Beowulf

[SteveLaura 0]

NPR just gave it a bad review (nice effects, ####### screenplay), but Rotten Tomatoes are giving it 71%.

[*JG* 2]

I want to see it in 3D on the Imax.

[Emancipation 2]

Nope already saw one crappy movie based on the same poem...

http://imdb.com/title/tt0402057/

[Mags 112]

I can't get over the fact that the wonderful but rather portly Ray Winstone is in it. It doesn't matter how great they make him look, how much belly they remove, I will STILL see the Ray Winstone I know. Y'know, bit of a gut, sexily wrinkly and so on.

[SteveLaura 0]

I can't get over the fact that the wonderful but rather portly Ray Winstone is in it. It doesn't matter how great they make him look, how much belly they remove, I will STILL see the Ray Winstone I know. Y'know, bit of a gut, sexily wrinkly and so on.

Saw 'The Lion, the Witch & the Wardrobe' at the cinema with my family here - LOVED it when the beaver started talking in Ray's voice! Him & Dawn were perfect. Also, when the kids were told they were going to save Narnia - "We're not heroes. We're from Finchley." I was the only one in the cinema who laughed!

[one...two...tree 2,762]

Steve,

One of the guys at work sent out an email yesterday, saying that he just watched it the night before, in 3D on one of those big Imax screens and he enjoyed it...mentioned 'digital boobies'.

I'm not crazy about hyper-realistic looking CGI animations. There's actually a theory called the Uncanny Valley where the closer a robot (or non-human) immitates human form and movement, there is this threshold of creepiness. This movie though, seems to use that creepiness as part of the look and feel of the movie.

[Welshcookie 17]

I can't wait to see it

[almaty 19]

Steve,

One of the guys at work sent out an email yesterday, saying that he just watched it the night before, in 3D on one of those big Imax screens and he enjoyed it...mentioned 'digital boobies'.

I'm not crazy about hyper-realistic looking CGI animations. There's actually a theory called the Uncanny Valley where the closer a robot (or non-human) immitates human form and movement, there is this threshold of creepiness. This movie though, seems to use that creepiness as part of the look and feel of the movie.

i would like to see it..but, would probably go if the boobies mentioned were real and angelina jollie's

[SteveLaura 0]

Steve,

One of the guys at work sent out an email yesterday, saying that he just watched it the night before, in 3D on one of those big Imax screens and he enjoyed it...mentioned 'digital boobies'.

I'm not crazy about hyper-realistic looking CGI animations. There's actually a theory called the Uncanny Valley where the closer a robot (or non-human) immitates human form and movement, there is this threshold of creepiness. This movie though, seems to use that creepiness as part of the look and feel of the movie.

It looks to me like a very long, non-interactive computer game. But I suppose I'm not the audience it's aimed at. Angelina does look good in the trailer, but there's enough films of her getting her kit off already out there, without needing to see 'em digitally, IMO.

[*JG* 2]

Steve,

One of the guys at work sent out an email yesterday, saying that he just watched it the night before, in 3D on one of those big Imax screens and he enjoyed it...mentioned 'digital boobies'.

I'm not crazy about hyper-realistic looking CGI animations. There's actually a theory called the Uncanny Valley where the closer a robot (or non-human) immitates human form and movement, there is this threshold of creepiness. This movie though, seems to use that creepiness as part of the look and feel of the movie.

i would like to see it..but, would probably go if the boobies mentioned were real and angelina jollie's

They are Angelina Jolie's.........sort of!

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

I’ll watch it – but I heard its not especially great. Apparently Neil Gaiman wrote the screenplay, and its rather loosely based on the original story. I’ve never really been a fan of Gaiman to be honest.

I don’t understand why they decided to animate it – especially when they use the actual likenesses of many of the actors who are playing the parts. Why do Angelina Jolie Anthony Hopkins or Brendan Gleason in CGI, when you might as well just use the real thing? Given the whole point of the animation is to provide a means of realizing the characters in the story, rather than the actors who play them – this seems superfluous. I’d rather they’d done this as a live-action movie – with CG elements. Also Ray Winstone, at least from the trailers sounds somewhat constipated as Beowulf. While I really didn’t like 300 – I don’t think they would have lost much by putting Gerard Butler in the lead role.

Also I’m not too enthused by Angelina Jolie – whenever she’s in a movie like this she uses the same Bride of Dracula voice. She did it in Alexander which was bad enough, let alone that the other actors insisted in speaking with marked irish accents – even the actors who weren’t irish.

I read that closeup the animation is pretty good – but its not so hot in the wide shots, and looks more like a video-game cut-scene.

[one...two...tree 2,762]

I’ll watch it – but I heard its not especially great. Apparently Neil Gaiman wrote the screenplay, and its rather loosely based on the original story. I’ve never really been a fan of Gaiman to be honest.

I don’t understand why they decided to animate it – especially when they use the actual likenesses of many of the actors who are playing the parts. Why do Angelina Jolie Anthony Hopkins or Brendan Gleason in CGI, when you might as well just use the real thing? Given the whole point of the animation is to provide a means of realizing the characters in the story, rather than the actors who play them – this seems superfluous. I’d rather they’d done this as a live-action movie – with CG elements. Also Ray Winstone, at least from the trailers sounds somewhat constipated as Beowulf. While I really didn’t like 300 – I don’t think they would have lost much by putting Gerard Butler in the lead role.

Also I’m not too enthused by Angelina Jolie – whenever she’s in a movie like this she uses the same Bride of Dracula voice. She did it in Alexander which was bad enough, let alone that the other actors insisted in speaking with marked irish accents – even the actors who weren’t irish.

I read that closeup the animation is pretty good – but its not so hot in the wide shots, and looks more like a video-game cut-scene.

Zemeckis seems to be out to prove that CGI replicants can one day replace real actors. If that's his idea, it will never happen and mainly because of the 'uncanny valley' creepiness that is the consequence. We all know what a real human looks like and how they move - there's just so much subtlety to human movement, especially facial expressions which we can pick up and respond to. It then becomes a question of why go through all that trouble to make a CGI person look, move and act just like a real person, other than to say we could do it?

Painting went through this same kind of evolution - ultra realism until photography came into existence...then modern expressionism revolted against the idea of realistic representation in art. To me, art shouldn't be trying to represent reality, but be an interpretation or expression of it.

[Mags 112]

I can't get over the fact that the wonderful but rather portly Ray Winstone is in it. It doesn't matter how great they make him look, how much belly they remove, I will STILL see the Ray Winstone I know. Y'know, bit of a gut, sexily wrinkly and so on.

Saw 'The Lion, the Witch & the Wardrobe' at the cinema with my family here - LOVED it when the beaver started talking in Ray's voice! Him & Dawn were perfect. Also, when the kids were told they were going to save Narnia - "We're not heroes. We're from Finchley." I was the only one in the cinema who laughed!

I laughed at that too.

[Amby 490]

is this film completely animated?

[Trompe le Monde 1,107]

"Never take a class where they make you read Beowulf"