I was pleasantly shocked by how much I enjoyed Beowulf. I'm not a Neil Gaiman fan--nothing against him, just never read much beyond the initial volume or two of The Sandman and the very boring 1602--so my prime wasn't pumped there. I remember the poem from high school English, of course--we even did a video reenactment of it that involved the music of Pantera and Laibach that was pretty bitchin'--but not, like, super-fondly. Robert Zemeckis's last CGI foray, The Polar Express, looked sterile and creepy; this looked marginally more lifelike from the commercials and online trailers I saw, but only marginally, and it looked mostly like the kind of video game I'm not interested in playing. Moreover, you're unlikely to win me over to anything by saying "from the director of Forrest Gump." Finally, if I want to see Angelina Jolie naked (and let's be honest, I do), I can see the real thing, nipples and all, simply by googling Gia (and let's be honest, I have).

But boy howdy, was this ever the right choice for a matinee today. First of all, the commercials don't do the imagery justice at all. Seeing it in 3D on the big screen enables your eyes to parse the visual information much more easily, so rather than the supercompressed, watching-someone-else-play-Gears of War look of the ads, you get this stunning, gold-hued, you-are-there effect right from the opening shots. It's like watching the scene from Return of the King where they're riding between the oliphaunts' legs for a whole movie.

Secondly, this isn't just 300 in Viking drag. It's a monster movie, and a scary one at that, scarier and more outré than anything in The Mist, to use a recent example. Our first look at Grendel is just at a tumorous, shuddering, self-injuring, blood-gushing mass of flesh and gristle. Hell, that's what he always looks like. To overuse one of my favorite comparison points, he's Clive Barker's "Rawhead Rex" writ large, a suppurating wound on legs. Voiced by Crispin Glover's all too human and vulnerable shrieks, he's also incredibly disturbing; the audience I was surrounded by gasped and phewed audibly every time he showed up and started shouting. The visual was strong (a lot stronger than he looked on the small screen and the laptop monitor, where the design came across weak and undefined), but it also worked in popcorn-movie terms: His every appearance was boo-scary as shit.

Indeed, on the visual level, nearly everything in the film worked as well as one could hope. Computerized naked Angelina Jolie was about as steamy as the real thing; god knows she got more screen time! The dragon that does battle with Beowulf at the end of the film had real size and weight, and the fire he spewed is easily the gold standard for CGI flames. Throw in his golden color and I feel like the whole thing was a "can you top this?" challenge to Peter Jackson and WETA for the (hopefully) inevitable appearance of Smaug in the Hobbit film(s? ! ). That Jacksonian resonance is also felt, of course, in King Hrothgar, his people, and their mead-hall, the setting of most of the film; that it can be compared comfortably to The Two Towers' infamously art-directed-out-the-wazoo Golden Hall of Meduseld in Rohan is a compliment indeed.

The "actors" don't disappoint either. This is certainly where I expected the film to fall flat, based on, well, everything I know about CGI. And yeah, there are a couple of "naw, I don't buy it" moments, some involving the skin around the eyes of John Malkovich's petty courtier Unferth, most involving Robin Wright Penn's young Queen Wealthlow. To demonstrate her May to Hrothgar's December, they fill out her patrician cheekbones with baby fat in a way that looks kind of nothing like the young Robin Wright we remember from The Princess Bride. But shit, everyone else! There truly were times, as the characters portrayed by Anthony Hopkins, Brendan Gleeson, and even Wright Penn (playing the queen in the autumn of her years, her Easter Island face in full flower) strode the screen, when I thought they'd scrapped the CG and switched over to live action. Surely the greatest achievement is turning Ray Winstone, an indisputably commanding presence who nonetheless is basically doing the corpulent/dissolute thing in films from Sexy Beast to The Departed, into the computer-generated Gerard Butler. Zemeckis and company earn my undying gratitude simply for creating the Winstone-Gleeson buddy film of my dreams, of course, but it's more than that. Never once did I question the real-feel of this mead-swilling Leonidas, equal parts genuine prowess and ham-actor bluster.

And that right there is the core of the film, which given its screenwriters' provenance I should have expected to be on the thoughtful side. Turns out that amid the chest-thumping, bellowing, wench-ravishing, and grappling in the nude (and who'd have thought that when it came to crowning the year's best naked-guy fight to the death, Eastern Promises would have competition?), Beowulf is an examination of the contrast between real and imagined heroism, and the price the former pays in its transition to the latter. It may have to play fast and lose with the unnamed bard's tale of the slayer of Grendel, his mother, and the dragon to do it, but who cares? The yarn it spins is all the more engaging for it, right down to its affecting, bravely ambiguous ending (carried by the great Gleeson, much to my delight). In that way the film becomes what it's about--fudging a good story to make it great, and the potential costs of doing so.

Posted by Sean T. Collins at 4:44 PM | Permalink | Comments (4) | TrackBacks (3)