Grendel

Moviecut—Grendel

While I haven't fully read Beowulf yet, I will be within the coming months, and I felt that this movie would give me a taste of the story. If you're looking for comments related to how the movie stacks up and compares to the actual story, you may wish to just wait for somebody else's comment. All in all, I thought this was an adequate movie. It combined decent amounts of action, character building, and fantasy. The movie had its boring parts, like almost any other movie (Except Crank, I suppose...), as well as its high points. **SPOILER** One of these high points, as I would call it, is the final battle with Grendel. Not so much the slaying of the beast, but the anticipation leading up to the fight... You know it's coming, and you know someone/something is going to get killed... Probably Grendel... But you still have the anticipation growing as you eagerly await what happens next. I suppose that may be different if you're familiar with the story already, but for me it was one of the more attention-grabbing scenes in the movie. It started off on a pretty good note as well. Too many movies these days are starting off very plain, and very boring; often with heavy music and flashy scenes to catch your eye. Personally, I prefer a movie to delve right into the story and action. Grendel does just this, as Beowulf enters a cave and slays a beast almost effortlessly. This serves two purposes, really... It gets the viewer interested in what else is to come, and it shows that Beowulf is no push-over when it comes to slaying creatures. Though, much like I said before, this movie does get boring at points, and most of the key characters become very predictable as the movie goes on. From the moment you see Finn you know he's going to get himself in trouble as the story progresses. You know Ingrid is going to be a total ditz that gets herself into trouble as well... And you most certainly can decipher that Unferth is going to be a prick, as well as a fool. **END SPOILER** All in all, if you're looking for a decent movie to pass the time, and possibly watch just for a rather unique movie, you probably won't be disappointed with Grendel. That said, Grendel is unique in its own right, since it gets away from the run-of-the-mill fantasy medieval genre... However, if you're looking for a highly original, completely enthralling fantasy medieval movie, you might want to look elsewhere; as Grendel still has many of the components of a rather blotched, horribly general adventure. You know, the easily-distinguishable CGI for the monsters, ridiculous battle scenes, and the times where you find yourself mentally yelling at the characters one minute, and laughing at their actions the next... All because of how poorly some of the fighting goes. We've all seen it, but we all still watch it. Now, as far as why I gave it a 6... Personally, I feel the rating system on IMDb is screwed. Not because it's unfair, but because there are so many different opinions on movies, that you really have to know which opinions to follow if you're going to find the rating system useful. Without getting too far off-topic, what I mean by this is the fact that some movies you may enjoy, such as Conan the Barbarian, or The Boondock Saints, get rather low ratings, while other movies like The Godfather rank so high. Or better yet, how The Matrix beats Equilibrium... But that aside, If I were to rate this movie with a totally open mind, based on what some other movies on here have gotten, I would give it a 6. It's better than your usual Sci-Fi Channel garbage, but not as good as some fantasy medieval classics, like Conan the Barbarian. Certainly don't expect something like The 13th Warrior here. Expect a very basic, but entertaining-at-points movie that's great to watch by yourself with some popcorn on a lonely Saturday night. Of course, if you're thinking about watching this with a group of friends, you might be better off just renting a movie from the local video store...

Overall Grendel is an average movie taken from a great story. The only people that may love this movie are those who haven't read the epic poem "Beowulf". It keeps the same basic plot elements from the epic poem, other than that the only thing used from the poem are some of the names of the characters. The acting for once in a scifi original movie is actually half way decent, same went for the dialogue of the movie too. Special effects are the same Scifi average cgi, fake and outdated. Disappointments in the movie (SPOILERS ARE FOUND HERE!): The scenes in which Beowulf fights Grendel were incredibly disappointing to those expecting a close adaptation, especially if you were expecting Beowulf to fight Grendel bare-handed instead of using the ridiculous cross bow that fired exploding rounds. If you watched Grendel expecting to watch Beowulf rip Grendel's arm off with his own strength you will be disappointed because instead Beowulf hacks off Grendel's arm with a sword. The overall the movie's average and unless cheesy Scifi channel "orginal" movies are your cup of tea than the movie is for you. Most of you should be like me who were some what disappointed should wait for the release of Beowulf in theatres later this year.

May the saints preserve us, because this movie is not going to help. Someone with access needs to e-mail Mel Gibson and tell him we need a faithful production of Beowulf. Something that actually has something in common with the epic poem that is the foundation for all modern western literature. The recent (since 2000) versions of Beowulf make we wonder two things. First, why is there so much interest in the story. Second, why are all these filmmakers squandering mountains of cash on this crap. The only reason this got a two is that the version with Lambert in it (Beowulf 2000) was worse and needed the 1. What is even worse, some people will watch this and get the wrong idea about the poem. How can an industry where Peter Jackson gets a literary conversion to film so right can get it so wrong. I mean really, the Roman Forum as a model for Heorot is too much. And PLEASE, horns on helmets? Spare me. This is insulting. /hjm

I'm an associate of Ron Fernandez and after viewing some of the enlightening comments made I thought I'd have a quick Q&A with the writer of "Grendel". The following is a transcript: G: Hi Ron. R: Hi Glen, It's great to be here. G: So Ron, how do you feel about the movie as a whole? R: Overall I think it came out great(he says smiling) considering the resources and timetable involved in these films. I think SciFi Channel and UFO films did a super job of translating it to the screen. Nick Lyon, who directed it and is now doing Species 4, brought great life to the characters, and I particularly enjoyed watching Ben Cross coax the drama out of his scenes. Chariots of Fire to Grendel... Hmmm... G: Cool. Yeah I enjoyed watching it with you over many beers at our favorite pub. R: Maybe the beers helped. (both laughing) G: What did inspire you to manhandle this epic poem? R: When I was hired by the production company I realized the daunting task of adapting one of the greatest stories in western culture. Tough choices had to be made in order to make this epic tale fit the parameters of a fun Saturday night SciFi Channel flick, and I think those choices paid off. For example, I decided to add a love story which would frame the tale for modern audiences. The crossbow gun was not my creation, by the way, but it happens to be cheap and easy to blow things up in Bulgaria. G: I think the Rambo 2000 crossbow gun was actually pretty damn cool. But Im glad you mentioned it, because a lot of people out there don't understand the process of storytelling within the constraints of a producer and bottom line run production. Damn those wacky producers. R: The challenge is delivering a quality story to viewers at home. I think our film stacks up well if not better than some of the other SciFi pictures I've seen, but the power of the original Beowulf narrative of course helped us a lot. If you haven't read it in a while I recommend you do. I had to read it when I was a Freshman in high school and I didn't get it. But going back I was astounded by the beauty of the language and the heroic character of Beowulf and the others. G: Some of the user comments here indicated that there were some factual mistakes made (i.e. Grendel's mother not being fought underwater, the townspeople being sacrificed etc.) How do you respond to this? R: We saw the original text as a launching point for the recontextualization of a classic. As I said tough choices had to be made in terms of story and the reality of budgeting. The climatic scene in the poem, where Beowulf confronts Grendel's mother underwater was in the first draft but you know it couldn't be done in the time alloted. As to the second part of your question, believe it or not, the story of children being sacrificed to appease the angry monster is in the original poem. But we chose to emphasize it. G: Do you see SciFi taking on more literary or epic narratives or adaptations? And what new projects can we expect to see from you in the future? R: I hope that SciFi continues to take risks by re-envisioning more of the classic tales of the past. Right now I'm writing another film for them, this one set in the present and currently entitled "The Monster". It's a cross between American Werewolf in London meets Excalibur. It should be a hoot. G: Always a pleasure Ron. R: Thanks, Glen.

Why oh why can't anyone make a decent film out of a legendary tale? This is the second adaptation of "Beowulf" I've been disappointed with in a year. But I have to say, the previous version ("Beowulf & Grendel", starring Gerald Butler) was far superior to this. That one was only a little disappointing. This one is a mess!!! What bugged me most? Was it the useless plot elements they added in for no particular reason (Human sacrifices? Pointless love interest?), or the bad CGI, or the inconsistency of the characters or the uninspired acting? Even worse was the way they made beautiful Marina Sirtis look so horrible!!! And lets not even talk about that ridiculous crossbow? And why did they continually remind us that Beowulf had the strength of 30 men, and yet he never showed the slightest sign of such strength throughout the entire film. He was tossed around by both monsters he fought, relying on his sidekicks to save his bacon. Even when he slugged the arrogant prince, he didn't knock him out. He was much too reliant on weapons. Beo-wimp is more like it. This was certainly not the powerful Beowulf of the epic poem! I'd like to end this on a positive note but I can't really think of one offhand. All I can say is, if you've ever read "Beowulf", you'll be infinitely disappointed by this dismal, inaccurate excuse for an adaptation!

Where to begin? Anachronism? High tech cross bow with a scope in about 500AD? Arrows with explosive charges in 500AD? A monster Grendel that looks like a robocop and obviously never interacts with any of the weapons fired or swung against him? The heart torn out of his victim's chest without any sense of contact? Possibly the blond who would fit in on a recent fashion show with her make-up and streaked hair? The ancient Danish court represented in Classical Greek style? The queen played by Marina Sirtis more savaged by her makeup artist than by madness? The effects are way too weak to carry this story. There are some stories that don't mind or even benefit from cheap effects, but this Grendel isn't one of them. What about characters who seem to jump about in their attitudes without motivation? A bravado idiot prince whose home has already been savaged more than once by the monster Grendel seems to have less respect for the danger he faces than Beowulf who was sent from afar from the land of the Geats to help the desperate Danes. In this it feels more like an old cowboy western than any kind of myth. Beowulf is an ancient tale from an era with almost no literary tradition and much of both its sentiment and its drama is obscure. I suspect that any modern telling which doesn't make an intelligent attempt to penetrate the obscurity must fail. I didn't love the recent "Beowulf and Grendel" which sees Grendel essentially as human and sees Hrothgar and his Danes as too arrogant and stupid to recognize Grendel's attacks as well-justified vengeance, but I had to respect its revisionist position that Hrothgar's Danes were a bunch of macho thugs who never grasped, even after it was all over, that they had brought this nightmare on themselves, and therefore, the original story of Beowulf, as it was written, was a misrepresentation of the real story. I think there's a more complex meaning to be understood than that, but this "Grendel's" terrible secret that Grendel's attacks are tied to previous human sacrifice doesn't really bring us closer to the shame experienced by Hrothgar and the Danes. This Beowulf has little to recommend it as traditional myth or as modern fantasy. I give it a 4: higher than it deserves, but always hopeful that a poor effort will draw attention by someone who is up to telling the story intelligently. In the meantime, Sci-Fi's movie-making seems to be following the NASA policy that it's better to build lots of probes that fail than a few that succeed.