Ain't It Cool News (
Animation and Anime

Quint has seen 20 minutes of BEOWULF in 3-D at Comic-Con! Holy Crap!!! How was it?!?

Ahoy, squirts! Quint here with my impressions of reel 2 of BEOWULF in 3-D They screened it tonight at the Horton Plaza… Neil Gaiman and Roger Avary presented it to a full theater tonight along with a longer, gorier trailer and the one that hit the net tonight. You’ve seen the trailer. Imagine it in 3-D and you’ve seen what I’ve seen. So, I’ll focus on the 20 minutes. The story starts at the end of Beowulf’s fight with Grendel. I’m sure you’re familiar with the story (if you had to take English in high school, you had to read this), but if you don’t know it, then stop reading it here. We get Beowulf doing a very primal yell of victory as he holds Grendel’s arm. The monster is trying to get out, but Beowulf screams out at him that he has been defeated by him, calling out his own name as he slams the door on the creature’s arm pit. Grendel’s arm falls to the ground, he howls in pain and slinks off into the snowy night. Beowulf is butt-ass naked (he decides that this demon can’t be killed by any weapon made by man, so he strips of his armor and armory and fights him completely naked) as the hall calls out his victory. This section had his genitalia being hidden like an AUSTIN POWERS scene. At one point it’s one of Grendel’s fingers in the extreme foreground, then it’s a helmet, a cup, etc. There was a split afterwards at to how campy this came off, but I thought it was a little distracting, but harmless. I realize they’re going for a PG-13 here and they can’t have Beowulf’s schlong waving around. The King is awoken (Anthony Hopkins) and told the monster is defeated. At the same time, Grendel stumbles to a body of water where he meets his mother, a water demon, so even the shallow pool Grendel finds takes him to his mother (Angelina Jolie). Now, this was by far my favorite part of this footage. You don’t see the water demon, nothing more than her hands, as she consoles her dying son. Crispin Glover as Grendel will be the master stroke in this film, I have no doubt. As he dies, he speaks to her… and it’s in this moment we get a piece of Glover’s work. The speech is in this weird half-Danish half-English dialogue. You get what he’s saying. He’s hurt. He’s dying. He takes comfort from his mother, who asks him calmly who did it. He utters an incomprehensible sentence before capping it with “Beowulf,” and then finally slumping, eyes dead. Let’s talk about Grendel. He’s lumpy, cancerous. He’s obviously mutated. Very fleshy, disproportionate. I visited the production offices a while back and described this design. I love it. His face is mutated so badly his jaw is exposed, teeth sticking out. Yet, in his final moments he didn’t look unkind in a weird way. Back to the grand hall, Beowulf is congratulated and given treasures. If you go back and read my set visit report, you’ll see they let me shoot a scene and it was during this moment. I can’t be positive… but I swear to God one of my pieces of framing made it into the film. The process had a digital world I could walk around with, monitors showing my progress in this world roughly animated. The King (Hopkins) gives a speech and gestures to Grendel’s arm mounted in the Hall. I shot this low, with Hopkins on the extreme right side of the frame, arm outstretched and Grendel’s limb fitting perfectly above his arm, next to his shoulder. Now, the rest of this scene was nothing like I shot it, but I’m going to pretend that was my shot. Hehe This sequence gave us good looks at Ray Winstone as Beowulf (doesn’t look a goddamn thing like him), Brendan Gleeson, Anthony Hopkins, John Malkovich and Robin Wright-Penn. Another good moment is a nightmare Beowulf has as he’s visited by the vengeful demon mother who wants a child to replace the one taken from her. She appears to Beowulf as the Queen (Wright-Penn) and when he doesn’t take to her advances, a part of her demon being shows through and attacks. He awakes, screaming, to find that it was a nightmare. But then he sees that the bodies of the rest of the men in the hall… maybe 20 or 30… are strung up in the rafters. Pretty fucked up and gory. He gets the story from the King, finds out about the Demon mother. Beowulf flips. “How many do I have to kill? Who’s next? The demon father, the demon brother, the demon aunt,” etc. Hopkins pretty much says that he has nothing to worry about from the demon’s father (insinuating it was he himself who sired Grendel) and Beowulf and Wiglaf (Gleeson) go in search for the monster. This was a pretty beautiful scene as Beowulf along investigates a deep, magical cave. He’s slowly stalked by the demon mother until she reveals herself. When she appears to him, she slowly walks out of the water a naked Angelina Jolie. Liquid gold moves over her body, revealing all by the nipples and cootch (again, thank you PG-13). She seduces Beowulf, literally stroking his sword until it dissolves into a gooey puddle (nice imagery, yeah?), promises him his own kingdom, riches, fame… all he has to do sire her a child. The animation didn’t look completely finished to me. It was a little inconsistent. For instance, Robin Wright-Penn never quite looked right to me. She was the most “video game cut scene” looking of the characters. I don’t know if it was just because he has such a detailed, brilliant face, but Hopkins was by far the best looking of the group. For those worried about the eyes being dead, like in POLAR EXPRESS, then you have nothing to worry about. What is left is a little stiffness to the movements and some troubled mouth movements. Now, none of them are huge deals, but when you watch this movie you’re going to be so amazed at what they achieved for most of it, that any little thing that can break that illusion will stand out to you. On the whole, it was beautiful. It might not be life-changing… but who knows? I’ll need to see it in context, but my major worry wasn’t the animation, design or color palate, but if the acting was going to feel stagey, since that’s how they shot the performance capture. I guess I needn’t have been worried with such great actors, but even good actors can lose focus. Here, though, everybody was amazing. Like I said, I can’t wait to see more Crispin Glover as Grendel. So amazing. The 3-D was well done. Again, not in your face, but giving everything a greater depth. That’s it for my thoughts on the screening. Be back with more Con stuff… keep an eye peeled. -Quint

Readers Talkback
comments powered by Disqus
    + Expand All
  • July 26, 2007, 5:34 a.m. CST

    Sorry, but the eyes DO look dead...

    by Angry Mean Panda

    You can't post this after the trailer is released and say they don't. THhy very much do.

  • July 26, 2007, 5:38 a.m. CST

    Naked Angelina Jolie 3D Model

    by kingrobot

    I'm sure the animation team had fun with that one during coffee breaks....

  • July 26, 2007, 5:39 a.m. CST

    So I read the article (good btw)

    by Kragmose

    Reach the bottom, no comments. Glee filled my face, but I had to be sure. I hit refresh. Comments appear. I'm off to punish myself.

  • July 26, 2007, 5:45 a.m. CST

    Can't wait for the first Performance Capture Porn!

    by DerLanghaarige

    Imagine Jolie on Jolie action!

  • July 26, 2007, 5:52 a.m. CST

    Regarding the Rating

    by Dersu

    I had once heard that there were going to be two cuts of this movie produced. One PG-13 and one NC-17. Is this true? I think it could be really distracting and campy to have a character's genitals covered in that "Austin Powers" type of way that you mentioned, Quint.

  • July 26, 2007, 6 a.m. CST

    Set visit?

    by Shoegeezer

    Are you Tron?

  • July 26, 2007, 6:26 a.m. CST

    I can see Quint masking his disappointment

    by IndustryKiller!

    it's pretty obvious this one isn't going to be what we all wanted. I blame the mo-cap, which just looks ridiculous. Why have actors act live, then animate over them only to try to make it look as lifelike as possible? It's the computer animation equivalent of Gus Van Zants Psycho remake. Just utterly pointless. There is no discernable style to the animation. Just plastic looking figurines made to imitate actors robbing the work of all atmosphere. I'm all for pushing technology but Zemeckis seems to be taking a huge bullet for the sake of a technology no one is particularly interested in even if it gets better. He should be out there doing good work.

  • July 26, 2007, 7:02 a.m. CST

    Sounds like a mess

    by Andy Warhol Jr

    Or Quint is a bad writer. Maybe both.

  • July 26, 2007, 7:17 a.m. CST

    Agreed about the dead eyes

    by Franklin T Marmoset

    I thought the trailer looked pretty interesting, but that dead eyes problem continues to haunt CG animated human characters. It was the same thing with that Final Fantasy film. There's so much painstaking attention to detail, but then the end result looks plain creepy, like a bunch of demon dummies wandering around. I'd be interested to see if it's a problem they can crack, but no one's come close so far.<p>Also, three cheers to DerLanghaarige, who has hit the nail square on the head. Some day soon, all the actresses you want to see nekkid wil be scissoring each other in a bunch of cgpornimation videos. It's bound to happen.

  • July 26, 2007, 7:17 a.m. CST


    by lost.rules

    Sorry. It's overated.

  • July 26, 2007, 7:21 a.m. CST

    Good sum up

    by 300spartansinhell

    I saw the trailer again and all I can say is that some parts looked really good and others not so good. The eyes were actually good, but the animations on the mouths were bad. Water effects looked good, but fire effects were like from a game. Landscapes were beautiful and painterly but horses were very cartoony in a bad way.

  • July 26, 2007, 8 a.m. CST

    What's with all this love for a crappy 80's TV show

    by TheManWithTooManyNames

    . . . about a supersonic military helicopter?

  • July 26, 2007, 8:04 a.m. CST

    Will actor Jan-Michael Vincent be reprising his role as

    by TheManWithTooManyNames

    "Stringfellow Hawke" in this?

  • July 26, 2007, 8:11 a.m. CST


    by malpaso

    I actually think this guy is a bit of an original...looking forward to his flick.

  • July 26, 2007, 9:07 a.m. CST

    Take it to 11

    by BeyondStatic

    The graphics look pretty good to me, though the trailer is cut too fast to get a feel for the animation. Swear, I thought it was live-action on first look. The designs look phenominal, like they crawled into my head when I read the poem back in high school. But honestly, forget the marketing. Do the story justice - go for the R rating. This is still an experiment in performance capture. If you're going to experiment with art then be an artist; make art, not commercial. Go for the R.

  • July 26, 2007, 9:21 a.m. CST

    Why does the wee Baby


    Have a beard?

  • July 26, 2007, 9:45 a.m. CST

    Didn't Read it in English Class

    by redfist

    so I stopped reading like I was told...was the article any good?

  • July 26, 2007, 10:29 a.m. CST

    performance capture is kind of goofy

    by Rupee88

    If they are going for photorealism, why not just film the regular actors. But I love CGI and this looks like the best film like this since Final Fantasy: The Spirits Within, which I thought was great although it was a huge flop. I'll definitely see this at the theater and in 3-D.

  • July 26, 2007, 10:30 a.m. CST

    Quint sounds underwhelmed by the 3-D

    by Rupee88

    I thought half the review would be about the 3-D experience, but he relegates it to one sentence at the end and doesn't even seem impressed by it...damn.

  • July 26, 2007, 10:36 a.m. CST

    We'll have photorealistic CGI humans in 10 years....

    by Rupee88

    ....yeah fucking retards. Not in our lifetimes or our children's lifetimes...regardless of what Zemeckis or Cameron says.

  • July 26, 2007, 10:56 a.m. CST


    by performingmonkey

    At the moment the lip-synching doesn't look right. Spend time on getting this and the eyes right and you have success. I think that's the MOST IMPORTANT THING for the crew to consider.

  • July 26, 2007, 11:10 a.m. CST

    Just saw the trailer and i'm not impressed

    by feckdrinkarse

    All-motion capture movies are a dumb idea.

  • July 26, 2007, 11:19 a.m. CST

    Will someone who knows explain-

    by Space oddity

    is it true that the only difference between realistic and non-realistic CGI (that is not to say good CGI and bad CGI) is purely rendering time and therefore how much time money and manpower go into it? Because if that is true, then I don't think we're ever going to get mouths that don't either flap and twitch distractingly to be nuanced or ones that slowly or clumsily open and shut. Producers would much rather simply darken a scene to cover up those imperfections and spend the real Special Effects dough on the 'splosions. Just look what happened to that first Final Fantasy movie from a few years back that was suppose to blow everyone's mind. "HOLY SHIT! The chick from Frasier is totally in space! (and usually wearing a convenient helmet) THAT TOTALLY BLOWS MY MIND!"

  • July 26, 2007, 11:32 a.m. CST

    inferior to the intro of OMINUSHA 3

    by lavatory love machine

    and that was like 4 years ago

  • July 26, 2007, 12:22 p.m. CST

    Space oddity - rendering time

    by arctor

    rendering time has nothing to do with the 'realism' of the look...all things considered the two are not related at all...also the flappy mouths are purely a consequence of bad animation - which can be caused by bad animators or simply not enough time to get a good performance, or both. As to the rating - I've heard about a PG-13, an R, and an NC-17...

  • July 26, 2007, 12:58 p.m. CST

    What's the point?

    by Barry Egan

    Why do mocap work with actors so you can the animate them so they look like actors?

  • July 26, 2007, 1:15 p.m. CST

    No way. I love Oni 3's CG but come on.

    by Novaman5000

    The french citizens in the intro are really basic and nowhere near as detailed as this. This looks to have some of the best CG EVER created.<p> That being said it does seem sort of silly, to do mocap work and have the final product look so real and lifelike- why not just shoot it with real people...<p> I guess the future we're coming towards is- an actor's entire body and digital self can be saved and used later in other films. So Angelina Jolie is to busy to actually act in a film, but she can do the voice work, someone else mocaps and they can license her digital self from her, pop her in and bingo, she's starring in a new animated film. Sort of a strange concept.

  • July 26, 2007, 1:18 p.m. CST

    Novaman, I agree.

    by Barry Egan

    It will be even weirder when dead people are still digitally in movies. Didn't Zemeckis do a Tales from the Crypt with Bogart in it?

  • July 26, 2007, 2:08 p.m. CST


    by thxMike


  • July 26, 2007, 2:11 p.m. CST

    What about Davy Jones???

    by cheady

    Davy Jones had the most realistic eyes ever on a CGI creature...

  • July 26, 2007, 2:11 p.m. CST


    by Brannagins Law

    Why!? When will people learn 3D isn't ready yet to be replacing live action. It looks so stiff and fake. CG needs to be used as a tool i.e. 300. Sure it's come a long way but unless your going for a Ratatouille style, its going to fall flat. It just looks like it tries to hard to mimic true life. I remember how hard the audience laughed during the kiss in Final Fantasy, the Spirits Within. And when trailers start reusing the same song over and over again, to me that is like the director and producers don't care if they use a nice piece from the original soundtrack to pull you in, they phone it in and think you've never heard it before. They plays us for idiots. When I hear a track I've heard before from another movie played over a brand new trailer that's supposed to get you excited, I just know it's gonna be some good suck.

  • July 26, 2007, 2:29 p.m. CST

    I think I first heard that music in 28 Days Later

    by Demosthenes2

    and now it's in every other trailer; I'd rather just associate it with 28 Days Later, but it's hard to appreciate it anymore. It feels even less appropriate here (too modern) than it did in the I Know Who Killed Me trailer. And yup, the characters look pretty much just like the actors, only less real and dimensional. Monster House was great because the characters didn't look like the actors and the movements/designs were exaggerated. The way animation should be. When everything's so lifelike you might as well be watching life, because you are, just not as accurately. And yes, I'm the first one to think of that criticism.

  • July 26, 2007, 2:46 p.m. CST

    Crispin "Creapy" Glover!!!

    by ludmir88


  • July 26, 2007, 2:54 p.m. CST


    by jfp2007

    Some of you need to go out and read an article on what mocap is. Everyone here seems to think it's rotoscoping only in 3D. It isn't.

  • July 26, 2007, 2:58 p.m. CST

    We have photo-realistic humans now...

    by jimmy_009

    ...they're called humans. And there's several billion of them at our disposal. The whole idea of recreating a human for movies is so pointless it's insulting.

  • July 26, 2007, 2:59 p.m. CST

    Barry Egan

    by skimn

    Yes, he did in an episode that starred John Lithgow, I think he directed around the time of Death Becomes Her or Forrest Gump, when he was getting his feet wet in digital effects. And I second that Davy Jones was one of, if not the best done digital character yet.

  • July 26, 2007, 3:04 p.m. CST

    Mocap like this is coming for video games

    by TragicComic

    Hey all, I own a motion capture studio that specializes in doing facial mocap like this for video games (we are small, so our demo doesn't look as complete as what they are doing here, but we actually have substantially more advanced technology). Check out our early demo at: I actually left a long career in the video game industry to build this tech (I'm the lead engineer as well as president) so that video game writers and designers would have a medium that would allow interesting characters personalities to really come through in games (and hopefully make an emotional connection with the player), rather than seeing lame archetypes that simply flap their lips.

  • July 26, 2007, 3:08 p.m. CST

    jimmy_009, you are missing the point

    by TragicComic

    Using completely digital humans can radically change the way films are made. Take a look at pixar films for instance, because they are completely CG, they can edit, reformat, reshoot, retool, until the movie meets the expectations of it's creators. It seems to me in most cases, using actors and film is a massive restriction on what you can do creatively after you've done your primary filming.

  • July 26, 2007, 3:13 p.m. CST

    Kong had nice eyes

    by Antz

    He was mo-cap, so it can be done. Gollum wasn't too bad either, not quite as good, but still reasonable.

  • July 26, 2007, 3:33 p.m. CST

    What the fuck is this shit? Zemeckis is an IDIOT!

    by Overgod

    Okay...Did anybody else look at this trailer in disgust as 1) Angelina Jolie's annoying fake russian/romanian sounding accent a la Alexander returned to shit over this movie once more? Why doesn't Angelina Jolie shut the fuck up with that annoying russian accent and realise that she sucks at fake accents? Her voice is annoying as hell and terribly distracting. Now to the visuals: What the fuck is this? Is this some fucking computer generated crap designed in lieu of real actors? Everybody and everything, from the fire, to the horses, the actors, the props, everything, looked fake and computer generated. WHAT THE FUCK IS THIS? OH MY GOD, is the next "Final Fantasy" flop?

  • July 26, 2007, 3:37 p.m. CST

    Halfbreedqueen of course it matters

    by TragicComic

    But just a CG allows us to do more with our creative visions, so will complete performance capture. You've got to realize that this stuff is the beginning of complete 3d capture. Over the next few decades, we will be able to shoot on set, fully digitize it change it, tweak it. This is another VERY powerful tool that will allow creative people to do more for less. Ultimately, this technology will fall into the hands of the individual and individuals will have the capacity to do work that will rival the visual work work done in the most expensive films of today. Why is it that people always seem to the think that the way it's always been done is the best way to do it?

  • July 26, 2007, 3:38 p.m. CST

    The Future of Mo-Cap


    Is going to be hybridization. Shoot live with real-time mo-cap that doesn't require visible lines or dots or weird suits, use the live footage then pop in backdrops, add effects, and enhance or change lighting using the the hybrid mo-cap . . . You heard it from me, dammit.<br><br>Zemeckis is just taking the first baby-steps to getting there.

  • July 26, 2007, 4:15 p.m. CST

    The reason why the way it's been done is the way to go

    by Ugee

    TrajicComic, the reason why people think that the way it's been done before is the best way is because CG has been around for a while an very few people have been able to get it right. CG still sticks out like a sore thumb on film and I myself would rather see conventional special effects than CG anyday. When I see special effect done in CG that could of been done traditionaly I think it's a sign of lazyness. The joy of seeing conventional effects on film is wondering how they were done.

  • July 26, 2007, 4:38 p.m. CST

    Boy you people like to bitch...

    by Johnno

    Sure it isn't perfect... but how the hell do you expect them to get there? By just sitting around NOT Trying? I can reach back into the live action film catalogues and traditional animation and pull out all sorts of SHIT! The film industry didn't start off with a major epic movie in full colour! If you don't dig it, don't see it! But stop complaining about why it's being done in the first place! If shit was left up to people like yourselves the world would be at a standstill, never progressing! That said the best CG model doubles of real life people are still Neo and Smith from the Matrix Reloaded/Revolutions, though admittedly they were wearing glasses most of the time, but that final punch at the end was sheer greatness! The only complaint about this project is that the animation in it doesn't move very well despite mo-cap, it's boring. When a videogame being mo-capped by Andy Cirkus on PS3 looks more alive using non-photorealistic characters, then you know there's a problem. And I someday hope to see a CGI flick that will top the fantastic action in Final Fantasy VII: Advent Children, now THAT's what I call taking advantage of a medium that live action can only wish it could be. Maybe I should be an asshole too and suggest live action should give up when it comes to matching the quality of sequences done in CG, in fact... live action can never do it without CG! But CG doesn't need shitty live action! Har Har! Aren't I elitist?

  • July 26, 2007, 4:57 p.m. CST


    by Geek Sodomizer

    it looks fake and computer generated? maybe because IT'S FAKE AND COMPUTER GENERATED ASSHOLE. Damn what did you think that it was going to be photo-real? a 90 minute movie? get real. yeah the animation kinda sucks but the graphics look impressive.

  • July 26, 2007, 5:19 p.m. CST


    by drew mcweeny

    I'm guessing reading comprehension isn't your strong suit. I'm not "putting down the geek crowd" at all. I'm just stating an absolute truth: we do not drive box-office phenomenons. We don't. If we did, the box-office landscape would look very different. We are a very vocal minority, and I'm thrilled that Hollywood takes us seriously, but if they think that catering exclusively to us will create a $500 million blockbuster, they're wrong, and they know that.

  • July 26, 2007, 5:32 p.m. CST

    Davy Jones' eyes were actually Bill Nighy's eyes.

    by Barry Egan

    I am pretty certain that the only parts of the Davy Jones character that were actually Nighy were the eyes and of course the voice. I agree that Jones is a feat of design and is a great example of a mocap character done right. I just don't see the point of using mocap to creat a digital character that looks just like the actor. I wonder what SAG has to say about it.

  • July 26, 2007, 5:32 p.m. CST

    Davy Jones' eyes were actually Bill Nighy's eyes.

    by Barry Egan

    I am pretty certain that the only parts of the Davy Jones character that were actually Nighy were the eyes and of course the voice. I agree that Jones is a feat of design and is a great example of a mocap character done right. I just don't see the point of using mocap to creat a digital character that looks just like the actor. I wonder what SAG has to say about it.

  • July 26, 2007, 6:29 p.m. CST

    The Future of Mo-Cap by

    by EUROPA

    Sounds a lot like Sin City, 300 or many of the ohter movies today that use green screens.

  • July 26, 2007, 6:44 p.m. CST

    whats the

    by v for vienetta

    piece of music in the trailer?

  • July 26, 2007, 7:53 p.m. CST

    Re: Rating

    by roadcaesar

    I remember hearing that too, Dersu. Something about the PG-13 going to regular theaters and the unrated cut going to IMAX 3D?

  • July 26, 2007, 8:45 p.m. CST


    by Sir Loin

    At least it wasn't, that commie would never enjoy a film like this one. That involves women. Even CGI ones.

  • July 26, 2007, 9:54 p.m. CST

    This is America Quint...

    by kirttawesomio

    No one reads in English class anymore. I mean come on, where do you think you are, Northern Europe.

  • July 26, 2007, 10:05 p.m. CST

    This is Perplexing

    by Playhouse

    I guess I'm just lost as to why you would recreate the actors as perfect likenesses of themselves (Beowulf's hodgepodge model aside). If you're going to do this kind of thing, use them as a basis and create "someone" new. Otherwise, you're better off just committing the movie to film and creating effects around the live-action. I'm not going to say it doesn't look impressive. It does. Just seems like a pointless exercise to see a digitally recreated Hopkins or Jolie when they've already done all the acting live.

  • July 26, 2007, 10:56 p.m. CST

    People bitch too much.

    by cerebulon

    Looked good to me. I'm there.

  • July 26, 2007, 11:53 p.m. CST

    So is Sean Bean getting anything ...

    by irritable

    ... for having his face pasted over Ray Winstone's ugly mug?

  • July 27, 2007, 3:21 a.m. CST

    barry egan

    by conbarba

    The eyes of Jones were digital also.

  • July 27, 2007, 3:31 a.m. CST

    Grendel isn't evil, just misunderstood

    by hrogthrar

    I. Heorot's plea and Grendel's awakening Midnight suns bid moors farewell, retreats from charging dusk Mountain echo, curfews bell, signal ending tasks They place their faith in oaken doors, cower in candlelight The panic seeps through bloodstained floors as Grendel stalks the night Earth rim walker seeks his meals Prepare the funeral pyres The shaper's songs no longer heal the fear Within their eyes, their eyes Wooden figures, pagan gods, stare blindly cross the sea Appeal for help from ocean fogs, for savior born of dreams They know their lives are forfeit now, priestly head they bow in shame They cannot face the trembling crowd that flinch in Grendel's name Earth rim walker seeks his meals Prepare the funeral pyres The shaper's songs no longer heal the fear Within their eyes, their eyes As Grendel leaves his mossy home beneath the stagnant mere Along the forest path he roams to Hrothgar's hall so clear He knows that victory is secured, his charm will testify His claws will drip with mortal blood as moonbeams haunt the sky Earth rim walker seeks his meals Prepare the funeral pyres The shaper's songs no longer heal the fear Within their eyes, their eyes II. Grendel's Journey Silken membranes span his path, fingerprints in dew Denizens of twilight lands humbly beg him through Mother nature's bastard child shunned by leaf and stream An alien in an alien land seeks solace within dreams The shaper's lies his poisoned tongue malign with mocking harp Beguiling queen her innocence offends his icy heart III. Lurker at the Threshold Hounds freeze in silence bewitched by the reptile spell Sulphurous essence pervades round the grassy dell Heorot awaits him like lamb to the butcher's knife Stellular heavens ignore even children's cries Screams are his music, lightning his guide Raping the darkness, death by his side Chants rise in terror, free round the oaken beams Flickering firelight portraying the grisly scene Warriors advance, prepare for the nightmare foe Futile their sacrifice as even their hearts must know Heroes delusion, with feet in the grave Lurker at the threshold, he cares not for the brave, he cares not for the brave So you thought that your bolts and your locks would keep me out You should have known better after all this time You're gonna pay in blood for all your vicious slander With your ugly pale skins and your putrid blue eyes Why should I feel pity when you kill your own and feel no shame God's on my side, sure as hell, I'm gonna take no blame I'm gonna take no blame, I'm gonna take no blame So you say you believe in all of Mother Nature's laws You lust for gold with your sharpened knives Oh when your hoards are gathered and your enemies left to rot You pray with your bloodstained hands at the feet of your pagan gods Then you try to place the killer's blade in my hand You call for justice and distort the truth Well I've had enough of all your pretty pretty speeches Receive your punishment, Expose your throats to my righteous claws And let the blood flow, and let the blood flow, flow, flow, flow

  • July 27, 2007, 6:51 a.m. CST

    Ho Hum. more Mannequin shit

    by council estate scumbag

    when will they ever learn, huh? i WAS excited til I saw dat crappy trailer. If i wanted to see a load of dead people moving about I'd go and watch 3 episodes of Eastenders back to back through a jar of formaldehyde. Shit! has Zemeckis learnt nothing from Polar Express? Why is he tryna foister his sick obsession wih walking corpses on us all? Advance the technology, fella, THEN make your movie. This looks pitiful. Jolie looks fit tho. Thats necrophylia right there.

  • July 27, 2007, 7:10 a.m. CST

    I just gotta say...

    by vezner2007

    that this looks like a frickin computer game cinematic rather than a movie. In other words, we might as well be watching World of Warcraft The Movie. I'm not going to waste my money on seeing this one in the theaters. It'll be a netflix view for me.

  • July 27, 2007, 7:55 a.m. CST


    by hallowhitch31

    Polar Express with swords. Fucking yawn.

  • July 27, 2007, 9:32 a.m. CST

    Nope, not Nighy's eyes. It's 100% CGI.

    by minderbinder

    In the first movie, the skeletons have the eyes of Depp and Rush. When they shot the second one, they were worried they would have to do the same for Davy Jones, so they shot Nighy with some makeup around his eyes in case they needed to use them. But it turned out the CGI eyes looked fine so they didn't end up using the real eyes at all. That seems like a perfect example of when to use mocap/cgi, I just don't get the point of taking more time and money to create footage that looks less good than what they would have ended up with if they just shot the actors. And why do video games insist on the crappy CGI cutscenes? Why don't they just hire actors to do the dialogue scenes instead of wasting time on facial animation and lip sync? Do like Sin City or 300 and just use the CGI for backgrounds and action/FX, which is what it does best. I guess it's because it would make the in-game graphics look bad in comparison, when the whole thing is CGI you can forget how unrealistic it looks.

  • July 27, 2007, 8:19 p.m. CST


    by Johnno

    Not using live actors in videogames keeps consistency in the look... much better in my opinion. Also you can't use live actors for games with stylized or anime characters. That would simply look very stupid. Also using real time cutscenes saves disc space rather than resorting to high quality FMV. That said, some video games do use live action sequences...

  • July 31, 2007, 11:58 p.m. CST

    No way this will get away with a PG-13

    by Veraxus

    They just need to go for the R-cut. Look at 300. Wildly successfull. Rated R. Give us the blood, the nudity, everything. This looks amazing and I'm dying to see it, but clearly artificial censorship (conveniently placed objects, etc) will absolutely ruin it for me. It won't just lessen the experience, it will ruin it the same way a handful of fresh horse shit would ruin risotto.

  • Aug. 4, 2007, 5:13 a.m. CST

    new beowulf

    by stvnsprngr

    I hope to be bowled over by the new movie because nothing I have seen so far comes close to instilling the same feeling I have for the 2005 "" Gerard Butler flick with Ingvar E. Sigurdsson as Grendel. I watched the movie, enjoyed it and then let it go. Three days later, the scenes of Sigurdsson's Grendel raging at the sunset were so strong in my head that I had to rent it again and watch it again.

  • Aug. 21, 2007, 9:31 a.m. CST

    *Sigh* I didn't even know

    by scrumdiddly

    that this movie was being made in this offensive style until I saw the trailer a while back. Totally forgot about it after that, too. All I can say is I think we all know it will flop, and I'm very glad of that. It's BEOWULF, you bastards! You do it PROPERLY!!!