"Beowulf" Talkback (Spoilers)

P

per fin

New member
You should have heard this kid behind me screaming his head off when Grendel appeared.I meant,this has to be the best CGI since Monster's Inc. :D
 
"Mods,if you'd be so kind." Well,aren't we just so courteous?

Hey, CGI is classified as animation and this is CGI.Therefore,it's animation.

Know what,whatever.Just lock the darn thing.You lock everything else.:mad:
 
I actually thought it was quite brilliant.

It's especially good for people who had to read the poem--the legend that we all know from high school, in this movie, stems from lies that Beowulf told. I thought that was fascinating. In fact, exaggeration and distortion kept coming up in this film. For an animated film to have themes like how oral history distorts the truth is really something. It nods to the source material with that, then goes off to create something much more complex and exciting and better story-wise.

Also, the 3D was awesome. The motion capture was impressive but still has a ways to go--some of the women especially looked weird and fake.
 
We will not be so kind. I don't mod here, but I do mod Entertainment and this movie is animated, Entertainment is live-action.

Mr. Lucas does not have the authority to lock anything, nor is he able to declare a CGI movie live-action.
 
Just like shouting "I DECLARE BANKRUPTCY!" in a crowded room doesn't alter your financial status, summoning the mods by name does nothing unless you actually report the post. There's a button for it, and it works quite well.
 
It was ok. I was still kinda annoyed with Zemeckis's "sex it up" attitude he and Gaiman took to the material and all those weird and completely arbitrary modifications but it was... decent.
 
The previews for this movie look great, and I really want to see it. I read the poem when I was in school and I really liked it, I just need to get some money together to see this, cause it looks great.
 
Without giving a whole lot away, I should warn you not to go in expecting the poem since the film goes in a completely different (and kinda weird) direction midway through.
 
The whole thing was basically a morality play about how all heroes are basically flawed individuals, and will do anything to save face in the eyes of those that adorn them.

"Many brave warriors have come to taste my husband's mead," gets my vote as the most unintentionally funny line of the movie.
 
It was... interesting. It felt like an overall better movie than "The Polar Express", Zemeckis's previous film. Between the two, "Beowulf" had the better story, and also had superior visuals. Half the time I forgot I was watching a cartoon.

But then there were scenes which pulled me out and reminded me, "By the way, these are CG representations of real people, not actual actors." It was most prevalent in close-ups; as good as the humans looked, there's still that 1% disconnect. I have a feeling that no matter how many leaps and bounds technology makes in the coming years, they still won't be able to replicate humans to the point where audiences will actually be fooled into believing real actors are on the screen (or freaked out because they're like, "This is TOO real!" ;) ).

Despite being initially skeptical, I can see why they decided to make this in CG instead of just filming live actors and inserting CG backgrounds- all those action scenes probably benefitted from being able to pull off impossible moves without using actors. And there was enough inventive and whirlwind camera work to justify the style choice.

Story-wise and dialog-wise, it wasn't anything I hadn't seen before in other films but there were a lot of memorable moments like
trying to stab the dragon's heart, the naked battle, Beowulf allowing a rival soldier to stab him, and Jolie's seduction sequence
.
 
Just out of curiosity, is this a 3D movie where you wear glasses, like the new Nightmare before Christmas, or is it just a regular CGI movie? Planning to see it either way, but I'm kind of confused reading the bottom of the TV spots.
 
The movie was terrible. The acting was bad, the story was average, and the CGI was the worst I have ever seen. There was absoluntely no emotion between the actors. I give it a 2/5 stars.
 
The "Animation" was terrible-- actually painful to watch. The textures and models were stunning.


Ultimately, it was a pretty average film for me. I do not recommend seeing it in IMAX 3D if you get dizzy. I got a pretty bad headache from seeing it Friday at 11 am (I still have said headache). I was okay for the first half hour but it just got really hard to watch, especially during fight scenes.

If I'd known better, I would have seen it in anything but 3d.
 
It was pretty good, but the effects outweigh the actual story in terms of coolness. However, this movie had probably one of the worst endings I've seen in a long time, so prepare for disappointment if you're the type that enjoys closure.

For those who have seen it:
Why didn't he just throw the horn into the ocean and walk away? He just saw his friend die because of the freak lady, and he seemed to be the most level-headed character in the movie. Did he just continue the cycle? How stupid.
 
I haven't seen the film yet but from what I've seen and heard it still looks "mocappy".Uggh, I hate motion capture. It's such a lazy way to make an "animated" film. It's basically digital rotoscoping (tracing over live action to get an "animated" effect i.e. the animated Lord of the Rings).

The film would look so much better if they used the motion capture for reference and had actually real animators go and ANIMATE the characters.
That's how they did Gollum in Peter Jackson's LOTR and Kong in Peter Jackson's King Kong. And hence why those movie looked so great.

Yes, motion capture was used to create Gollum and Kong but animators actually went in and animated the characters using the motion capture as reference only... and not as a crutch.

Hence why Gollum and Kong don't look like zombies with creepy looking dead eyes.

I love the comment at the end of Ratatouille:

"Our Quality Assurance Guarantee:
100% GENUINE ANIMATION:
No motion capture or any other performance short cuts were used in the production of this film."
-Pixar"

I'm glad Pixar at least has some respect for real animation.

[/rant]
 
Well, as a film fan, I liked it because it's Robert Zemeckis. He's in that little club along with Spielberg, Burton, Chris Columbus, etc. When they make movies, they may not always be the best, but their worst is still pretty damn good.
 
Back
Top