Beth Accomando of KPBS.org said of the film, "Zemeckis’ Beowulf aspires to epic realm of 300 and the fantasy of Lord of the Rings but falls short of both. But it’s an intriguing novelty act with a few stirring scenes." For her, and for other reviewers, the genre space where Beowulf was situated helped to discredit it. Some reviewers felt that films like 300 and Lord of the Rings vastly surpassed Beowulf; others saw in Beowulf the bad dialogue and clumsy characterization that they have seen in these previous films. I think these criticisms belie Beowulf's strength: that it aspired to be epic, but made a conscious, successful effort to be less manipulative than other films in its genre.
In fact, this was a distinguishing characteristic of Gaiman and Avary's dialogue. The most dramatic moments were understated and brief (like Grendel's death, or the relationship between Wealthow and Ursula, or Hrothgar's suicide), so they didn't linger long enough to become comedic. Other sequences (like the fight with Grendel and the "fight" with his mother) were intentionally jocular and over the top, so they didn't get in the way of the emotional dynamic of the characters. These were the experiences that Roger Ebert was responding to when he said, "I'm not complaining. I'm serious when I say the movie is funny. Some of the dialogue sounds like 'Monty Python.'"
In effect, Beowulf avoided some of the most common pitfalls of epic films: the groan-inducing, single-tear closeup, the predictable battle cry from the top of a mountain. Even so, the editing was slow enough, and the pauses frequent enough, that the film had an authentic ambience and emotional quality underlying it. This might have been aided by the strikingly realistic faces, contrasted with the slightly cartoonish bodies.
Article comments