Film

What's on at the cinema plus reviews of the latest movie and DVD releases

Updates:

Beowulf (2007)

Director: Robert Zemeckis

Time Out rating

Average user rating

66 reviews

Synopsis

In a legendary time of heroes, the mighty warrior Beowulf battles the demon Grendel and incurs the wrath of the beast's ruthlessly seductive mother. Their epic clash forges the timeless legend of Beowulf.

Movie review

From Time Out London

‘Bollocks! Give me a gobble, then!’ This sample dialogue is typical of the many miscalculations made in Robert Zemeckis’ tediously protracted, mis-judged and puerile animated adaptation of ‘Beowulf’. It’s evident from the script – by British-born graphic novelist Neil Gaiman and Tarantino’s one-time collaborator Roger Avary – that it wasn’t the power and beauty of the language of our great eponymous, anonymous eighth-century Old English epic encomium that attracted the filmmakers. Nor, indeed, was it the work’s insight into pre-Anglo-Saxon history, as Anthony Hopkins’ Welsh-accented kinsmen and the snowbound mountain castles of table-flat Denmark bear eloquent witness. But even as a mere convenient launchpad for some vertiginous, 3D-assisted, man-on-beast heroics located in the eternally-adolescent gothic/fantasy/horror comic-book tradition, it seems an irrelevance.

Part of the problem is the animation technology itself. In re-animating the actors’ performances, ‘enhanced motion capture’ (the technique Zemeckis adopted with ‘The Polar Express’) makes of them creepier spectres than the creatures by which they are often surrounded. Thus, however gloopy and cadaverous the 20ft Grendel (voiced by ‘crazy’ Crispin Glover) appears or how unexpected we find the swoops of the fire-breathing dragon (non-Equity) and how bizarre the serpents-tailed Goldfinger babe presented by his protean mother (Angelina Jolie), none of them can compete with the sheer, unsettling oddity of the humans, with their milky-blind eyes. This applies especially to our hero, Beowulf, beneath whose glistening, highly sexualised , often naked rejuvenated body and bulging, leather-bound musculature lies the just-detectable face and movements of dear old Ray Winstone. The final, kinetic aerial battle scenes are eye-poppingly spectacular – especially in the 3D IMAX-version under review – but they come way too late to save the film.

Author: Wally Hammond 2007-11-12 15:58:02

Time Out London Issue 1943: November 14-20 2007

Bookmark

User reviews of this film

Angela said...

Posted on Nov 19 2007 12:36 This was inappropriate and not suitable for the 12A rating it got it should have been at least a 15 even though it was an animation. This contains more sex, violence and other inappropriate references. The 12A reference it has suggests that it is suitable for all or most ages but the content is anything but for all ages.
My advice would be to avoid this film there are both better and more appropriate films to go and see.
We sat through the first 5 minutes and then walked out due to just how inappropriate it is.

Report as inappropriate
Angela said...

Posted on Nov 19 2007 12:28 THIS was HORRIFICLY inappropriet as it contians things that should be rated at least at a 15 not a 12A.People are always saying that you should ban children from playing vidoe games and thins as thay primote violence but this film is more inappropriet than most tv games put together

Report as inappropriate
JonJ said...

Posted on Nov 19 2007 12:23 I have to agree completely with the rating. I (naively) took my mature nine year old to see the film on the basis that Star Wars 3 and Lord of the Rings had similar ratings and were not inappropriate. We walked out after five minutes due to bad language and violence. This should without doubt have been a 15 - what is the value in lowering the rating? It definitely wasn't a kids film.

Report as inappropriate
carolann said...

Posted on Nov 19 2007 11:55 We took our 11 and 12 year olds to see this last night and boy oh boy do I wish I hadn't. The language in this film left myself, my husband and my kids absolutely horrified. This should have been a good film but most definitely been rated a 15. Very gory and a bit long winded. Just don't take the kids. Hugely wrongly rated as a 12a

Report as inappropriate
karen said...

Posted on Nov 19 2007 10:42 From the trailer i got the impression this would be a Narnia type animation albeit with a little more action, rated 12A didn't give me cause for concern when i decided to take my 13 year old to see this film ..... i certainly wished i'd looked into it more thoroughly because the 12A certificate doesn't prepare you for the level of toe curling grossness (i have an eye phobia) anyone who has seen the film will understand that comment!!
Seriously though is was one of the worst films i have ever seen totally unsuitable in my view for the majority of kids some in the cinema as young as 7/8 but also i found it dull for 80% of the film and i wished i had saved myself the money and the bother of going to see it ........a real let down !

Report as inappropriate
Ronald said...

Posted on Nov 19 2007 10:29 Seems like some people here were in a movie they shouldn't have gone to in the first place. I chose the 3D-version and I was totally fascinated. Apart from two shadow-technical-faults caused by the 3-d-technique it was the first 3-d-movie that I could watch without getting a headache (cause eyes always have to get used to the glasses). And now I hope this movie will get an oscar for best animation, cause I think they managed to set a new level in this matter. It probably won't get a nomination for best film of the year, but it was certainly one of the best films I have seen so far ... at least in the category of the making (art). Can't wait to get the Blu-ray or HD-DVD ... maybe in 1-2 years time when that will come available at affordable prices.

Report as inappropriate
Lucy said...

Posted on Nov 19 2007 08:58 I fell asleep. I love sci-fi/fantasy and had at least heard the premise of this epic poem. However, apart from the amazing CG this film was boring as hell. I was very dissapointed with it. This should have been a 15 at least, if not an 18, it was ridiculously gory. Should have seen 30 days of night, at least I would have known what to expect. The most exciting part of this film was seeing the trailer for the Golden Compass!

Report as inappropriate
RobH said...

Posted on Nov 18 2007 17:23 In 3D the film was amazing - the whole cinema was spell bound by the experience, but I'd have gotten a bit bored in standard 2D

Report as inappropriate
Lizzie said...

Posted on Nov 18 2007 13:57 Rubbish film, don't bother going to see it - np stars -walked out after 15 minutes and went to see 30 days of night instead - much better!

Report as inappropriate
ben said...

Posted on Nov 18 2007 12:18 I thought it was an incredible animation film, the actors the way it was done i mean Wow i dont think it would look as good is they had real people doing it but it was a great film that made some of us jump wiles watching it good story line 5/5

Report as inappropriate
Steve said...

Posted on Nov 18 2007 11:51 I don't know why they had to animate the characters for this film, as it is not quite believable, the CGI for the monsters is outstanding, and would have worked really well with live actors. Definitely a leave your brain at the door sort of film, and just sit back and enjoy, however I left feeling slightly disappointed, 6/10 could do better.

Report as inappropriate
Jonathan said...

Posted on Nov 18 2007 09:33 I thought the story was actually a big improvement to that of the original poem. Instead of the rather disjointed, episodic nature of the original story - Beowulf kills Grendel; Beowulf kills Grendel's mother; many years later, Beowulf kills a dragon - the film integrated all these elements so that they made sense. Transforming Grendel's mother from a monster similar to but worse than Grendel himself into a sort of succubus, and introducing the theme of temptation and transgression for the old king and for Beowulf himself, so that the attacks of the monsters are ultimately caused by their own sins (rather than those of Cain!) - this, in my opinion, made for a much for satisfying and interesting story. I especially liked the explanation, within the film, for why its plot differs from that of the original poem (Beowulf lies about Grendel's mother, and his version of the episode gets repeated by the poets!). I agree, however, that it wasn't enormously well executed: technology hasn't yet reached a stage where we can accept long, serious, talky scenes between animated characters or think of them as serious moral agents. The same plot - even the same script - done in a more traditional fashion, with the CGI reserved for the creatures, might have resulted in a really good film.

Report as inappropriate
Richard said...

Posted on Nov 17 2007 22:19 I don't know how this film got a 12A. If it had been real actors rather than 'enhanced motion capture' animation I'm sure it would have been a 15. I took my 11 year old and - sex and violence wise - this went a lot further than Spiderman. My advice would be not to take any child under 12

Report as inappropriate
LRDR said...

Posted on Nov 17 2007 22:00 This is by far the worst film that I have ever seen in my life. I left the cinema half way through- that's how bad it was. I have never left a film before this one. If you are wandering whether or not to see this film then take my advice and don't. It is a rubbish, ridiculous film that is weird and scary. When you leave the cinema you will be highly dissapointed. Just do not see it. Please. For your own sake...

Report as inappropriate
Tone said...

Posted on Nov 17 2007 17:30 Utterly incredible! The 3D version really immerses you into the movie, and even though its long, I couldn't keep my eyes off the screen. Pure escapist extravaganza. Grendel is terrifying, and the dragon scene is astounding. For a 12A, its incredibly gory though, if it were live action, it would certainly be an 18cert!

Report as inappropriate