Beowulf

[StevenYoo]

Originally posted by: Omegachi
so only one person here saw it and liked it?

I saw it in IMAX.

I enjoyed it, even though there were some HORRIBLY cheesy moments and laughably bad lines.

I love Neil Gaiman and I've read almost everything he's done, but the script for this movie just wasn't that great.

 

[SSSnail]

I liked it, it was enjoyable. The people that didn't like it? Oh well, must be tough going through life for them.

 

[Sphexi]

There haven't been any really awesome manly movies lately, other than 300, and that was a different sort of "manly". I miss the 80s, where movies were some guy, with a knife, killing lots of people for some reason you forgot by the end of the movie. Some of the previews of this movie made it seem like it was going to be a completely badass smackdown of epic proportions.

Still, fairly decent as far as recent releases go.

 

[vital]

why did this movie even need all that CGI if they were using real actors?

 

[DanTMWTMP]

saw it in IMAX 3d.....very awesome experience.

the movie wasn't bad, but it wasn't great either. The fighting was great. I just hoped that it'd be a bit more epic.. i'm not sure what it was, but it was missing something.

 

[chowmein]

"everyone who tried to eat the lord's meat has died trying"

"BEOWULF!!!!!!" after he lunges out of the sea monster

 

[SacrosanctFiend]

Originally posted by: bunnyfubbles
How could anyone have been fooled into believing this movie was going to be awesome or even merely good? There have already been two movies based off of Beowulf made in the last 10 years (13th Warrior in '99, and Beowulf and Grendel in '05), and both of them are probably better than this CGI special effects circle jerk.

Not only can Hollywood not make up their own original stories, they're even doing remakes on top of such remakes (which isn't that bad if there has been enough time in between the first and the new one to merit it, but less than 10 years is certainly inexcusable), give me a f***ing break.

I don't care if this is "entertaining" like Transformers was "entertaining", I've drawn the line and won't be seeing it.

You forgot to mention Beowulf(1999). That was most certainly worse than this version.

 

[lokiju]

Originally posted by: Omegachi
so only one person here saw it and liked it?

I saw it last night and really liked it.

Had it not been in 3D, then maybe not as much, but it was still a good movie IMO.

 

[lokiju]

Originally posted by: bunnyfubbles
How could anyone have been fooled into believing this movie was going to be awesome or even merely good? There have already been two movies based off of Beowulf made in the last 10 years (13th Warrior in '99, and Beowulf and Grendel in '05), and both of them are probably better than this CGI special effects circle jerk.

Not only can Hollywood not make up their own original stories, they're even doing remakes on top of such remakes (which isn't that bad if there has been enough time in between the first and the new one to merit it, but less than 10 years is certainly inexcusable), give me a f***ing break.

I don't care if this is "entertaining" like Transformers was "entertaining", I've drawn the line and won't be seeing it.

It was actually a movie of the book Eaters of the Dead that was inspired by Beowulf.

 

[JEDI]

Originally posted by: vital
why did this movie even need all that CGI if they were using real actors?

i didnt like the movie

 

[villageidiot111]

meh, it could have been a lot worse.

 

[cKGunslinger]

Meh - it was an average action film, made much cooler by being in IMAX 3D.

 

[compnovice]

I watched it in 3-D and hated it. No story and horrible dialogs.

Save your 13 bucks and gas..