Beowulf & Grendel movie

BonesMcCoy · Post by **BonesMcCoy** » Mon Mar 13, 2006 11:22 pm

If you go to www.beowulfandgrendel.com you can watch a trailer for the movie (which is currently showing in Canada - the movie, not the trailer). It looks like grendel is some kinda neanderthal-looking half-ogre-ish dude. What's up with that? I've never read the real poem and I know how Hollywood butchers everything but isn't Grendel supposed to be some kinda monster? Like a dragon or troll or something?

JCBoney · Post by **JCBoney** » Tue Mar 14, 2006 12:02 am

First, cool link, so thanks.

No, Grendel is more of a monster and seperate from the dragon. Check wikipedia here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grendel

Algolei · Post by **Algolei** » Tue Mar 14, 2006 2:47 am

There's a Beowulf movie? And it's showing in Canada? Why didn't I know about this!

JamesEightBitStar · Post by **JamesEightBitStar** » Tue Mar 14, 2006 3:14 am

Or, rather: They're making another Beowulf movie? (there was one released direct-to-video around 2000 or so. I never saw it)

Stonegiant · Post by **Stonegiant** » Tue Mar 14, 2006 4:01 am

Well from what I have seen it looks a hell of alot better than that travesty/joke called The 13th Warrior *gags & spits* eghh, it still leaves a terrible aftertaste everytime I say it.

stranger · Post by **stranger** » Tue Mar 14, 2006 9:08 am

At first I thought you might of meant "BEOWULF" with Christopher Lambert. Being done in the future threw things off for me on that one. I see I was mistaken, I will have to keep an eye out to see if this makes its way to my area everntually.

Mythmere · Post by **Mythmere** » Tue Mar 14, 2006 9:11 am

Stonegiant wrote:Well from what I have seen it looks a hell of alot better than that travesty/joke called The 13th Warrior *gags & spits* eghh, it still leaves a terrible aftertaste everytime I say it.

Wasn't the 13th warrior based on Eaters of the Dead by ... what's his name? He wrote Jurassic Park ... Michael Crichton? Eaters of the Dead is a good book. Pity if they butchered it in a movie.

stranger · Post by **stranger** » Tue Mar 14, 2006 9:17 am

Mythmere wrote:
Stonegiant wrote:Well from what I have seen it looks a hell of alot better than that travesty/joke called The 13th Warrior *gags & spits* eghh, it still leaves a terrible aftertaste everytime I say it.
Wasn't the 13th warrior based on Eaters of the Dead by ... what's his name? He wrote Jurassic Park ... Michael Crichton? Eaters of the Dead is a good book. Pity if they butchered it in a movie.

It sure was, the title was changed so it wouldn't sound like a horror movie.

Stonegiant · Post by **Stonegiant** » Tue Mar 14, 2006 2:48 pm

stranger wrote:
Mythmere wrote:
Stonegiant wrote:Well from what I have seen it looks a hell of alot better than that travesty/joke called The 13th Warrior *gags & spits* eghh, it still leaves a terrible aftertaste everytime I say it.
Wasn't the 13th warrior based on Eaters of the Dead by ... what's his name? He wrote Jurassic Park ... Michael Crichton? Eaters of the Dead is a good book. Pity if they butchered it in a movie.
It sure was, the title was changed so it wouldn't sound like a horror movie.

I read the book as well and enjoyed it. I am a big Jurrassic Park fan!

My primary complaint with the movie and what ruined it for me was the lack of attention paid to clothing, armor and weapons being used by Beowulf & his crew. In one scene they have have Beowulf wearing 15th century plate armor, one of his men is wearing or carrying a Roman gladiator helmet. Antonio Banderas' character is armed with 12th/13th century scimitars. The list goes on and on, all of this was done in a movie supposedly set in the 6th to 10th century. It is this lack of caring in films that drives me nuts. It would probably have been as expensive or even cheaper to obtain the appropriate clothing and equipment. IMO the musical cartoon Quest for Camelot was more historically accurate than The 13th Warrior. I love my history and my living history and it infuriates me when Hollywood bitch slaps it, treats it like a cheap whore and then kicks it out on the screen in the wrong and way too cheap dress! If you aint going to do it right then leave it the hell alone!!

WSmith · Post by **WSmith** » Tue Mar 14, 2006 5:36 pm

Stonegiant wrote:I love my history and my living history and it infuriates me when Hollywood bitch slaps it, treats it like a cheap whore and then kicks it out on the screen in the wrong and way too cheap dress! If you aint going to do it right then leave it the hell alone!!

AMEN!!!

AxeMental · Post by **AxeMental** » Tue Mar 14, 2006 6:53 pm

Q: "Well from what I have seen it looks a hell of alot better than that travesty/joke called The 13th Warrior *gags & spits* eghh, it still leaves a terrible aftertaste everytime I say it."

Damn Stone Giant, your one tough mofo. 13th Warrior was a THUMBS UP IMO, sure it wasn't Eaters of the Dead, but it had cool filming, violence, blood gushing, cool actors playing the vikings, a semi-AD&Dish group of guys adventuring into a dungeonlike cavern, and and Omar Shariff. You just have to see past the inaccuracies, sound bites, etc. At least we didn't have to watch Brad Pitt....it could always be alot worse.

Stonegiant · Post by **Stonegiant** » Tue Mar 14, 2006 7:58 pm

AxeMental wrote:Q: "Well from what I have seen it looks a hell of alot better than that travesty/joke called The 13th Warrior *gags & spits* eghh, it still leaves a terrible aftertaste everytime I say it."

Damn Stone Giant, your one tough mofo. 13th Warrior was a THUMBS UP IMO, sure it wasn't Eaters of the Dead, but it had cool filming, violence, blood gushing, cool actors playing the vikings, a semi-AD&Dish group of guys adventuring into a dungeonlike cavern, and and Omar Shariff. You just have to see past the inaccuracies, sound bites, etc. At least we didn't have to watch Brad Pitt....it could always be alot worse.

Beowulf/Dark Ages are one of my all time favorite time periods. If they had called it The Caves of Doom and dropped all pretense of being a historical film I would have thought "what a cool D&Dish movie". Yes looking at it that way it was a good film.

Algolei · Post by **Algolei** » Tue Mar 14, 2006 8:24 pm

Stonegiant wrote:
AxeMental wrote:Q: "Well from what I have seen it looks a hell of alot better than that travesty/joke called The 13th Warrior *gags & spits* eghh, it still leaves a terrible aftertaste everytime I say it."

Damn Stone Giant, your one tough mofo. 13th Warrior was a THUMBS UP IMO, sure it wasn't Eaters of the Dead, but it had cool filming, violence, blood gushing, cool actors playing the vikings, a semi-AD&Dish group of guys adventuring into a dungeonlike cavern, and and Omar Shariff. You just have to see past the inaccuracies, sound bites, etc. At least we didn't have to watch Brad Pitt....it could always be alot worse.
Beowulf/Dark Ages are one of my all time favorite time periods. If they had called it The Caves of Doom and dropped all pretense of being a historical film I would have thought "what a cool D&Dish movie". Yes looking at it that way it was a good film.

I loved it, but I didn't think of it as historical. But I also loved it for the sweat and grime, which is what made if more "realistic" to me.

No, I didn't look at the armour and weapons and hope for any kind of reality. Yes, if they had been authentically dated, that would have improved the film for me, and hell I'd probably have watched it three times as often as I have (so, 15 times instead of just 5).

Stormcrow · Post by **Stormcrow** » Tue Mar 14, 2006 8:51 pm

I loved "The 13th Warrior," especially since I had just discovered the then-new RPG Rune, which went along with it perfectly. Historical accuracy? It's a tale of adventure! I don't need historical accuracy in my movies any more than Gygax needs historical accuracy in his RPGs.

David
Stardate 6201.5

Stonegiant · Post by **Stonegiant** » Wed Mar 15, 2006 9:45 am

Stormcrow wrote:I loved "The 13th Warrior," especially since I had just discovered the then-new RPG Rune, which went along with it perfectly. Historical accuracy? It's a tale of adventure! I don't need historical accuracy in my movies any more than Gygax needs historical accuracy in his RPGs.

David
Stardate 6201.5

But when you are making a movie about a historical figure and events than I feel you are obligated to be as accurate as possible. The Arab figure in the movie is based on the actual Arab merchant that travelled among the vikings whose writings have given great insight to their culture. This movie was not set in the age of Beowulf but instead set in the midst or height of the Viking age and was not some time shrouded age of myth. The betrayl of the film was to both the book and the history of the time period portrayed. As I said if they had removed all historical or earthly refrences and just made it a fantasy adventure movie, say set in the lands of the Snow or Ice barbarians of Oerth, I would not be up on my soapbox. To me what this is, is another example of Hollywood revisionist history that thwarts the attempts of historians to keep people informed of what was really going on. Would it have been so hard for Hollywood to have had them were chainmail, openface helms and weild axes and broadswords (1-handed) and have the Arab character weild a straight bladed sword similiar to the Roman spatha; no. They don't want to and they don't care. I have seen films with smaller budgets and lesser stars come closer to historical accuracy then this and other films. To say its just a film of high adventure is to rationalize and excuse apathy and hollywoods "lets play to the lowest common denominator". Gygax didn't use historical accuracy in his game; I agree 150% but Gygax also wasn't trying to portray a specific time period in our history. If you were to go to his wargamming table on the other had during a historical game you would see accuracy I am sure and EGG would probably be pretty adamite about it also.

*rant off*