Hey, everyone. ”Moriarty” here.

I'm on the record already saying that I think BEOWULF is a hell of a ride, especially if you see it IMAX 3D, and I'm already getting mail from people saying, "So that means it's no good, right?"

Let me clarify. I think the film would be quite good even if you only saw it on DVD in 2D. I think it's a canny look at the nature of storytelling and the desire to live forever in recounts of your exploits. It is about the tradition of heroic storytelling, and it's a damn good heroic story.

The reason I want people to see it in IMAX 3D is because that's the best possible version of the experience, and it enhances what is already damn good. My advocacy for that particular version of the film does not mean that it's just a technical trick with no soul; far from it.

But don't take my word for it. Check this out.

Hey all this is my first time writing into AICN. If you use this review just call me Trojan Man.

I just got back from an advance 3-D screening of Beowulf at USC tonight and let me just say, wow.

First off, let’s talk about this films biggest “hook,” the CGI. The characters, for the most part, look photorealistic, or at least enough so that the CGI does not detract from the story. Beowulf is by far the best display of computer animation to date. However, did the CGI really add anything to this that live action couldn’t? No, not really.

It felt almost like the CGI was implemented to prove a point, to prove that photorealistic actors could be done, which seems to be Zemeckis’ obsession these days. Instead of contributing to the narrative, it just made me say “wow, that looks almost real.” That’s not necessarily a bad thing though and was definitely cool to see.

Though the CGI is what is most hyped in Beowulf, the real draw is the 3-D presentation. Quite simply, if you live within range of a theater showing this in 3-D, GO SEE IT. No other film has ever developed a quality, immersive, 3-D experience to the level that Beowulf does. The 3-D has depth in both directions. Objects stretch far into the distance and others reach out of the screen toward the audience. But at no point does this ever seem to feel “gimmicky,” but rather serves to pull the viewer deeper into the film.

During a conversation with Jeffrey Katzenberg earlier today, he said that he believed 3-D is the future of cinema (coincidently, Bee Movie, his latest film, opens today in 3-D). When she aid earlier in the day that in 10 years, 50-60% of films would be in 3-D, I thought he was rather crazy. But after seeing Beowulf, seeing what 3-D looks like when done RIGHT, I believe him. This is the future of movie-going. Gone are the days of red and blue glasses and splitting headaches. Though the new wave of 3-D technology has made several appearances in everything from Spy Kids to Harry Potter, it has never been done like this. It will blow your mind.

As for the story, this was probably its weakest point. Beowulf (the poem) is painfully short and not very cinematic to begin with, so the vast majority of the film strays far from its source. The result is not very pretty. There is little emotional connection to any of the characters, much less any real development. Perhaps most damnably of all however, Beowulf, the hero, plays like a bad imitation of Gerard Butler as Leonidas in 300.

The performances were all fine considering the source material they had to work with. No real standouts that I can think of.

Cinematography was gorgeous. The entire movie is a feast for the eyes.

A note for parents, THIS IS NOT A KID’S MOVIE. The CGI may make it a tempting weekend outing for the family, but the films is full of very strong violence and gore, as well as multiple instances of full frontal female nudity.

Bottom line, if you can see this in 3-D, then GO. As soon as it is released, JUST GO. If you’re limited to 2-D screenings, it may be worth a watch, but you’d probably be just as well off renting it on DVD in a few months.

I hope you guys can post this. I should have a review for Southland Tales coming in next week as well.

-Trojan Man

I think people keep overstating the full-frontal female nudity. Angelina Jolie’s character is a monster, and her “nudity” is rather stylized and, in some ways, sanitized. She’s about as anatomically correct as a Barbie doll, 100% camel-toe free.

Small quibble, though. It’s just strange how it keeps coming up in reviews. Here’s another quick reaction from someone who saw it in the same place:

Yo Harry,

I'm in Leonard Maltin's class at USC and he screened us Beowulf in 3D on Thursday night. Robert Zemeckis was on hand later for a Q&A. First things first, quoting Maltin here (and I have to agree), never has anyone started clapping at the Paramount logo. That's the level of "cool" we're going with the 3D technology. The interactivity is downright fun. After that, the film immediately immerses you into the world of Beowulf. The ever-moving camera soars through Scandinavia in one particular scene where a rat is plucked from a roof by an eagle and we watch in awe as we fly through the sky. On the whole, the animation is a giant improvement since the soulless children of The Polar Express but there were still moments of shudder, in particular Alison Lohman's potato shaped head, which called attention. When this movie kicks ass, boy does the shit go down. In particular, Beowulf vs. Grendel and Beowulf vs. The Dragon. These two major sequences are breathtaking and it is fair to say that this film will set a certain precedent in terms of these types of movies.

I have to disagree with XiMan's review about if Beowulf was live action. I honestly believe this film would not work as live action. If this were live action, it would have been a crappy Reign of Fire meets 13th Warrior mess. Also, and Zemeckis addressed this later, there really isn’t anyone out there who could be Beowulf (he did say maaaybe Russell Crowe), even if it was Crowe, the live action version would have had a shitty CG Crowe battling a shitty CG Grendel in the style of Matrix Reloaded. Zemeckis, by creating a fully CG environment, has brilliantly made the action seamless and created a visual feast.

I loved the liberties they took with the poem; dare I say better than the original? By enhancing the fallible qualities of our lead and emphasizing the mythic nature of the story, there were moments that the film oddly reminded me of Petersen's Troy (also with Brendan Gleeson) but in a good way. They could have gone really over the top by adding Odin and the rest of Valhalla but by only referencing the gods, much like Troy, a grounded reality emerges, which fits the film very well.

Casting was pretty much spot on. Winstone, although not his likeness, brings the haggard bravado of a hero to life. And it helps that he's a complete badass. Angelina Jolie is the best casting as her role needed to be someone who was quite frankly so hot that you would screw over your kingdom for a night with her. Brendan Gleeson, much like Liam Neeson has become THE mentor in many of his films, has basically become THE "badass partner to the badass", case in point with Troy, Braveheart, Kingdom of Heaven. However, he's awesome cos you know he would have your back in battle any freakin time. Crispin is back with Zemeckis and it's great. There are echoes of the freakish Thin Man here, with all that screaming but he and later Jolie's monster side both contribute to some genuinely scary moments.

All in all, this was a thoroughly enjoyable ride, would have been right at home as a summer movie, and despite some cheesy moments between Beowulf and Robin Wright Penn's Queen, the bulk of the film has some great set pieces and the good thing is after the initial awe, you actually get into these characters and the story, without a continuous stream of WOOOOOOW. Now, here's to an unrated edition on DVD!

Cheers,

Sanjuro Kuwabatake.