When I first heard that the epic tale of Beowulf was being made into a feature-length film, I was excited. Ever since I had first seen the live-action version of The Fellowship of the Ring from Peter Jackson, I had thought that a similar treatment could do a wonderful job with the Beowulf epic.
And then when I learned that the Beowulf film was going to be done entirely with computer-generated images (CGI), I was disappointed. Frankly I lost interest in seeing the movie entirely. But as time wore on, enthusiasm for the film from some of my friends, as well as some of the trailers, reinvigorated my hopes for the film version of the Beowulf epic.
And now that I’ve seen the film, I’m crestfallen. To be sure, the movie delivers in the special effects department. I saw the IMAX 3D version, which is projected in 3D throughout the entirety of the film. One of the advantages of using CGI which I had not considered at first was the quality of the 3D images. In contrast to the climactic scene in Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix, for instance, the 3D effects were crisp, clean, and stunning.
That’s where the strengths of the film end, however. Far too often the plot deviates from the storyline that made the Beowulf epic a classic for the last millennium. Set in the fifth and sixth centuries of the common era, the Beowulf story includes all the great elements of heroic mythical narrative. The modern retelling departs from the tale’s classic history in at least two major ways, and these departures are most decidedly not improvements.
The first has to do with the treatment of religion, specifically Christianity, in the modern version. While the poem was first composed in the high Middle Ages, it was set in a pagan culture prior to the Christianization of Scandinavia. There is a great deal of scholarly debate on whether the tale is solely about pagan virtues or whether Beowulf is “a Christian Ur-hero, symbolically refulgent with Christian virtues.”
Article comments
1 - duane
Good review, Jordan. Well done.
2 - Rohan Venkat
Neil Gaiman and Roger Avary did not set out to simply adapt the epic to the big screen. A lot more was at play both in their original script and the re -write seven years later.
I suggest you look up Gaiman's blog or read a review that actually considers why the story departs from the 'accepted' version of the epic today, like this one
3 - Andy Marsh
I just saw this movie with my daughter and your review has me confused. The only reference to christainity I heard or saw in the movie was in one of the earliest scenes when the king is asked if they should pray to Christ and he answers no!
There may be a cross or two in the movie, but I missed all the reference to Christianity that you talk about in the review. But I guess someone that studies religion like you must, being a student in historical theology, that you can find religion in just about anything...
Maybe I'm just lucky that I'm not as familiar with the original story as you are, but I think you're looking way to deep to find christain references in this movie.
I enjoyed it very much, the animation was outstanding! There were times in the movie that the characters looked incredibly real. I will say that CGI still seems to have issues creating lips, they never seem to get them right.
4 - Jon Sobel
Thanks for reminding me about Grendel, which I now want to re-read.
And thanks for reinforcing my decision not to see this film (i.e. for seeing it so I don't have to!). The Beowulf legend is too stuck in my brain to see it changed around so much. It's too bad it couldn't have been done like Peter Jackson's Lord of the Rings, which stayed true to a great story while using the best of modern moviemaking magic.
5 - Triniman
Have you seen the 2005 or 2006 version that was a Canadian-Norweigan co-production? It's pretty good but with lower production values than most mainstream films.
6 - bibbyroo
it sounds to me like you are just being a bit snobbish. i was unfamilar with the original beowulf story when i went in to see it, and i walked out loving it! they may have changed a couple things, which adds up to a couple references made early on in the film. in order for me to understand your disgust for this film, i feel that you need to better explain the changes that you feel it destroys the original story. what changed so drastically from the epic that made this so intolerable?
i personally have never read the story before but am now interested due to the movie, but i find it interesting that you say i must "have absolutely no appreciation for the narrative legacy of the epic" if i enjoyed this film.