Beowulf (2007) User Reviews

Beowulf was by no means a bad movie. It was much worse than that.A bad movie would have been an improvement.\nThe target audience was apparently video game playing 15\nyear old boys with the attention span of a flea. Somebody owes me $7.50.

05/22/2008, 10:10 am

After seeing the epic story that is Beowulf with my AP Literature class in theaters, I can sum up our initial responses during the movie with one word: laughter. The laughter was not out of intentional humor by the creators; rather, it was out of the sheer ridiculousness that literally about 95% of the story was altered from the classic original. The only major similarity that I could find was that the â??heroâ??sâ?? name was the same. The movie became a comedy because it was so disgustingly inaccurate. Besides the visuals, there is nothing good I can say about the movie.Why am I so closed-minded? If you knew the real story, you would be too. Beowulf was a true hero in the original story. Nothing, including women, power, and riches would have changed him or his actions. Neither Beowulf, nor Hrothgar had sex with Grendelâ??s mother. Beowulf killed her straight away (which included an excellent battle deep down underwater). That means then that Grendel was not Hrothgarâ??s son, and the dragon was not in any way related to Beowulf. When Beowulf killed Grendel, he pulled off his arm by strength alone, not through a chain/door contraption. The character of Grendel to me was hilarious. This monster, who was supposed to have been a descendent of Cainâ??s clan, was laughable. He didnâ??t look the part; I almost pitied him instead of feared him. King Hrothgar was a respected king who tried to take care of his people. He was not in any way a dumb-witted drunk. He also did not commit suicide; an act like that among the Anglo-Saxons would have been repulsive. It was noble to fight to the death. The dialogue was unbearable; most memorable was the scene in which Beowulf utters an â??uhhhâ?? sort of grunt. He was, in fact, an eloquent speaker and an intelligent hero in the poem.I could unendingly continue, but the basics have been explained. All in all, if you have read the poem, I would not recommend watching this movie, unless you are in it for laughs.

05/22/2008, 10:10 am

It was made well. The animation was freakin greatness. there is some mild nudity. Definitly not for children, but a must see

05/22/2008, 10:10 am

I cannot tell you how disappointing this film was. Every so often when going to the theater, you see something so blatantly bad, so clearly below par, that you are tempted to write and ask for your money back. "Beowulf" is that film.Frankly, I had high hopes for this release. If you have ever read the poem, you know that it has tremendous possibility for a swords and sorcery genre film. Its got everything - kings, heros, swords, demons, magic talismans... it should have been a fantasy to rival the world of Tolkien. Sadly, these guys chose to cheapen the whole thing.It has none of the quality of filmmaking of the Lord of the Rings series. The visual effects were so far below the state of the art that the entire movie looks like it was rendered on a playstation. Frankly, considering the jerky, repetitive movements of the rendered actors, it was hard to watch. Frankly, they simply missed an enormous opportunity to make a beautiful film, went cheap, and it shows.Further, the art direction was just downright stupid. Who renders high heels onto a mythical demon, in a time before time began? It insults the viewers to modernize these figures in so unimaginitive a fashion, not to mention that the cheap digital nature of the film took visualizations meant to be erotic and seductive and made them plastic in the worst way. Even Angelina Jolie nude and gold painted lacked sexual provocation, and looked, well, fake. That is hard to do considering how hot she is.The story is similarly poorly assembled. Where they could have delved into the real moral texture of the story - the fatal flaws of the hero Beowulf - they chose to gloss over, simply indicate that he was indeed less than perfect, and get back to the action. The writers simply truncated every possible line of character development, and hoped you would not notice.Please, do yourself a favor. Skip this one, wait for it to hit TNT. It is not worth more than $2 out of ten of your movie going dollars.

05/22/2008, 10:10 am

I thought this movie was amazing....I dont know much about the original story and I hear that the movie has nothing to do with the original story but I thought it was incredible and so did the people that I saw it with.....even though we didnt get to see it in 3D...I cant wait to go back just to watch it in 3D!!! I highly recommend EVERYONE go see it 17 only though

05/22/2008, 10:10 am

I would not say a bad but not a great movie. The grafics were interesting but cheap. I think the the story told here was not bad. But as a cartoon did not work for me. Many of the cartoon figures appear to be direct rip off of other movies almost.

05/22/2008, 10:10 am

where can i get the cd at?precious Lord

05/22/2008, 10:10 am

The opening credits for the studio were by far the best part...great 3-D imagery; it was all down hill from there though. Way too gross; Grendel was a puss dripping, slobbering cretin that oozed disgusting ear fluids...yuck. I nearly left after the first 30 minutes or so. With that said it was ok after Grendel died. Animation was ok not great, definitely can't recommend should have been rated R due to graphic violence.

05/22/2008, 10:10 am

Other than Jolie's sexually portrayed demeanor, the rest of the movie was great with great effects. Can't writers be creative without giving us the same ol' womanly wiles storyline? Peruse the classics and lets get back to good clean fun!

05/22/2008, 10:10 am