George W. Beowulf

I'd like to say that the primary decision I waited so long to post this review of Beowulf is because I wanted to see it on a conventional movie screen as well as the obviously more visually compelling Imax 3d screen, but the truth is I've just been feeling rather lazy and ill the past few days. However, I did see it in both formats, and now that I'm on the mend, it's time for me to impart my opinions of the latest swords and sex blockbuster, which will invariably be compared to the much hipper, edgier, harder entry in the same genre, "300."

As it should be. "300" saw wide release in the United States not too long ago, in March of this year. Like "Equilibrium" was to "The Matrix," like "Deep Impact," was to "Armageddon," (all films about the same subject released within a year of the other) Robert Zemeckis's noble latest effort, although in development long before "300," will always be remembered by contemporary moviegoers as the younger, less polished sibling of the former film. This is a fairly remarkable situation considering Zemeckis's long history of employing sophisticated technical wizardry to craft classic, beloved, popcorn films.

If someone had told me a year ago that a film by young-gun director Zack Snyder, fresh off the noteworthy but limited success of his "Dawn of the Dead" remake, would achieve a much greater opening weekend box-office total and overall level of popularity than a fresh interpretation of English literary-canon by Zemeckis, I doubt I would have believed it for a second. But- one must of course consider Zemeckis' recent string of duds, including the virtually universally decried "Polar Express," (made using the same motion capture/computer animated technique as Beowulf) and Snyder's youthful enthusiasm and originality.

Notwithstanding, I am very happy to report that "Beowulf" is a fortunate and timely return to form for Zemeckis, and even breaks new some significant new ground for the director, though perhaps not in the way many are expecting.

Now, I must also caution that my opinion is certainly influenced by the fact that I have yet to read the original epic Norse poem in its entirety, and have no firm plans to do so in the near future. This hasn't stopped me from developing what I believe is a pretty solid understanding of the story in its "classical" form, and I am well aware of the many massive liberties taken by screenwriters Gaiman and Avary in this latest cinematic incarnation. Anyone that knows me fairly well might also question my critical reviewing skills when it comes to ANYTHING by Neil Gaiman, one of my all-time favorite authors and personal idols, but I stress; I am not predisposed to like everything the man creates and does. In fact, the latest novel of his I read, "Anansi Boys" struck me as pretty weak and uninspired.

So with that aside, let's examine Beowulf- using the unofficial, unscientific, altogether undignified method that I bring to most films. In terms of technical achievement, which I spoke of briefly in regards to Zemeckis' film catalog earlier, the movie is a vast improvement over "Polar Express." Complaints of zombie-eyes and cold, lifeless facial expressions, which surfaced in reviews of that earlier picture, are unlikely to be applied here. The motion-capture technology hasn't been quite perfected yet, but its getting damn close, and at least it's no longer an unforgivable distraction. If and when you see it, take a look at King Hrothgar's face- a perfect meld between the familiar, stalwart Anthony Hopkins and a vulgar, decrepit Danish king from a time long ago. The fusion is frighteningly realistic at times, and is evident to more or less of a degree in all of the other characters.

However, this is clearly an animated film, and is designed to appear thus, especially in 3-d, much to the surprise and chagrin of at least one of my friends, who was misled by the TV-spots into thinking it was going to be a live action/green-screen fusion ala "300" or "Sin-City." Therefore, I think it would be advisable to look at "Beowulf," not so much as a wannabe "300," but rather as a violent and bloody picture-book come to life, in the vein of Ed Gorey. A story that might have, in a different world, been retold by Pixar Studios, with much more spectacular results.

Even this version of "Beowulf," though not quite as good as it could have been, still manages to be pretty damn spectacular. All of the big action sequences are exquisitely choreographed. The camera, freed from the constraints of physical sets and actors, swims around the screen rapidly and crazily to follow the violence or to close up on a certain character's expression. These movements are never jarring or vomit inducing, though, they are always graceful and deliberate. The fantastical creatures are particularly incredible to look at, formidably detailed and epic in scope, including the absolutely revolting Grendel. The infamous being was my favorite character in the film, thanks to a-near perfect performance by the always good Crispin Glover, who manages to turn the glistening, shuddering frame of the "monster" into something real and emotional, a freak of nature the audience simultaneously fears and pities.

Although he is given a run for this title by his mother, the unbelievable sexpot that is Angelina Jolie. When she first appeared onscreen in humanoid form, slowly rising out of a luminous cave pond, I immediately thought of what it would have been like to see this film as a 13 year old, or younger, and I was both grateful that I was not that age, and envious. Jolie's water-demon is a creature of breathtaking but scandalous beauty. Her voice, her walk (on gold-claws that are made to appear as stillettos), her eyes; all of these ooze the intense, raw, sexual confidence of a porn-star. But like a porn star, she appears almost immediately unwholesome, a tantalizing but potentially dangerous figure who turns out be destined for a much larger purpose than being the object of male (and female) fantasy.

Ray Winstone's "Beowulf," begins the film as a brash, arrogant young muscleman that is not easy to like, (unless you are a 13-year old boy, or a football player) and even less easy to take seriously. Yet by the end, it is his transformation into a resigned, regretful old has-been seeking redemption for his mistakes that is not only the most compelling aspect of the movie, but ironically enough, it's salvation. I'm extremely glad I saw this film the same week I watched "No Country for Old Men," because they make very nice compliments to each other, a point I will hopefully expand upon further in my review for that film.

Because for all of his bravado and boasting, this Beowulf is no stronger than any of us mere-mortals when it comes to temptation. His skill at fighting and womanizing and seizing the opportunity to enhance his own image is undermined by his own lack of foresight, his inability to perceive how his actions will affect his friends and family. This is, of course, a tragic flaw not found in the canon version of the story, and one that would understandably incense some of the more diehard fans and scholars.

It must be said that it is precisely this, though, that distinguishes Beowulf from "300's" Leonidas, or any of the Spartan warriors, and transforms the movie from a brutal, misogynistic, unapologetic orgy of violence and decadence into a fairly cerebral social commentary, one that could not be more appropriate for our morally ambiguous times. Beowulf operates on at least several levels in this regard- first, as a character study of the man himself, but secondly, and more interestingly, as a probe into the collective, seemingly timeless human tendency for creating and exalting certain people as untouchable heroes.

For although Beowulf himself was quite preoccupied with establishing and maintaining his legacy, consequences be damned, it was not he alone that spread the tale of his so-called victories far and wide. As is shown in this film adaptation, the people of his age were hungry for a hero to solve their problems, to lead them out of darkness, to give them a reason to believe that humankind was worth saving. Ordinary people are even willing to overlook the nearly obvious, to ignore pronounced faults and inconsistencies, so that they can retain idealistic, unblemished images of their heroes. Forgive me for bringing politics into this mess, but it is not difficult to see parallels in the way some loyal Neoconservatives in the United States were willing, for the better part of the last decade, to overlook so many of the same faults in their own heroes, especially those occupying the highest political offices in the country. But I do not think this tendency is unique to any particular group of people or ideology.

That is, for me, the one of the most remarkable aspects of this Beowulf movie, that it touches on what I see as a very universal human urge- to entertain those that even give the slightest pretense to heroism, to trust them with our lives and our future, hoping that they can somehow make sense of, or at least distract us from this very complicated, mostly inglorious place we call home.

Towards the end of the film Beowulf attempts to apologize to the forever loyal bride whom he betrayed, saying, "Keep a memory of me, not as a hero, but as a man, fallible and flawed." Once again, this is nothing like the Beowulf one would come to understand from reading the ancient poem, but it is one that makes more sense to us- a self-pitying geezer who has nothing left to offer save belated apologies and a seemingly hopeless, final physical trial to prove he is worth something after all. And SPOILERS AHEAD, low and behold, he succeeds, leaving the audience with a breathtaking, sacrificial last act that almost makes up for his past transgressions. This was my favorite moment in the film, and the one I find to be groundbreaking for Zemeckis. Where most of the director's other films have been inspiring because of their unnecessarily suffering noble leads and mostly happy, sappy, conclusions, this one was inspiring because it captured more realistically the ever-mysterious, contradictory nature of real life. Even people who we have come to mistrust and nearly loathe can surprise us. Even animation, a medium usually relegated to children's stories and comedy, can be used to retell and reinvigorate a longstanding literary classic. Even a tale that is swollen with gratuitous bloodletting and hubris can reveal some very thought-provoking, multifaceted topics about the fragility of humanity (a feature mostly absent from "300"). So, while it suffered from a lack of the spectacular vistas found in the "Lord of the Rings" movies, and an absence of the edgy, artistic hipness of "300," and was weighed down by too many scenes designed specifically to showcase the 3d effect, the "Beowulf" of 2007 still pleased me a great-deal, and I was glad I saw it twice.

In sum: A surprising and mostly successful experiment, but one that still falls short of the greatness achieved by recent masterpiece entries in the genre. Definitely still worth paying for, especially in 3d.