Beowulf is a great story that presents
themes about human nature and tells the epic tale of a hero who fights many
monsters and wins. The movie version,
on the other hand, narrates the story of a man who can’t seem to keep his
clothes on and continues to make horrible mistake until he dies fighting a
dragon that is also his son. The movie’s director, Robert Zemeckis, seemed to
have the intention of making a movie adaption that appealed to today’s
teenagers. There is a lot of action, a lot of nudity, and a lot of raunchy
jokes. This might not have worked alone, but paired with uncomfortable computer
generated animation and drastic deviations from the original story this movie definitely
lost its title as a great film version of this historic poem.
The
first thing I will discuss (because it is so blatantly presented to the
audience throughout the movie) is the extreme amount of nudity in the film.
Almost immediately, Hrothgar’s blanket of an outfit falls off while he
addresses his company, who are all completely covered in appropriate garb. Not
much later Beowulf presents himself and tells the story of his competition at sea. Again, in the flashback of him
destroying monsters he only wears his gross leather underwear. Next, Beowulf is
about to fight Grendel and strips down to his birthday suit, explaining to Wealhtheow
that he will fight the monster man to man. In the ensuing battle, to avoid
showing the audience everything, Zemeckis puts many obstructions in Beowulf’s
path that block his man parts. The most comedic of which is a sword that
Grendel throws into a table right before Beowulf moves into the foreground.
Finally, the most blatant display of nudity comes when computer animated
Angelina Jolie rises from the water completely naked and dripping in gold. This
time there are no obstructions to block our view. This was no doubt added to
entice the audience. She even has heels coming out of her feet to add to her
sexy image. Though the reason for Angelina Jolie’s nudity is quite clear, I am
unsure of why everyone else was naked. Maybe it was too add another layer of
excitement to the film, or to make Beowulf seem more manly and sure of himself.
Whatever the reason, it didn’t work.
Another
aspect of the movie that made it almost unwatchable was the computer-generated
imagery. The awkward way everything flowed distracted me throughout the movie.
The hair, especially, seemed to be half of a second behind the rest of the
person, and it gave the movie an awkward affect, “as if underwater,” to quote
Manohla Dargis of the New York Times. Also, this animation is always
used for kids’ films, and it seems like the “mature” content of this movie was
added to convince the audience that this was, in fact, an adult, mature film.
It created the opposite affect, however, and gave the movie the humor of a
thirteen-year old boy.
The
one theme that the movie tried to stay true to was Christianity versus
Paganism. This was done almost well, beside it being so obvious. The Christian theme
was always attached to Unferth. I am unsure of the reason for this. Maybe the
association between this mean-spirited and arrogant man and Christianity served
the purpose of insulting this religion. Maybe it was because Unferth knew he
wouldn’t achieve “immortality” through deeds and sought another way to live
after death: heaven. It was also clear that Beowulf and Hrothgar had a
preference towards Paganism. I appreciated the desire to keep this fascinating
theme in the story, but I wish it could have been done with more subtlety.
Another
device that was presented too enthusiastically was the use of foreshadowing. When
Hrothgar is telling Beowulf about Grendel’s mother, Beowulf asks about
Grendel’s father and if he must kill him too, to which Hrothgar responds,
“Grendel’s father can do no harm to man.” This alludes to the fact that
Hrothgar is Grendel’s mother and it is clear foreshadowing. This wasn’t as
obvious as the transition sequence between young Beowulf and old Beowulf. It is
a close up of Hrothgar’s crown that illustrates him slaying a dragon by
stabbing its weak spot, a tip that Beowulf will later use to kill his own
dragon. This use of foreshadowing was unnecessary and forced.
One
of the most frustrating elements of this movie was that it downplayed the
heroism of Beowulf and Wiglaf. The epic style was lost in the film. First,
Beowulf can’t even finish his boast without confidence because he doesn’t kill
the last sea creature. It is implied in the movie that a siren seduces him. His
first heroic act is already untruthful. Then, he doesn’t even rip off Grendel’s
arm, and instead just shuts it in the door while he’s chained to a post. He
also doesn’t kill Grendel’s mother at all. He doesn’t even go back and finish
the deed after he failed the first time. He just never kills Grendel’s mother.
He also sleeps with her and creates the dragon that he must kill in the end. He
is weak and gives into her because she offers him power and riches. He even
says himself that he is not a hero. Wiglaf’s character is also affected by this
change. In the poem, Wiglaf stabs the
dragon in the stomach with his sword and helps Beowulf finish the monster. In
the movie, he jumps over a burning bridge and saves Wealhtheow from falling off
of another bridge. Those are the only heroic deeds he performs. These
characters are severely affected by this approach to the movie.
Despite
my aversion to almost everything else in the movie, I did love the portrayal of
Grendel and how it compared to the dragon. I thought it was a very creative
idea to compare Hrothgar and Beowulf through their demonic children. Hrothgar’s
son, Grendel, was a horrible and grotesque monster with scaly, ripped skin and
a gnarly eardrum that became his downfall. He wailed and drooled green slime
and tore apart the mead hall in such a gross and terrifying manner. On the
other hand, Beowulf’s shining gold alter ego was a fantastic representation of
his heroism and power. This majestic, gold dragon was so impressive and grand.
The contrast of these two monsters made up for the film’s lack of connection to
the original story.
This
movie was very entertaining. It was very humorous even though it wasn’t meant
to be. Roger Ebert worded it best in his review of the movie: “what this movie
needs is an audience that knows how to laugh.” The horrible jokes, the awful
way that Unferth beats his crippled slave, and the obscene amount of nudity
must all be seen in a comedic light to fully enjoy this movie. Though there are
few similarities between the book and the film besides the characters’ names
and the general plot, it was still interesting comparing and contrasting them.
The movie was very affective in making Beowulf accessible to today’s youth.
However, it did not do the poem justice as a great film adaption of a very
serious and epic story.
No comments:
Post a Comment