anybody see this yet?
I just came back from a digital 3d screening.  it was beyond awesome (i'm a massive fan of the original story)  I really like how they took a different interpretation of it from the awesome '04-'05 Beowulf & Grendel.

pleasantly surprised that it didn't get a complete kiss of death from Jolie.

it stayed pretty faithful in some regards to the established story,  and well visually its hard to beat.   i still can't decide if some parts of it were live action or not.

I thought it was a huge dissapoinment and completely butchered the original story.  All in all, it was a mediocre movie with one awesome fight scene (the dragon) and a lot of extra dross thrown in.

From what I've read, it sounds a lot different to the original story. Neil Gaiman wrote the screenplay, no? That's probably the main reason I'm going to see it.

The trailer I saw didn't impress me...in fact it looked like a made for TV movie. 

thalaw,  there was a recent made for tv movie too...

as for people saying it butchered the original story?  it's probably the closest adaptation you can find (but I haven't seen the made for tv movie yet).
This was the only one with all three battles, (although the mother was embellished upon, and Beowulf becomes king of the danes, and not the geats in the movie). It succesfully hits upon all of the tropes of the original epic, and remarkably carries the symbolism of the balance of opposing forces, being guided by a third constant throughout the entire movie.  I haven't seen any other interpretation other than John Gardner's Grendel do such a thing.

[spoiler]
What I mean about this recurring theme is that most of the main plot devices and themes deal in threes:
three battles,
three funerals,
three kings,
three recurring themes of the body - the head, the arm and the foot
three ascriptions or religions - paganism/norse, christianity, and epic/legend status
the holy trinity of christianity - father, son, and holy ghost
three states of Beowulf as a man - as a hero, as a monster, and ultimately as a mortal
and the three stereotypical parts of the hero's journey - rise fall and ascension.

in each of these themes, you find an opposition between two of the forces, and a common thread between the two that drives the story. For example in the movie the myth of dragon drives the constant troubles between father and son, and between 'good' and 'evil'. just as women cause tension between lords and thanes...blah, i could go on about this forever. but i'll spare everyone my rantings.
[/spoiler]
lets not forget that the original epic was for entertainment purposes as well. It's about a guy that prides himself on being a hero and killing monsters. The movie does this in a fantastic fashion, and is self-referential in the fact that these are fantastic stories of fantastic deeds.

I saw it as well. The graphics are in fact the best I've seen.

It started and I went; hmmm ok is this a cartoon movie or real?

I personally really didn't like it...
The visuals were just far too jarring, the acting was pretty terrible, and it just felt so.. contrived half the time..

Not too mention the terrible character design of Grendel. Gleh...

I guess it stayed pretty true to the story, but I wasn't a big fan of that in the first place, so that may be part of my not-total-liking of the film..  <_<

-CM

Just saw the movie last night, I liked it, my brother didn`t. I`m not familliar with the original story, but it kept my attention through the entire movie.

Visuals are great, but when you look at the female characters you can clearly see that it`s animated.
I actually liked Grendel`s design-really creepy and grotesque.
Overall I think it`s much better than the old version with Christopher Lambert, and worth watching.

Quote from: Jakew on November 25, 2007, 03:53:23 PM
From what I've read, it sounds a lot different to the original story. Neil Gaiman wrote the screenplay, no? That's probably the main reason I'm going to see it.

Yeah... that's why I watched Mirror Mask.

I've learned my lesson about seeing movies based on who makes them.

yeesh, i actually really liked both Mirror Mask and Stardust, but i've never been too fond of Gaiman's comics work.  I'm hoping he'll have something to do with the Genndy Tartovsky Dark Crystal sequel.

Quote from: detourne_me on December 02, 2007, 07:51:06 AM
yeesh, i actually really liked both Mirror Mask and Stardust, but i've never been too fond of Gaiman's comics work.  I'm hoping he'll have something to do with the Genndy Tartovsky Dark Crystal sequel.

I enjoyed Mirror Mask also though the story was essentially a prettier Labyrinth. Beowulf on the other hand was an enjoyable film but when it comes to staying true to the source material it fell short. I'm hesitant about a Dark Crystal sequel though I doubt it will get off the ground given the life span of hollywood projects Tartovsky is attached too. (Astroboy the maybe live action maybe animated movie will never come out)

Yeah, I didn't like Mirror Mask much either ... mainly due to the visuals. However, I like Gaiman's written work.

Stardust was also ok ... not great, but not too bad.

The Mrs and I saw it last weekend in a 3D showing. Definately worth paying the couple of extra bucks for that version. We both rather liked it.

When I told her that Neil Giaman worked on the script, she misheard me and though I had said Neil Diamond. We both had a laugh at the thought of a Neil Diamond sung ballad of Beowulf.