I saw a movie called beowulfand grendal a few weeks ago, probably from the 90's or early 2000's and it wasn't bad.
This one I hear is all about the 3-d special effects.
I want to see Beowulf, I think.
I had to read it, but I didn't mind. It's an Old English epic... that's kind of interesting in its own right.
The movie is bound to make slightly more sense than I could out of the book at the time.
I should perhaps reread teh book, now that I have more patience.
I'll give it points for cool camera views that you can do with 3-d generated by a computer. Definetly go see the imax-3d version if you're going to go, but I wouldn't bother.
Amongst the many problems I've accumulated over the years, the phone company gave me panic attacks.
And I had a really bad panic attack watching that movie last night.
That probably won't happen to you.
They still don't have down the computer generated people. It's not bad, but it's still not right. Not sure why they bother.
And the place I was in was way too loud, because I'm too old.
So overall, the presentation was Too Much. Maybe you're theater won't be so annoying.
I thought Beowulf's 3D presentation was really cool. I went to see a few 3D films like Jaws 3-D and Friday the 13th Part III back in the 80s when it was a big fad, and they had maybe two or three really strking 3D effects in the whole film. Beowulf has 3D FX in every scene, some subtle, some beat-you-over-the-head obvious, and it's amazing to see how far the technology has come over the past 20+ years.
The movie itself was nothing special, but it's a cool enough action flick with comic booky over[2~tones, if you're into such things.
I haven't seen any promos for any movies, so keep this in mind as I relate the following...
Melvin and I went to see Beowulf today.
I did not expect Melvin to like it, as I presumed he wouldn't get into a medieval fantasy based on an epic, but I was wrong (again). He seemed to very much enjoy the movie.
I liked it as well, and was rather surprised to discover this was an animation. I expected a live-action film instead. I think this is the first time I ever saw anyone attempt to make an animation this close to realistic. While I found the effect mildly distracting, it didn't take away from the story at all.
The story, of course, is a classic. And, of course, it's a good story. So seeing it retold in a movie format was kind of nice.
Plenty of action, of course. And brutish, in that special way you can only get from medieval tales.
All-in-all, I found it entertaining. But I would stop short of describing this as high art.
Well... I did a lot more reading regarding the movie.
It's a combination of animation, and acting, through this kind of interesting technique where all the actors wear a rubber jumpsuit with dots all over it, as well as a sort of form-fitted mask (again, with the dots), and they record all the muscle movements of the actors. They also used something to record the eye muscle movements, so they could keep the eye movements in sync with the rest of the muscle movements.
Then, they cast whatever actor they wanted (without regard for the actor's appearance) for the role, using the actors movements and grafting it to the bodies they wanted to use for the animation work.
Very intriguing, honestly. It allowed them to cast "McFly" as Grendel without having to worry that he didn't look enough like a monster (he screams a lot as Grendel... with the one direction that "everything Grendel does brings him pain"). It also allowed them to use this overweight actor for the role of Beowulf (I can't recall his name, but he doesn't look a damned thing like the Beowulf of that film). They have some heavy hitters playing in the movie, to be honest.
As for the story itself, they retooled parts of it. I don't want to give anything away, so I'll just say that the story they put together for the film addresses some of the poem's weaknesses as an epic; the third (and final) chapter fits in very nicely with the other two, where in the original, it lacked a device to help keep the chapters together. Some of the characters seemed to have been reworked a little, probably to help fit into the movie better. They could release the story itself, as is, and have a more compelling version of Beowulf than the original, I think.
To that end, the writers tried to work out what seemed missing from the story... what might have been dropped out because it had been transcribed by a monk, rather than preserved by a scholar. They apparently read through several different translations of the story to assemble the story that worked for them. I wonder how many scholars are going to be annoyed with this movie.
PS: I have a Futurama movie DVD for sale, if anyone's interested.
I have it in my queue, but I'm afraid that they toyed with the book too much. It was a fun book to be sure.
I probably have every movie that's currently out and probably some unreleased ones sitting in my place on DVD right now. Hubby managed to get himself randomly chosen for the SAG Awards nominating committee, so we're getting free DVDs of EVERYTHING. I don't know when they expect us to watch all of these movies before it's time for Kevin to submit his nominations. I think we've watched about 10 and have about 30 more to go.
didn't read the book. Given the choice, I always watch the movie first, and then read the book to see if more or cooler stuff happened in the book.
Without having read the book, I enjoyed the movie quite a bit. Don't know how they compare though.
Just watch Nightmare Before Christmas again.
What a fun movie to watch. Great music, fun animation, twisty little thing.
And I wonder if Rayne likes the movie.
Gien the choice, I always read the book first. The movie is usually a let down after tho'
Case in point: "Starship Troopers" bore ono resemblance to the Heinkein masterpiece
(This is an opinion only)
Just watch Nightmare Before Christmas again.
'bella - I always end up reading the book first, usually because I read a lot. But when I see the movie first I can appreciate the movie without b ook comparisons and maybe enjoy it a little bit more.
Then when I read the book, I can appreciate the book on its own.
As to Nightmare Before Christmas..
That's a great little scene!
Then she should check out Tim Burton's "Sweeny Todd: the Demon Barber of Fleet Street".
Melvin and I just finished watching that in the theatre, in one of our rare goings out to the theatre.
Marvelous music, although in some ways I found it annoying (having not seen any promos for the movie, I went into this without knowing it was a musical, so I was surprised again). Damned funny stuff in places, such as when the barber and the meat-pie lady discuss their oh-so-practical scheme for disposing of bodies. As has been noted elsewhere, cannibalism improves any movie.
Sasha Baron Cohen did a great job as Pirelli... very amusing, and quite well done.
Desparately sad movie, filled with tremendous (and at times almost off-hand) violence with straight razors, amazing contrapuntal melodies between characters with their own sick, twisted motives, and an excellent multi-layered series of moral lessons. And blood. Buckets, and buckets, of blood. More than in any one human body.
Noodle might love it. But you probably won't love Noodle's screams in the middle of the night, as she sees the straight razor descend upon her in her dreams.