The exclusive R-Rated Beowulf trailer from Comic-Con 2007 has finally been released online. Yes, you get to see a digital motion/performance captured Angelina Jolie naked (kinda, she has some sort of mud on all the important spots). People are calling this the “Restricted” or “R-Rated” teaser trailer, but the film is to be rated PG-13, so I’m not quite sure how the trailer could have a more restrictive rating. But heck, “PG-13 Comic-Con Trailer” doesn’t sound as appealing, does it? You should also know going in, that much of this trailer was cut for the 3D experience. There are parts where blood is coming off the screen at the audience. So in 2D, the same trailer is not quite as impressive.
I’m still not sure about this film. I enjoy the 3D experience at the movie theater, and will see the film just for that alone. But I found the story lacking the audience empathy that is required to make this kind of journey. And I’m still not sure I understand the point of motion capture if you’re just going to make the actor or actress look like themselves. Check out the uncensored comic-con teaser trailer after the jump.
August 25th, 2007 at 3:44 pm
I want to look forward to this movie but I just… can’t. I won’t be seeing this in theaters, and as of now I have no need to even rent the movie when it hits DVD. The visuals just seem awkward somehow. What really irked me the most about this “new” trailer is the water substance that is seen around the final 12 seconds of the video. Who knows, I’m just rambling right now. Overall, much better than the teaser that was released to us that didn’t attend Comic Con, but nothing special or opinion changing at all.
August 26th, 2007 at 5:06 am
Why dont you just become an hero then Mitchell so I can see a watery substance come from your face. If you ruin these cg baps for me I swear to gawd. Jk. Its a sword melting though- the watery substance. We can like it now.
August 26th, 2007 at 4:51 pm
That looks pretty damn awful. It looks like a feature-length version of a badly rendered cut scene in a sub-standard PC game. And it’s nice to see that the people who made trailer are being really original by using John Murphy’s 28 Days Later score for the gazillionth time.
November 5th, 2007 at 9:27 pm
I notice they cleverly cut anything resembling acting from the trailer. Doubtless the actual performances will be good. Right?
November 10th, 2007 at 8:46 am
I have seen the movie and recommend that you see it before you judge it…It is action packed and follows the story…I really enjoyed it and so did every other cheering fan in the theater.
November 12th, 2007 at 3:37 pm
I have not yet seen the movie, but any rendering of the epic poem that casts Grendel’s mother as anyone more beautiful than a deformed australopithecus school marm cannot possibly “follow the story!”
November 12th, 2007 at 8:36 pm
Actually, the Old English descriptors of Grendels Mother are “Noble lady” and “supernatural warrior.” That last is the same phrase used for Beowulf.
IOW, her son (since this IS based on history in some fashion, we having found both Heorot and Beowulf’s barrow) was some kind of lunatic or thug who terrorized people, and after he died, she took up the Blood Oath like a man, and acquitted herself well enough to earn respect.
So she very well could have been beautiful or charismatic.
People make the same mistake with Jekyll and Hyde. Hyde was NOT monstrous.
November 16th, 2007 at 4:08 pm
The poem tells us that Grendel’s mother was an “alien spirit†with the “likeness of a woman†(lines 1349-51). But the correct rendering for her when she first appears is not “noble lady†but “noble lady-monster†(ides áglaécwÃf, 1259). She is not seductive but “greedy and gloomy-hearted†(1277). She is a “sea wolf†with “loathsome fingers†(1505-6) who lives in a cave below the water.
Let’s face it. Old literature is interpreted according to modern thought and paradigms, and the paradigm today is to march naked lady-skin across the silver screen. It’s not literature really; it’s Hollywood.
November 16th, 2007 at 4:31 pm
The newest translations have much better scholarship of Old English. The OE Dictionary has been changed significantly in just the last couple of years.
November 19th, 2007 at 10:46 am
This is a tragedy to great literature. I believe that Hollywood ruins great works when they cant even follow the story. In “The Lord of the Rings” they tried to interpret the story so it would capture the magic that Tolkien had written. It was beautifully made and honored the deceased writer. This is a stupid, senseless movie that was made to demean women (unnecessary nudity) and it also ruins a great story in our history. I wish Hollywood would try to preserve the past instead of destroying it with “money-making” storylines!!!
November 19th, 2007 at 12:34 pm
Nudity is not of itself demeaning. It can show purity of form or self. There is also male nudity in this. But I agree it was largely pointless and gratuitous as done.
November 28th, 2007 at 12:56 am
I agree with Amy in the sense that nudity is altogether unnecessary when portrayed in this way. I dunno if I would go as far as saying ’stupid and senseless’ (I’m sure there are at least some good parts in the movie), but considering people don’t run around nude in real life (at least most of us), then they shouldn’t need to do that in a movie. THAT is just a money-making addition.
And yes, Peter Jackson did an awesome job sticking to the Lord of the Rings’ storyline!
December 5th, 2007 at 8:20 pm
Heya!
Just wanted to let you know that our review of the Beowulf Movie is up in the latest episode of Upon Further Review. http://www.furtherreview.net
We love to hear your feedback!
Thanks,
The Reviewers
Upon Further Review
March 4th, 2008 at 9:09 am
i appreciate the fact that Beowulf gives me at least a pseudo-education in ancient literature (never had to read the book as a child)