Modernisation of a Timeless Fable

Rating: 6/10 (28 November 2007)

are there any fans of the original tale that were as disappointed as i was by the changes to the story? i was less than impressed with changing the portrayal of Grendel's mother to some sort of mystical seductress; for the sake of sexual overtones the movie's plot was changed where it didn't need to be. however i admit that in my opinion this led to an interesting and well performed portrayal of Beowulf's character in the first two thirds of the film, showing predominantly his arrogance leading to a lust and weakness for power. equally in the third act Beowulf's remorse and willingness to admit his failings as a man are further well acted by Winstone, who i must admit surprised in his diverse approach to the character. i felt that the scene where he is almost begging the invader to take his life was particularly powerful, showing an almost desperate desire to be rid of a life that he is now ashamed of, that can still be seen as arrogance and great leadership by his followers.
however the change of Grendel's mother also led to one of my biggest ills with this picture, with her offspring now being the cause of men of power laying with her. whilst this did lead to an interesting take on the character of Grendel it was something again that i felt wasn't needed. the original fable told Grendel and his mother as true monsters and whilst the reason for Grendel's killings did interest me, the original telling where he has no explained reason, makes him more of a monster. i didn't think that Grendel needed to be given human aspects to his character to make the audience sympathise with him, we only needed to know that there was a bond between him and his mother to explain her revenge killings.
this could all have been excused though, but for the inclusion of the dragon that kills Beowulf being the son of himself and Grendel's mother. this element was only written in because of the portrayal of Grendel's mother and to tie all the stories together full circle; i see no reason why they couldn't have kept the story the same as to the book and just show it as Beowulf's last great adventure.
there were other more minor changes to the story that i didn't agree with (such as the over elaborate way Grendel's arm was taken off rather than just displaying the brute strength of Beowulf ripping it off) but i didn't think they detracted from the story too much.
overall i felt the film itself was solid, there were some entertaining performances from Anthony Hopkins and John Malkovitch and Ray Winstone plesantly surprised me in a more diverse role than i've seen him play for some years. visually it was impressive, with varied interesting camera techniques implemented which made use of the limitless boundaries of using CGI and the realism of the human characters was quite astounding. the script i found was suspect in places ("how about a quick gobble?") but i did expect there to be some instances of this due to making it appeal to a wide audience.
for those that had never heard of the tale before or only knew a limited amount about it, this would prove to be an epic adventure about a complicated man caught between the notions of honour and power. however for fans of the original fable, it doesn't live up to such a timeless story.