Comments on: Beowulf

by: paulwjm

Tue, 11 Dec 2007 18:55:12 +0000

You’re right being sceptical about the long-term possibilities for 3D - it has tended to be a short-lived gimmick in the past, however the process has improved plus I hear there are quite a few directors choosing to shoot using the method as standard now. If it does become more widespread then it’s a good idea to allow punters to pay less if they already have the specs - they’re pretty rigid specs (as opposed to the old cardboard frames) and it doesn’t make sense to keep paying for them every time you see one of these films and thus having to dispose of them, plus it’s not environmentally friendly.
The real test for Beowulf, whether it’s truly a worthwhile movie in its own right and all that, is when we see it in 2D. It’s easy to get sidelined by the fact that it’s in 3D, however, I do feel tempted to pick it up at the moment. I’ve heard that the new HD formats will be capable of replicating the 3D effect so that’s an interesting proposition in light of the new process.

by: gproject

Tue, 11 Dec 2007 12:35:40 +0000

You know, I came out of this in a similar frame of mind to how you open the review: I’d had a good experience. It’s the first time in a while that I’ve wanted to come out and tell people about how good an experience I’d had, rather than just say: “yes, the film was good”.

It’s very easy to be snotty about the idea that digital projection and 3D technology are going to be the defining features that put audiences back into theatres, but I have to admit that I was impressed and left the theatre smiling despite Beowulf only being a ho-hum of a movie.

I’m still in two minds about the whole thing, I guess. A feature on Film 2007 a few weeks ago had industry professionals raving about the idea that 3D could redefine cinema - but is there short-sightedness about the sustainability of 3D (it’s good now, but what about 5 years time?), plus they’ve got a financial angle for convincing us it is working (tiered pricing for 3D and non-3D movies, difficult to pirate etc.).

by: paulwjm

Sun, 02 Dec 2007 14:29:22 +0000

Brilliant point about that amazing camera-pullback! The similarity didn’t click with me until your comment - it is indeed extremely reminiscent of the opening Contact shot and very similar with regards to use of sound (i.e. the gradually increasing silence as the camera gets further away); I love the effect.

The problem with human movement in animation (particularly eyes) is the fact that we’re so acutely aware of its intricacies, despite general lack of conscious acknowledgement of this, that the most minimal discrepancy between real and artificially created motion produces the effect you mention. I wouldn’t like to say that it will never be conquered but it does seem to the last great hurdle to achieving true photo-realism.

Real shame about your naff cinema experience though - if you get the chance I’d definitely check it out in 3D (and with a sensible audience if that’s at all possible - luckily mine was alright).

Thanks for your input, Mike.

by: Mike

Sun, 02 Dec 2007 12:46:36 +0000

Sadly, I saw this in a 2D theatre, made worse by an awful cinema that seemed to be full of kids who think talking and laughing during movies enhances the entertainment

Apart from all that, I really enjoyed it, and thought the performance of Grendel (Back to the Future’s Crispin Glover, isn’t it?) was an amazing piece of vocal casting. It looks fantastic, and I got the impression it never took itself too seriously e.g. the swords, elbows, etc that shielded the audience from Beowulf’s ‘Vking jewels’ during the naked combat scene. It’s far in advance of The Polar Express, Zemeckis’s last experiment with animation, though the dead-eyed problem remains, and might never realistically be solved.

Favourite part - probably the long, long pull back from Hrothgar’s Hall of Mead, across a snowy landscape and through trees until we reach the demon’s cave. Zemeckis did this before in Contact, and just like then it’s a wonderfully effective piece of film.

by: paulwjm

Mon, 26 Nov 2007 19:42:31 +0000

As always it’s best to go make your own mind up, but regardless of whether you actually think the film itself is great or not, it’s worth checking out at the cinema purely for the 3D spectacle. Of course we’ve all seen a 3D film but things have improved a bit since Jaws 3 and the level of detail in the world is amazing. Plus, one thing I didn’t mention above, it’s a little gruesome in places (though only classified as a 12) so it seems like they weren’t specifically aiming it at children.

You mean ‘Grendel’ I take it No, unfortunately not…

by: Cal

Sun, 25 Nov 2007 18:09:32 +0000

I’ve heard some good and bad things about this, but I might check it out if the mood catches me.

Incidentally, does the old Marillion track get an airing? :p