![]() |
I enjoyed this a lot, but much more so the second time.
During the first showing I attended, the 3-D was "inside-out", or "psuedo-stereo" which makes the backgrounds and foregrounds appear to switch places. The only way to see the 3-D properly was to turn the glasses upside down! I quickly notified the manager of the problem and explained that the polarizing filter must be installed wrong, and that they had better get it fixed quickly. Guess when it got fixed? HALFWAY THROUGH THE MOVIE! The entire audience was wearing their glasses upside down for the first half of the movie, and then had to switch them when they finally corrected the mistake. I should say, it was opening day at this multi-plex, but man, what a fiasco. I shudder to think what happened before I got there to explain this to them, as they were running it in 3-D on 7 screens all day. I really hope hundreds of people didn't watch the movie and wonder why the 3-D sucked! This occured at the new Rave Motion Pictures in Las Vegas. I went to another theater the next day (Red Rock Station) and thankfully it was presented correctly and flawlessly. Truly amazing 3-D, at least the second time. I have to say, in over 70 polarized 3-D screenings, I have never seen the 3-D presented backwards or inside out before. |
Spoiler:
|
Originally Posted by sk8r1189
Spoiler:
|
Originally Posted by Patman
But they left out the tattoos...
|
Originally Posted by JaxComet
I found it funny that when he says "I am Beowulf!".....It sounds exactly like "This is Sparta!" :)
|
Just saw this this morning and thought it was pretty bad. The story was told in a terrible manner, Beowulf screaming his name felt silly, the characters looked creepy from the motion capture, and the nude fight scene felt entirely out of place and far too slapstick, whether intended or not.
I'm pretty dissapointed. The only thing that I thought was pretty slick was the dragon and the effects. |
Originally Posted by meshershark
Yes, I found that very cheesy. I don't find copycats cool, especially when they copy something like a hero yelling an iconic phrase, in the exact same manner. The gall is compounded by the fact that the original yeller also played Beowulf in a live-action version a few years back.
|
Originally Posted by FinkPish
This review gives me some hope for this film not being another Polar Express: http://www.chud.com/index.php?type=reviews&id=12521
Spoiler:
|
Just to let everyone know out there that unless there are nipples on the boobies, that technically is not "R-rated" nudity as far as the MPAA is concerned.
I enjoyed this a lot, and the 3D IMAX was spectacular. The story was fine, but the action was the real star, and was much more exciting than 300, even though I still enjoyed that somewhat. |
Just watched it and thought it was great fun. I don't remember the last time I watched a movie in 3D. I'm glad I took the time to see it.
|
It doesn't even seem like that foxnews AP reviewer actually saw the film.
The film is not more violent than 300, there isn't that much nudity, unless you find a wet suit to be exactly like the naked human body, and I believe he says "I Am Beowulf" 2 or 3 times in the film, what a terrible drinking game that would be. |
Well, considering the entirety of Beowulf's fight is him in the nude, with a lot of bare ass shots, there's certainly more nudity then most PG-13 movies. And i'd say he says his name Beowulf at least a half dozen times.
Definitely not as much violence as 300 though. |
Nope he only says it three times. Once when he comes to the curse lands, once during the fight with hunter rose, and once during the telling of the story on how he killed mama demon.
|
Went to the IMAX after turkey feast. The 3D was amazing but the story was so-so. There was more action than I expected, so that was good. Overall, I enjoyed it.
The IMAX trailer for I Am Legend rocked. |
Originally Posted by Baron Of Hell
Nope he only says it three times. Once when he comes to the curse lands, once during the fight with hunter rose, and once during the telling of the story on how he killed mama demon.
|
Loved the movie.
Loved the storytelling. Loved the model of Grendel. Hated the animating (or lack there of) of the hands. Hollywood still has trouble with animating hands and faces. |
Originally Posted by Steve Phillips
I enjoyed this a lot, but much more so the second time.
During the first showing I attended, the 3-D was "inside-out", or "psuedo-stereo" which makes the backgrounds and foregrounds appear to switch places. The only way to see the 3-D properly was to turn the glasses upside down! I quickly notified the manager of the problem and explained that the polarizing filter must be installed wrong, and that they had better get it fixed quickly. Guess when it got fixed? HALFWAY THROUGH THE MOVIE! The entire audience was wearing their glasses upside down for the first half of the movie, and then had to switch them when they finally corrected the mistake. I should say, it was opening day at this multi-plex, but man, what a fiasco. I shudder to think what happened before I got there to explain this to them, as they were running it in 3-D on 7 screens all day. I really hope hundreds of people didn't watch the movie and wonder why the 3-D sucked! This occured at the new Rave Motion Pictures in Las Vegas. I went to another theater the next day (Red Rock Station) and thankfully it was presented correctly and flawlessly. Truly amazing 3-D, at least the second time. I have to say, in over 70 polarized 3-D screenings, I have never seen the 3-D presented backwards or inside out before. |
Saw it in IMAX yesterday. If not for the 3-D, this would have been a much weaker movie. I found the story to be pretty good, but this movie is nothing without the visuals. I don't even think I could sit through it again on DVD.
One question about the story though, why was Grendel such a deformed adolescent-acting monster and Beowulf's offspring was a strong gold dragon guy? |
Originally Posted by Snowmaker
One question about the story though, why was Grendel such a deformed adolescent-acting monster and Beowulf's offspring was a strong gold dragon guy? I wondered about that too. |
Originally Posted by Snowmaker
One question about the story though, why was Grendel such a deformed adolescent-acting monster and Beowulf's offspring was a strong gold dragon guy?
Grendel's was presented as a braggart and party animal. The Dragon's was... a hell of a man. |
how was this movie not nominated in Best Animated feature at this year's Oscars? you are telling me "Happy Feet" deserved it over this technical marvel or does this not fit into the "animated" category since it is different?
|
Originally Posted by scott1598
how was this movie not nominated in Best Animated feature at this year's Oscars? you are telling me "Happy Feet" deserved it over this technical marvel or does this not fit into the "animated" category since it is different?
And Happy Feet was last year. Surf's Up was nominated this year. I'm not sure if it counts, although I'm leaning towards it not counting because of the motion capture stuff, but maybe i'm wrong. I thought there was a list or something of movies up for nomination. |
Originally Posted by fumanstan
I don't see what it being a "technical marvel" would have to do with anything, since the award isn't based on technical achievement.
And Happy Feet was last year. Surf's Up was nominated this year. I'm not sure if it counts, although I'm leaning towards it not counting because of the motion capture stuff, but maybe i'm wrong. I thought there was a list or something of movies up for nomination. and how was this not rated R in theaters? this was more graphic and just plain more brutal than some horror pieces of crap that have come out of late. |
Originally Posted by scott1598
how was this movie not nominated in Best Animated feature at this year's Oscars? you are telling me ["Surf's Up"] deserved it over this technical marvel or does this not fit into the "animated" category since it is different?
http://animatedfilms.suite101.com/ar..._animated_film Surf's Up seems a bit of a surprise nomination, especially when figuring in the other animated films that didn't make it, like The Simpsons Movie and Shrek the Third. However, those films seem like more likely candidates than even Beowulf. As fumanstan pointed out, the category is about the overall quality of the movie, and really Academy members views of the films, not just technical achievement and how was this not rated R in theaters? this was more graphic and just plain more brutal than some horror pieces of crap that have come out of late. |
Just saw this this weekend on HD-DVD and I really liked the movie, On the HD-DVD it has PIP of the movie without the CGI, just the actors on a big stage acting it out, its pretty neat seeing this and then the finally version.
|
| All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:44 PM. |
Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.