A review from a reader of the poem

Rating: 8/10 (21 November 2007)

Before I start, yes, I HAVE given the film a 7/10. And before I am doubtlessly lampooned by Beowulf purists, yes, I HAVE read the original source, and enjoyed it immensely. Not counting the countless potted children's versions supplied in my old primary school, I have read the translations by Seamus Heaney and Peter Dickinson, and have also read John Gardner's "Grendel".
I continuously hear the same complaints, which really come down to this film being Hollywood trash. How is Hollywood defined though? Predictable, unoriginal plots? Well, Beowulf is widely taught in both primary schools and universities, therefore the events in the story should never have been in any doubt, regardless of a film adaptation. Blank two-dimensional characters perhaps? And how would the characters of the original poem be defined (not counting John Gardner's novel)? I concede that maybe to call them two-dimensional would be an exaggeration, but so would stating that they were well fleshed out and complex characters. The film at least did manage to add some humanity to the characters, something to identify or connect with. And now for a few spoilers...
*SPOILERS*
I'm surprised at how many critics seemingly missed this, but it is repeatedly implied that the film, rather than an actual adaptation to the poem, is actually a fictitious reconstruction of how the poem came to be, implying some inevitable distortion through the embellishments of glorifying bards, generation after generation until the truth is lost. As a European, I also could greatly identify with the character's resignation to the historical fast growing cult of Christianity washing away the culture of their ancestor's, which I think is a subtle parallel to modern Europe's spread of Islam.
*END SPOILERS*
I am not saying that the film is an improvement to the poem. I am simply stating that it is possible to enjoy it even if you've read and appreciated the original source.