I haven’t read any reviews on this movie so this is based solely on my personal preference and observation from the trailers. Why do I think this new adaptation of the classic Beowulf will fail? Well, I think it’s the big obvious reason. The entire movie is done with CGI. It worked for “Final Fantasy: The Spirits Within” but I just don’t feel it happening for this movie.
First of all, Final Fantasy had very little known stars that you could visibly make out. Alec Baldwin, Ving Rhames and Steve Buscemi are the most notable of voice-over actors in that movie. But, where Beowulf faults is by having known actors, not to mention Oscar® winning/nominated actors, in the movie that you can clearly see who they are. Obviously Angelina Jolie plays Grendal’s mother, Anthony Hopkins and John Malkovich all make visible appearances in the movie.
I’m sorry, I just can’t have Angelina or anyone for that matter in an all CGI environment…for the whole movie. Look at where movies are today. We have Middle Earth and Narnia all created in the computer yet still leaving the human element intact, for the most part. The promos I’ve seen have some reviewer saying something to the effect of, “This is how movies are going to be in the future”. God, I hope not.
When I first saw the teaser for this movie, besides thinking, “Oh, 300: the sequel” (I…AM…BEOWULF/THIS…IS…SPARTA) - I thought, “This could be a cool movie….wait, was that all CGI?” Not until I saw more trailers did I have confirmation that it was entirely CGI and I was convinced this movie would fail. It’s not even the best CGI either, no offense to those guys who worked tirelessly, but Ratatouille was more interesting looking.
I really hope this movie does well, for the sake of making those greedy Hollywood folks making back their money, but I just don’t see that happening. If I’m wrong, cool. I still won’t pay to see this movie, if you know what mean.
November 15th, 2007 at 10:43 am
You’re just a hater! Robert Zemeckis has done a lot of good work and a lot of bad, so this film could go either way. Forrest Gump, Back to the Future 1-3, Death Becomes Her, Roger Rabbit have all been done by Zemeckis so he has a variety that can work well with his directing. He did produce Tales from the crypt since the start so there is hope for Beowulf.
“Final Fantasy: The Spirits Within” was an absolutely terrible movie and the CGI cannot overcome a poor story that went nowhere. However, Final Fantasy: Advent Children is godlike, where the amazing CGI and story collaborate to make an excellent epic film. It can be seen as a little silly that the people represent real actors, but with CGI the creators are only limited to their mind for what they can make those characters do. It does seem to play a little from the 300 war style heroism, but 300 rocked. Just because he yells his own name, I dont see the connection to saying ‘this is sparta’. 300 was based partly on a real event with some movie glam thrown on it, but for the most part it stuck to a realistic manner. All of Beowulf was fictional with monsters and such so they are similar, but not congruent.
Considering there was a Beowulf movie starring Christopher Lambert that shifted in and out of mortal kombat style techno-ey music, this should be a big improvement compared to what has been made regarding Beowulf. Since just about everyone had to read Beowulf in high school, I am interested in seeing how this turns out. I’m pissed Beowulf isnt rated R (as I am with any movie). Yet it is cool to see something made in CGI that isnt for Children (Pixar, Dreamworks, etc). This is a new development for CGI movies for adults, so its nice to see a change. Resident Evil Degeneration will be made by sony as a CGI movie, so I have high hopes for that in the future.
If this movie flops, then oops! But I cant hate it for the same reasons you do. Only time will tell!
November 25th, 2007 at 5:29 pm
I too think this will fail massively. I also saw the connection with 300, and laughed over it.
Personally, I think they saw the cult following that Beowulf and Grendel had, and are trying to rip it off. B&G was an obviously far superior movie…I just wish more knew of that wonderful gem.
November 26th, 2007 at 10:00 am
@ Seraph
Even though it did well the first weekend at the box office, where is it now, #3 or 4. People went to see it just for the hype. My co-worker said it was decent. Frankly, “decent” isn’t enough for me to shell out $7.50 a ticket to see it. Thanks for the comment!
December 28th, 2007 at 1:57 pm
I saw it in 3D and it was pretty good. Not the greatest movie ever for the hype, but worth a view. It was nice to see computer graphics actually having some mature action (fighting). Now we just need Saw 8 in CG! bwahah
December 28th, 2007 at 2:49 pm
@Josh - Though it did do “alight” at the box office, I still think it was an overall failure in the sense that it did not live up to the hype, as you mentioned. I don’t mind seeing CGI films more often, just not with REAL actors as the CGI. Voice them all you want, but to see actors in all CGI throws me off.
January 2nd, 2008 at 2:16 pm
@Sal - Yeah they did hype it up pretty bad, but it wasnt horrible. CG movies rule, lets hope for more genuine films - with or without real people hehe