Groomlakearea51 Posted November 27, 2007 Share Posted November 27, 2007 Took a few minutes last week and went to Beowulf last week and there were 2 choices, 3D and no 3D. Opted for 3D. Very nice 3D glasses (not the usual crappy ones and you get to keep them probably for the DVD later...). I was unaware, however, that the movie was done by "motion capture" and then computer graphic generated. That allowed for the 3D effects to be very, very good, not just the usual 2 or 3 funny things coming out of the screen. Scenery, buildings, virtually everything had the proper spatial effects that you should see with "stereo vision". It was very close to lifelike, and was not a distraction. Only CG "failure" was they could not seem to get horses to run correctly. A certain scene looked like a bunch of Shrek donkey butts running past with all of their legs in "lockstep". Funny, but if you have horses, then it's obvious. Horses don't run (as in gallop) like dogs..... Story line was ok, but skewed way off the "Beowulf" line pretty much completely after fight with Grendl.... No complaints, as it's entertainment, but story line played to Angelina Jolie's various attributes (the gold body with the 5" spikes growing out of her heels was impressive....) She's not really "bad", she just gets very dangerous when she's p*ssed off. Moral of the story line... (1) Don't become romantically involved with a water demon, regardless of how good she looks, and (2) When you make a deal with a really good looking water demon, keep your end of the bargain.... On the actors, Hrothgar's part well done by Anthony Hopkins; Jolie was great (OK, I'll admit it... she looked great..[]), but for that part, any "babe" would have done well. IMO, Jolie was certainly cast as Grendl's mom to draw the crowds, not for her "acting" abilities. John Malkovich did Unferth verywell. Winstone as Beowulf? Ok I guess, but something missing. Would have been better if Beowulf had been done by somebody like Gerard Butler from "300". Interestingly, Grendl's short part was done by Crispin Glover. Movie, while ostensibly a PG-13, is really not for kids under about 15-16. In this case, the PG really and seriously means parental guidance. Jolie's nudity, while well covered by the gold skin with no "defining" features that crossed the "R" (or "X") line, is still really way much more than PG-13 ought to be. Other nudity? Beowulf fighting in the nude with the "Bart Simpson Method" of private parts covering was really uneccessary. The 3D blood and guts graphics during the fighting scenes are way too much (IMHO) for kids under 13-14, and even then it's "iffy". While a real pain, as a suggestion I would recommend that before watching the movie, they might want to read Beowulf or at least the "Cliff Notes", etc. If you are so inclined, put some good classical through your Klipsch, get comfortable, and crack out one of the modern translations (from the Old English dating to about 700-800 AD). Opinions on the movie from members? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
seti Posted November 27, 2007 Share Posted November 27, 2007 I can't wait to see this in 3d but mostly for the 3d : ) This technology started so long ago and it is getting better with each attempt. I have a stereo camera that I really enjoy using. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve_L Posted November 29, 2007 Share Posted November 29, 2007 Thanks for the write up, I'm looking forward to seeing this! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.