land compare favorably with a harsh and unforgiving foe ravaging the ranks of the Danes. The production design was impressive as well though I did find the prosthetic body suits on Grendel and his father a wee bit hoaky and obvious. Liberties were also taken with the dialogue in the movie. For obvious reasons old English just wouldn't be cricket since no one would understand what is being said.
The opening sequence with a young Grendel by the side of his dead father ends in startling fashion. It is hard to say you want more action out of the film when it is bound by such revered text. But the sequences themselves are done well. There are plenty of bodies on spears and an arm is severed at the joint with the shoulder in self-inflicted and gruelling manner.
The movie itself though stands as pretty common fare. At the end of the film the beast has been defeated, so has another creature that comes with no explanation - at all! She just shows up and starts killing. Beowulf leaves will an understanding of how much nonsense there is with revenge and how petty little quarrels can blow up and have damning consquences. All in all it was a pretty standard film that will likely infuriate devotees to the poem and give the rest of us who know nothing of it only a muddy interpretation of it. Kind of like watching a made for tv Shakesperean movie then expecting to pass your English test the next day.
In case anyone wants to read it (the poem that is) here's a link.
http://www.lnstar.com/literature/beowulf/
[comment removed at poster's request]
I have to say that I thought the review posted by Mack bore little relation to the film that I saw on Friday at Paramount.
Whilst I can appreciate some of the points made I do take objection to the severiety at which they have been hammered home here.
Personally I had a little trouble with the opening of the film. A meandering camera shot over an ancient map of scandanavia to voiceover did smack a little of tv movie I agree and the opening scene establishing the motive of the protagonist did nothing to change that fear. But after this small glitch a totally different film emerged. The cinematography was stunning and I hardly think as a happy accident due to the beautiful landscape of Iceland. The closeup shots deployed far more than in any other action film I've seen helped show off the stella internation cast assembled. This could have really grated - the array of varying accents and the juxtaposition of modern expressions with period dialogue. But instead of coming across muddled both complimented the film, and the dialogue far cleverer, without the associated pretention than any recent (action) film I can recall.
His comments on the prosthetics I found also a little harsh. Again I had problems with the opening scene - young Grendel's whiskers seemed a little liberal and the performances not entirely convincing. But for the rest of the film I can only recall one scene where I thought his arms had a latex sheen that maybe needed dusting down a little. All in all a million times more convincing than any CGI that I have ever come across, be it green or otherwise.
I have to say that if you were to compare this to the common action fare mentioned it outclasses them all. Russell Crowes' "OSCAR&" winning performance never matches that of Gerrard Butler and the clanky rewriting of Troy is frankly laughable when held up to this screenplay. It's all very well writing a snobby review but at least give credit where it's due and frankly I think that was a the only thing lacking here.
Wow.
I thought Mack did a great review, as I'm sure it could have been much worse, he was being very polite.
I personally thought the movie was utter crap and was ticked off I wasted my time and a TIFF ticket.
This was a CBC movie of the week at best. The dialogue continuely dragged me out of the film and would not let me get lost in this epic era. Mack was bang on regarding the cinematograpgy, it was beautiful and it could not be otherwise considering the location.
The Grendle make up, young and old, was atrocious. Being "not CGI&" is a good thing, especially lately, but it is no excuse for using props from Robin Williams "Popeye&". The Film "Underworld&" which is universally trashed by critcs and fans alike developed and excellent way of making actors appear to be running fast without the use of CGI, the makers of Beowulf & Grendle should have employed the same ideas instead of shooting the scene and then speeding it up, very amateur.
The Sword play was no better than when my brother and I first got some Jedi LightSabres as Christmas gifts. This film also tried, and addmittedly got some, low brow laughs, which like the dislogue, immediately transported me out of the film.
Mr. Berzins, you should be ashamed of yourself. Not for your work, but for your brazenly defensive critique of someones review. You want to enter in to argumentitive discourse over someone's opionion? It's his review, his opinion, deal with it. I know I personally will not be swayed away from mine.
The movie is bad. You want to see a good movie, go watch the 13th Warrior, now THAT is a good film.
Norddeth
Hmm well I came here looking for reviews on the movie as I wasnt lucky enoguh to be at the film festival. I have heard some of the movie soundtrack so far which I thought was really good. Surprised that nobody mentioned that?
None of the above reviews have helped me much seeing as the positive review came from someone who criticises Crowe's Gladiator performance. And the negative reviewer seems to think that the 13th Warrior was a good movie. (I'm not saying its bad, but was rather surprised that he would have mentioned such a movie instead of Braveheart or Gladiator)
I guess I will have to wait till December to form my own opinion! Though I must say I am looking forward to Gerard Butler's performance and the movie looks to have stunning visuals and soundtrack.
[comment removed at poster's request]
"At the end of the film the beast has been defeated, so has another creature that comes with no explanation - at all! She just shows up and starts killing.&"
First off, we've seen the 'other creature' several times during the film, when she's tried to hunt various people in boats. Second - no explanation? Do you need it in neon? Obviously Grendel's mum. He returns to her before death and she's holding his body in state. It's not the most well-thought out aspect of the script, but I'd have thought it was impossible to miss the creature's place in the scheme of things.
As long as GERARD BUTLER stars in a movie, MILLIONS of women, from all over the world, will go to see the movie, as well as buy the DVD -- and, if the movie is even remotely as magnetic as Phantom of the Opera, will buy the DVDs for friends. All you need for a NO. 1 BOX-OFFICE DRAW is to star GERARD BUTLER in it.
ALLOW ME TO START BY QUOTING PART OF THE 'REVIEW ???'
[ start of quote " Having never read the poem that inspired this movie I cannot account for the accuracy of this film compared to the text. However, during the Q&A the scriptwriter did say that they took enormous liberties with the text and they felt what they were presenting in Bewoulf & Grendel was the 'bones' of the poem.
There*(I think he means Their) thoughts on this movie is that this could be the story that inspired the poem. My understanding of the nature of the poem is also limited. But Gunnarsson and guests did say that the poem has an aural**(again I think he means oral) history of 200 or so years, was committed to sheepskin, disappeared for 500 years and then was found in a burnt out English barn. I also understand though that poem has a devout and loyal readership. So the movie itself was inspired by the poem and made into the kind of story that could have inspired the poem. Follow?&" *end of quote]
IF YOU ARE NOT AQUAINTED WITH THE SUBJECT AND DO NOT UNDERSTAND THE CONCEPT OF THE FILM HOW CAN YOU CRITICIZE WHAT YOU DO NOT KNOW OR UNDERSTAND. THE SUBTLETIES AND INNUENDOES OBVIOUSLY ESCAPED THIS VIEWER. THE FILM IS MUCH MORE COMPLICATED THAN IT'S NAME.
I FOR ONE AM DESPERATELY HOPING TO SEE IT ON THE BIG SCREEN.
Well, even though I haven't seen this movie yet, I'm sympathetic to Mack's review. Yes, I'm a big fan of the poem. In the age of Peter Jackson we can make Beowulf much much closer to the poem, & really have it work. There's SO MUCH MORE in the Beowulf poem than the fight with Grendel & his mother. If treated with love, I am 100% positive the original poem could make a spectacular, gorgeous, exciting, epic, spine-tingling film. From all I've read about this film, it sounds like it's FAR from the epic, sumptuous, dark, luminous writing of the poem.
But fair enough - we all have different personal interpretations of things. Obviously it seems the film-makers' expectations were quite different from the original sense, story & flow of the poem.
i want more notes on the poem pls send to my mail address ok
I was lucky enough to see this movie at the Vancouver IFF- I DID re-read the poem prior to going and read John Gardner's book GRENDEL, along with the screen writer's blog on the movie web site- where Andrew Berzins clearly states this is NOT the poem. Since the action of the story took place in antiquity, who's to say what is the true story- and who cares- THIS is a GOOD story not a documentary! Lots of movies spark an interest in a subject and one looks up more info..this one did as much for me. For someone who likes History I realized there was a major gap, namely pre-Roman occupation Europe. Since seeing the film I've read alot more particularly John Grigsby's Beowulf and Grendel, a study of the history and mythology of the period. NOW I really want to see the movie again. No this is not the usual one-way viewing experience that we ususally get in movies- it's a dynamic, talk about alot kind of film. I loved it!