Beowulf & Grendel (2005) User Reviews

Review from 2005 TIFF

[riid · 7/10 · 18 September 2005]

I saw this film at the 2005 Toronto International Film Festival.

Beowulf and Grendel is based on the Old English epic poem of the same name. It follows Beowulf, a Geat, who travels with his compatriots to Denmark and the realm of King Hrothgar (Stellan Skarsgård), which is besieged by a great monster, Grendel (Ingvar Sigurdsson). Beowulf repeatedly tries to draw Grendel out to do battle, but soon finds from the witch Selma (Sarah Polley) that there may be more the story than meets the eye.

Historical purists will probably take issue with the portrayal of the story and with the dialogue. However, judged on its own merits, Beowulf and Grendel is a fine film. The film looks epic, thanks to the on-location filming in Iceland. Butler is suitably heroic, and Sigurdsson does well with a role that has essentially no dialogue, what with being a sub-human troll and all. Screenwriter Andrew Rai Berzins makes use of slightly more contemporary language in the script, but without any ill effect. Director Sturla Gunnarsson has made some interesting casting choices, with Scots actors as the Geats (who are actually from Sweden), Nordic actors as the Danes, and Canadian Sarah Polley as Selma. The cast acquits themselves well, including Polley, whose Canadian accent serves to show her character's isolation from the rest of the community.

Director Sturla Gunnarsson, screenwriter Andrew Rai Berzins, and actor Tony Curran did a Q&A after the film:

• They took a lot liberty with the story, especially as the poem has speeches that go on for pages. They decided to cut loose from it right away, and instead portray the story that would become the poem. As Gunnarsson put it, they tried to be true to "the bones of the story." Since the poem dates back to a Norse oral tradition, where poets would embellish stories with each telling, Gunnarsson felt they could do some of the same.

• There were a number of problems during filming, as they started shooting several months later than planned. At the time, there were a lot of hurricanes in the Atlantic, which results in very high winds. They lost four base camps, and in a single day lost eight vehicles to the 150 km/h winds.

• The ship used by the Geats is actually the Islendingur, a replica of a Viking ship from 870 AD, originally built to commemorate the anniversary of Leif Ericson's voyage to North America. The boat leaked, so four fire pumps were required to keep it afloat. However, for long shots of the boat in an iceberg-filled lagoon, the pumps had to be shut off and footage gathered quickly.

• Grendel is supposed to have the strength of 30 men, but at the same time he is not a god, which it makes hard to portray him on screen. They didn't want to create a fantastical movie, so they decided early on not to use any CG for Grendel.

• The horses used in the movie are Icelandic horses, which have three gaits unique to the breed, and uniquely suited to travel over the rocky terrain.

• The palette for the costumes if taken from the landscape.

• When casting Beowulf, they wanted someone unambiguously masculine, who could act, and who could bring some complexity to the role. Gunnarsson had seen some of Gerard Butler's films. While they weren't his cup of tea, he did find that Butler jumped off the screen.

• Gunnarsson and Polley have known one another for years. She loves Iceland and had asked to be cast in whatever he decided to film there next. Gunnarsson feels that Polley brings something to the moral conscience of the story.

• For Grendel, Gunnarsson had consulted with creature makeup director Nick Dudman, who has also worked on the Harry Potter films Dudman said that he could build prosthetics, but it would really all come from the actor.

• Sigurdsson read the script and was drawn to Grendel without any prompting from Gunnarsson. While in a bookstore in Reykjavik, an American tourist noticed that script and recommended John Gardner's book Grendel, which tells the story from Grendel's perspective.

• They weren't originally allowed to cast Skarsgård as he is not from the UK, Iceland, or Canada. On appeal to the UK authorities, they eventually agreed that it would be all right for a Norseman to play another Norseman.

• They wanted the Geats to look like a gang of bikers, not some sort of museum piece.

• On the use of humour in the script, Berzins said that there is humour in everything, and that he is frustrated by historical movies with no humour.

• Berzins said about the use of the f-word in the movie that the f-word is actually quite old, but he does realize that some people are brought forward in time when they hear it. Skarsgård was originally not a fan of its use, but by the end he was using it liberally.

Spoilers below:

• They tried to stay close to the story, but in the original, none of the characters have much in the way of motivation; Grendel just shows up and starts killing people. They felt that either he's simply evil, or he has a reason, which opens up all sorts of possibilities.

• They felt that this is a good time in history to explore the hero-myth. Beowulf is essentially a story about a warrior that goes overseas to fight a righteous quest but soon finds himself embroiled in a tribal war.

• Tony Curran said that his favourite scene is the one where the young Grendel is holding his father's severed head. Berzins' favourite is the one where Tony's character destroys the skull, he looks up, and you can see doom descend on him. Gunnarsson's favourite is Skarsgård's disintegration at the end.

A perhaps nuanced view of the movie?

[paterfam001 · 6/10 · 19 March 2006]

My motive for seeing this film was mostly curiosity. I read it long ago (in a past almost as dim and distant as the times of the Geats), as a requirement for Grad English, and I wanted to know what a more modern sensibility would make of it. On the whole, I thought the film-maker was confused by it, and was forced by his twenty-first-century prejudices to turn it into something it wasn't. What he did, in fact, was feminize it.

If this had been the result of real artistic vision, it might have worked, but it wasn't; it was done by the book, in a Sensitivity 101 fashion, and inconsistently, so that the result wasn't either mythic or modern. Or not the way the film-makers hoped, anyway. Instead of being a synthesis, it was an uneasy mix.

Oh, it was moderately entertaining to a modern man and woman, the scenery was magnificent and the cinematography splendid - almost a given, these days. The acting, with one important exception, was very good. I'm glad I saw that and not... what was the other one? Snow dogs in Peril? Oh, 'Eight Below'. 'Beowulf and Grendel' was actually about something, and not just 'based on actual events' - the usual witless excuse for a dull and meandering story.

What was Beowulf about? Originally - think about this - the tellers and hearers of this tale lived the dullest and most dangerous existence possible. They were pioneers, always on the jagged edge of starvation, faced with endless toil and unremitting vigilance, just to survive against an unremittingly hostile environment. They must have longed for a single villain, an enemy they could strike at and defeat, once and for all. Thus, Grendel. Grendel is all their fear and drudgery rolled into one. And Beowulf. He is them, all rolled into one, their collective courage and strength.

It might be possible to adapt this to modern ideals, but it has to be re-imagined, which likely means changing time and place to, let's say, the recent old-west, the populace to sodbusters, the Grendel-menace to an unbeatable black-hat gunslinger and the hero to the man in buckskin. You can't just graft modern attitudes onto ancient warriors and pretend you've done something new and significant.

The addition of the witch, Selma, played by my countrywoman Sarah Polley, is the worst of the modernist grafts. She plays the part almost without affect, as if all her actions were the product of cool rational thought, and didn't matter very much, anyway. I picture the director ranting at her in Icelandic, while a very polite translator murmurs, "more intense, please". I hate to bad-mouth one of the more intelligent actresses of our time, and one most loyal to her Canadian Roots, but she really dropped the ball on this one, and it affects the whole movie's credibility. If she'd been crazier, dirtier, more savage, more a part of the threatening Other, the role might have worked. Since she chose to preserve the proprieties of a modern girl --don't flip out, even when a troll is ravishing you -- she sinks the whole enterprise.

Final comment: handsome, amusing, entertaining, but highly flawed.

Epic as rough noise

[Chris Knipp · 6/10 · 7 July 2006]

The ninth century Anglo-Saxon epic Beowulf recounts the exploits of a hero of the Danes who saves them from a monster, Grendel, and the creature's vengeful mother, and then, decades later, dies fighting a dragon. This is an oral epic like Homer, which means it was composed and recomposed by oral bards among an illiterate but highly verbal people and "passed on" (actually constantly varied and renewed) in that way for many generations, and only later, when the tradition was waning, was written down. Epics, especially oral ones, have something in common. They are the embodiment of the primary values of the nation and culture they come from and represent. Their purpose is not just to entertain, but also to instruct, to inspire, to move, to instill pride in and knowledge of traditions and history. In a sense they tell stories everybody knows – everybody of the nation or culture – but they also preserve the values, the traditions, and the history and legend of the tribe. We don't know much about those traditions found in Beowulf, but in Iceland they do, and this movie was made in Iceland by an Icelandic director, Sturla Gunnarsson, who lives in Canada.

Anglo-Saxon poetry is alliterative, haunting, sad, and in a language utterly unlike modern English, completely strange. Here's how the poem begins, with translations for each line.

(You will have to look elsewhere, because the format of this website does not allow foreign languages.)

Which has been translated:

LO, praise of the prowess of people-kings of spear-armed Danes, in days long sped, we have heard, and what honor the athelings won! Oft Scyld the Scefing from squadroned foes, from many a tribe, the mead-bench tore, awing the earls. Since erst he lay friendless, a foundling, fate repaid him: for he waxed under welkin, in wealth he throve, till before him the folk, both far and near, who house by the whale-path, heard his mandate, gave him gifts: a good king he!

Along comes a movie, which doesn't have much US distribution but is currently showing in New York (July 2006). And I'm told there was a version with Christopher Lambert, but I have not seen it.

There are many translations but one by a poet of distinction recently done is that of the Irish poet Seamus Heaney. Here are a couple of short passages from Heaney's version:

You have won renown: you are known to all men far and near, now and forever. Your sway is wide as the wind's

It is always better to avenge dear ones than to indulge in mourning. For every one of us, living in this world means waiting for our end. Let whoever can win glory before death. When a warrior is gone, That will be his best and only bulwark.

This atmosphere that comes in the poem, even from a few lines, the importance of fame, of reputation, a deep fatalism, a sense of the power of nature and overwhelming sadness, are typical of Beowulf and of Anglo-Saxon poetry. But whether you get any of that from the movie I don't know.

What you do get is plenty of cussing, of F-words and S-words, spoken even by King Hrothgar and Beowulf himself, and body functions, and sexual intercourse – with a monster, who, for reasons best known to the filmmakers, is referred to as a "troll." Perhaps in Iceland a "troll" can be a giant, but in English the word has more often been used for a dwarf. Grendel isn't a dwarf. In the poem you don't see him clearly. He has scales. He's a monster. In the movie he's a big man who babbles incomprehensibly and has big muscles. He's like the Hulk.

It's rather unfortunate that Sarah Polley plays a witch, one who has intercourse literally with both troll and man. Everybody else has some sort of rustic English accent, but she speaks mall American. That doesn't work, and neither does her presence.

In the time of the Angles and the Saxons, the mead hall was a place for carousing, but also a semi holy place. Men got drunk and swore oaths, which they were bound to for life. The mead hall scenes are huge in Beowulf, but they just look like moments from any minor historical mélange here in this movie. Hrothgar's hall's structure is realistically represented from the outside, though.

The snowy Icelandic landscape has an austere beauty that is one of the best things about this movie.

Ingvar Sigurdsson as Grendel is impressive; but it would still be more evocative of the story and the poem not to see him clearly. Gerard Butler is dashing as Beowulf. But the way he talks! Stellan Skarsgård as King Hrothgar appears very beaten down; in the poem he is, indeed, depressed and presumably drunken, but somehow that is nobler in the mind than on the screen.

Whereas there's a lot of history -- epics are repositories of history -- in Beowulf the poem, in the movie things and people aren't explained very much. You get a rough idea, but explanation is almost totally omitted, even though every once in a while somebody in a boat speaks a few lines of poetry carrying the story forwrd.

The music by Hilmar Örn Hilmarsson is astonishing and powerful, though it isn't the sad, slow music of the Anglos-Saxon poem. This is of course an action movie. But there isn't quite enough action. It made me think of the wonderful example of dramatic narrative on film, which is so succinct and gripping and atmospheric, and which evokes an archaic time among Scandanavian peoples: Nils Gaup's 1987 Pathfinder/Ofelas, a Norwegian-Finnish production shot in the snow. Smashing. Find it and watch it.

How much do you want to think?

[lisapizzapie · 28 September 2005]

Bear with me while I transpose my thoughts from my tangential, blonde head and hopefully it will be worth your read.

Let me first say that Grendel engaged me throughout the movie. There were good performances by many of the cast (Butler's conflicted hero, Skarsgard's noble-but-not-so-noble king) , but Ingvar Sigurdsson owned it as Grendel. Was it the skill of the writer and director in making Grendel a vulnerable human(?) and victim (drawing a sympathy vote from the audience)? Was it Ingvar Sigurdsson's acting skills to express intense emotions and engage the audience despite virtually any words in the script and enough prosthetic make-up to impede facial expressions? All I know is that I connected with Grendel's pain. And isn't that the point?

Another prominent character was the weather. It wasn't on the casting list, but it showed up nonetheless and fought for top billing. It helped to draw you into the ruggedness of the times and the story, but I also found it distracting. Perhaps it's my own distractibility, but for whatever reason, the scenery and weather engaged me more than the story a few times.

The soundtrack was indeed beautiful, but personally, I don't think it fit. To me, the campfire-to-mead-hall timeless folktale would have been better served by a more primitive collection of instruments rather than the majestic orchestra suited to an epic. But that's just my taste.

My main criticism is that to me, the film seemed choppy. I felt like I missed out on some important parts. (I didn't take any washroom breaks, did I?) It may have been the editing. There are others who enjoyed the film much better at the second viewing, so maybe it's all there in the movie beyond my distraction by the scenery and Gerard Butler's rugged good looks. Maybe the movie did its job; after all I'm still chewing on it 2 weeks later. Who knows? I did, however, catch the humor in the film. Andrew Rai Berzins' sharp wit and humor came to the rescue and drew me back in when distractions prevailed.

I'd really like to see it a second time now that my giddiness is over. I was anticipating this movie from the time filming began, and what film can live up to a year's worth of my ruminations and expectations? Now, don't ask me to rate the film with a number. I hate numbers. They don't mean anything. You should never see a movie based on numbers. See it because you want to.

…and if my review left you with more questions than answers, then I've done my job, because that's where the movie left me. Now go see the movie and find your own questions and answers.

Based on a legendary and mythical poem and filmed in marvelous landscapes from Iceland

[ma-cortes · 6/10 · 12 May 2012]

In a medieval land is set this blood-soaked tale of a Norse warrior (Gerard Butler)'s battle against the great and murderous troll, Grendel (Ingvar Egger) . In a besieged land , Beowulf must battle against the hideous creature Grendel . As a flesh-eating creature called Grendel is killing off all those who live in the kingdom . That is until the arrival of Beowulf, a mysterious mercenary who offers Hrothgar, the kingdom's ruler, help to hunt Grendel . Out of allegiance to the King Hrothgar (Stellan Skarsgard) , the much respected Lord of the Danes , Beowulf leads a troop of warriors across the sea to rid a village of the marauding monster. The monster, Grendel, is not a creature of mythic powers, but one of flesh and blood - immense flesh and raging blood, driven by a vengeance from being wronged, while Beowulf, a victorious soldier in his own right, has become increasingly troubled by the hero-myth rising up around his exploits carried out along with Hondscioh (Tony Curran) and his warriors . Beowulf's willingness to kill on behalf of Hrothgar wavers when it becomes clear that the King is more responsible for the troll's rampages than was first apparent. As a soldier, Beowulf is unaccustomed to hesitating. His relationship with the mesmerizing whore , Selma (Sarah Polley) who has fallen in love with him, and creates deeper confusion. Swinging his sword at a great, stinking beast is no longer such a simple act. The story is set in barbarous Northern Europe where the reign of the many-gods is giving way to one - the southern invader, Christ , here represented by a Catholic priest (Eddie Marsan) . Beowulf not only does battle with Grendel, he also fights Grendel's evil mother . Vengeance, loyalty and mercy powerfully entwine in this spectacular Norse adventure.

This European co-production begins with a real sense of wonder and surprise and develops with continuous struggles and winding up a fight against the giant Grendel. The picture packs great loads of action , wonderful cinematography , abundant stunts , breathtaking combats and a little bit of gore and blood . Stunning battles scenes illuminate the full-blown adventure with a plethora of engaging action set pieces on the combats in which the heads and limbs are slice off here and there and everywhere while other parts of body are slit open . Good performance from Gerard Butler as Beowulf , a man caught between sides in this great shift, his simple code transforming , falling apart before his eyes and the strange witch well played by Sarah Polley. Both of whom play a story of blood and beer and sweat, which strips away the mask of the hero-myth, leaving a raw and tangled tale .

Beowulf was a poem written in England, but is set in Scandinavia , commonly cited as one of the most important works of Anglo-Saxon literature .Beowulf is considered an epic poem in that the main character is a hero who travels great distances to prove his strength at impossible odds against supernatural demons and beasts. It has variously been dated to between the 8th and the early 11th centuries. It is an epic poem told in historical perspective; a story of epic events and of great people of a heroic past. Although its author is unknown, its themes and subject matter are rooted in Germanic heroic poetry, in Anglo-Saxon tradition recited and cultivated by Old English poets . The poem is divided between Beowulf's battles with Grendel and with a dragon . The main protagonist, Beowulf, a hero of the Geats, comes to the aid of Hrothgar, the king of the Danes, whose great hall, Heorot, is plagued by the monster Grendel. Beowulf kills Grendel with his bare hands and Grendel's mother with a sword, which giants once used, that Beowulf found in Grendel's mother's lair .

Other films based on this epic poem are the following : ¨Beowulf¨(1999) by Graham Baker with Christopher Lambert and Rhona Mitra , ¨The 13º warrior¨ by John McTiernan with Antonio Banderas , Diane Venora , and ¨Beowulf¨ by Robert Zemeckis with Angelina Jolie and Anthony Hopkins .

Beautiful but not great.

[fisheggsandglue · 6/10 · 8 October 2005]

I saw the movie at the Vancouver Film Fesitval. I'm familiar with the original story of Beowulf and a modern novel that was told from the monster's perspective and was very much looking forward to the film. The setting is beautiful and I now have a great desire to visit Iceland. Gerard Butler made a fantastic Beowulf. He looked every inch the hero, although I felt the stripped down portrayal of his character detracted from the film. I enjoyed the film but there were several problems with it. The first was that many of the non-English speaking actors, which is most of the cast, do not speak clearly enough, meaning that the viewer can only understand about every third line of the movie. I was not the only who had this problem. Secondly, the idea of turning the story sideways by making Grendel the sympathetic character is interesting, but I found that it detracted from Beowulf's development as a hero and he was portrayed in a heroic light. Third the language use in the film varied between chorus like story telling and modern day words and phrases. I loved the storytelling aspect and was rudely pulled out of my absorption in the ancient Danish world every time a character would use a modern phrase. Finally it never ceases to amaze me that film makers choose the most desolate places to have ancient peoples make their homes. Medusaled, the Danish King's home, was supposed to be a place of great pride and beauty and yet the film has it located in what was probably the windiest, coldest part of Iceland. No human in his/her right mind would live there. I recommend the film for anyone who is a fan of ancient stories or heroic tales but don't go in expecting a work of art.

A horrendous adaptation.

[solarmacharius-1 · 1/10 · 12 March 2006]

Having anticipated this movie for months, I can only say that I am horrendously disappointed by the way this film was presented. The landscape and costuming was well done, but that was about it. The dialogue was woefully unsuited to the type of story presented (I was looking for dialogue written to the standards of Lord of the Rings, what we got was more suited to a summer action movie). I cannot believe the amount of swearing in the movie; while the Danes would have cursed, they wouldn't have been dropping the f-word constantly.

I am disappointed in the character of Beowulf. As the film goes on, the protagonist begins to question the morality of his role in the Grendel affair. From my understanding of the morals of the culture of the time, Beowulf should have had no problems with killing Grendel. The monster had killed kinsman of his kinsman, which brought Beowulf into the whole affair. Even if the deaths of these men was retribution for the killing of Grendel's father, the hero was morally obliged to avenge Hrothgar's kin.

The character of Selma is hopelessly contrived and unnecessary. The quiet acceptance of her own violation is extremely troubling, as was her defense of Grendel. Her role was unnecessary in the movie; there was already enough plot elements to cause Beowulf a quandary without her, especially the way the king was walling apart. On a stylistic note, it would have been nice if the actress could have made an effort to speak in a different accent... she was completely out of place among all the British and Scandinavian accents otherwise featured.

This is capped by the very poor explanation of many characters, especially Queen Wealhtheow, King Hygelac, and Grendel's Mother. Their existence is not explained, nor even their names. This made the movie hard to follow, especially when Grendel's Mother entered the picture. Several of my companions thought that she was Grendel and Selma's child's real mother! I am normally willing to give some leeway to adaptations, but this movie was undeniably bad. The plot development was slow, the characters were confusing, and many of the elements (Selma, the Christians) did nothing for the real plot. I regret having spent money to see it.

An effective Anglo-Saxon adventure

[Leofwine_draca · 7/10 · 8 November 2015]

BEOWULF is one of my favourite works of epic poetry, but the subject matter, which jumps all over the place and back and forth through time, is fairly unworkable on film. I was interested to see what the makers of this fairly low budget epic would do with the material, and in the end I was more than satisfied. As the title indicates, BEOWULF & GRENDEL focuses on the central thrust of the story, ignoring side-stories and the later Beowulf vs. dragon showdown to deliver a simple retelling of the main part of the age-old legend.

The story is largely expanded from the original, with many peripheral characters added and extra scenes. Some of these work (Eddie Marsan's psychotic Christian missionary helps to set the film in its time rather well) but others I could have done without, such as Sarah Polley's witch. Still, for the most part, the story is well achieved, with plenty of atmosphere and a real sense of place. Somebody had the brilliant idea of filming in the bleak Icelandic countryside, full of mountains and rocks and waterfalls with nary a blade of grass in sight; the decision paid off (despite problems with the weather during the shoot) and you can really believe the action is taking place over a thousand years ago.

Gerard Butler does well as the hero, his Beowulf equally as rugged as the isolated scenery. His role feels like a dry-run for 300's King Leonidas. Most of the supporting cast are interchangeable, but Stellan Starsgard is fine as the complex, tormented Hrothgar. Grendel is a more sympathetic creation here than in the poem; he's given his own back story, which I didn't mind, and he looks like a caveman rather than a hideous monster. Some of the incident in the eventual showdown between man and monster is changed and the later sub-plot involving Grendel's mother feels rushed, but I felt these problems were insignificant. For the most part, BEOWULF & GRENDEL ably brings to life the heroism and terror of the Anglo-Saxon age.

what a disappointment!

[stults7 · 2/10 · 1 November 2006]

Being a Beowulf fan, and having three teen daughters who think Gerry Butler is "hot," we waited over a year before this movie was shown in our area. The first shocker was that most of the audience was older than me: a Gerry Butler fan club of past-middle aged women in Viking hats salivating on their Butler action dolls. Will the fat lady please sing so this show can end?

To interpret Beowulf as a know-nothing who has to learn about integrity (and the sins of his friend Hrothgar) from the misunderstood and noble Grendel is just plain blasphemy. Making Hrothgar a ruthless idiot and his wife a long-suffering (can she roll her eyes just one more time?) care-giver of his majesty's reputation is pitiful.

To make a heathen witch the truth-teller in a story that was written clearly to underscore the Christianization of Scandinavia is scandalous; however, the biggest transgression from the original tale is the battle where Grendel cuts off his own arm. Please!

The scenery of Iceland was the one redeeming aspect of this movie.

Beautiful Looking Recreation Undercut by Modernisms

[noralee · 7/10 · 30 July 2006]

"Beowulf & Grendel" is a beautiful looking, modern re- interpretation of part of the legend with a reluctant hero and sympathy for the monsters.

The barren Icelandic coastal scenery with wind-swept sounds dominate the film, and will doubtless be lost on small screen viewing, but the characters may then seem less dwarfed by nature. (I did wonder where they got their food, fuel and metal from these rock-hewn shores.)

Though the ponderous narration duplicates the on screen words as well as the visuals, debut feature film screenwriter Andrew Rai Berzins makes several bold interpretive choices for a renowned man vs. monster legend, at least as I know it from Seamus Heaney's recent poetic translation.

The original's artistic focus on the power of the storyteller is frequently mocked, almost "Monty Python and the Holy Grail"-style, as Gerard Butler's Beowulf is consistently embarrassed by how his exploits have been carried and exaggerated by ever more flattering troubadours -- even as debut feature film director Sturla Gunnarsson has him quite dramatically emerge out of the sea from a shipwreck. His different accent, Butler's own Scottish brogue, is even explained by his distant homeland. Within the scope of modern manly epics, Butler carries off the costumes and fighting better than Clive Owen in "King Arthur", but doesn't come up to the high bar set by Russell Crowe in "Gladiator".

From the opening unprovoked attack that establishes the basis for Grendel's life-long revenge-seeking, Stellan Skarsgård's increasingly haunted King Hrothgar seems to intentionally recall the obsessively grieving king Denethor of "Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King", in a nod to Tolkien's significance as a Beowulf scholar.

Grendel himself seems to come out of a classic Ray Harryhausen Sinbad movie, though without CGI, as a giant who selectively tears into men (and there is quite a bit of blood spewn in his attacks). "Grendel's Kin" (the script refers to them as "trolls") is scarier in the water before she vengefully stomps onto land, looking a lot like a Very Tall Wraith from the TV series "Stargate: Atlantis".

I haven't read the John Gardner version, but this one is certainly sympathetic to Grendel from the beginning, and on as Beowulf oddly finds he can communicate with him, through the quizzical character of the alleged witch Selma (Sarah Polley returning to Iceland as in "No Such Thing"). While explaining her Canadian accent due to having been carried off as abused spoils in war from yet another outpost, her gradual seduction of Beowulf doesn't have much more heat in this cold clime than her other sexual encounters. She does spit out the sharp-tongued retorts quite well -- when Beowulf tries to establish sympathy that he too had been a war captive, she wryly comments that he hadn't worried about being made a whore by the victors. Unfortunately, her Cassandra-like prophesies kill some of the suspense.

As Beowulf gradually figures out the background truth, he becomes increasingly ambivalent about helping the king, which raises the question that maybe successful movie epics aren't meant to have Hamlet-like, hesitant heroes. His rueful warning that the others who come after him will be different is literally a double-edged sword.

The language is a confusing effort at trying to seem both ancient and modern, though the very contemporary Mamet-like profanity effectively gets across that this is a testosterone-fueled world of rough warriors. The actors all seem more natural and passionate when the dialogue is more modern. I assumed the male teasing was intentionally funny Shakespearean-like jibes, but no one else in the audience laughed at the sarcastic comments and one guy kept yawning. The literal pissing contest between men and monster was also funny.

The Christian overlay in a bloody pagan tale of magic is dealt with by having this Danish tribe presented as being on the cusp of Christian conversion hastened by the old gods seeming helplessness against the monsters' attacks.

The men's wigs and beards are among the best and most believable I've seen in an historical saga. However I would find it hard to believe that the Queen's hairdo was supposed to intentionally recall "Princess Leia" from "Star Wars". She doesn't get to do too much but is a strong helpmate covering up her husband's weaknesses. Polley's 'do is pretty much just a rat's nest.

The score is overly bombastic, but occasionally incorporates tribal sounds of percussion and eerie voices that are more evocative.

Why, oh why, must they mess with the source material?

[moviemom26 · 2/10 · 15 December 2006]

Beuwulf is a great piece of literature. Why did the writers mess with a good thing? I'm surprised no one started singing "Kum ba ya". Grendel is a monster not a victim. When did Hrothgar start drowning his sorrows in mead? The writers of Conan the Barbarian would have done a much better job.

What is Brendan the Navigator doing in there? Perhaps to take cheap shots at Christians. Completely unnecessary to the movie and a big disappointment.

It could have been a good movie if the writers had been faithful to the original. Then perhaps it wouldn't have gone strait to video.

On the plus side it was filmed in Iceland and the stark landscape added a lot of feel to the movie. The actors all did a fine job with what they had.

From Sheepskin to Celluloid

[callmomrad · 10/10 · 11 October 2005]

Breath-taking scenery, strong performances and an unexpected message come together in Sturla Gunnarsson's Beowulf & Grendel. Forget the dusty, inaccessible saga that may have been forced upon you in High School or as a College Freshman in English Lit! New life is breathed into Beowulf, the oldest text of recorded English, first set to sheepskin in 1000 A.D. after 500 years of survival through oral tradition. The acclaimed Canadian director of Rare Birds stays true to the bones of what undoubtedly started as a campfire story of a battle between Man and Monster without resorting to CGI or other special effects. Instead, he relies on the talents of an impressive international cast and an intelligent screenplay against the backdrop of a stunningly primal Icelandic landscape upon which no human had set foot in 800 years. You won't need Cliffs Notes to understand this examination of who and what defines "Other-ness" and how it is treated. The knee-jerk fear factor response is as prevalent today as it was in the early Viking slice-of-life portrayed.

Beowulf & Grendel owes as much to John Gardner's Grendel as it does to the Beowulf epic. The roles of Hero and Monster do not so much embody intrinsic Good and Evil as reflect qualities attributed to their assigned archetypes. How and why we assign those roles is at the heart of the first-ever serious adaptation of the anonymous poem. The movie systematically leads us through a labyrinth of History, Cultures, the psycho-social reaction to Outsiders and the unfortunate results of those actions to the inescapable conclusion that we are not so different from one another. The ensuing Logic would then dictate that War is merely a lazy solution to a problem better addressed by examining our own psyches.

Beowulf is portrayed with astonishing depth by the Scottish actor, Gerard Butler, who is accumulating an impressive array of credits from Attila (the highest-rated U.S. mini-series) to Phantom of the Opera (the lavish 2005 Musical) to Dear Frankie (the award-winning independent Scottish film), to name a few. As always, he throws himself whole-heartedly, thoughtfully, and more important, believably, into the role of Hero, which in less-capable hands might be one-dimensional. Even the screenwriter, Andrew Berzins, was both surprised and impressed by the levels to which Mr. Butler plumbed the character "all in his facial expressions." Rising above his mastery of brooding good looks through tangled locks of hair, he manages to have us look through his eyes, rather than at his eyes - no mean feat for someone who is undeniably easy on the eyes! Beowulf emerges as the antithesis of the later Danish Prince, Hamlet, who is so introspective that he is paralyzed into inaction. In contrast, Beowulf willingly accepts the yoke of the traditional Hero and initially and immediately acts without thinking. He recognizes his Destiny in this life and beyond, stating, "I'll go where I'm sent!" He does not, however, stop there. Delving into the reasons behind his mission, he becomes a relentless, if uneasy, historical detective, needing to unearth the cause of the troll/monster Grendel's savagery.

The Hero's journey, punctuated by pre-destined acts of violence, is one in which we participate and evolve along with Beowulf, with the assistance of the witch, Selma (appropriately ambiguously played by the popular Canadian actress, Sarah Polley). Although she and Beowulf do pair off at one point, theirs is not really a romantic connection. She serves as a sort of conduit between Beowulf and Grendel, leveling the playing field between them.

Grendel is splendidly brought to heartbreaking life by Iceland's biggest Star, Ingvar Sigurdsson. Interestingly, his 4-year-old son makes a very credible acting debut as the young Grendel, orphaned in no uncertain terms at the start of the movie and laying the foundation for the carnage to come. Harking more to Gardner's Grendel than the unremittingly bloodthirsty troll of the original poem, Mr. Sigurdsson manages to express both the innocence and tragedy of Grendel with gusto, exploring his un-human characteristics without judgment. It is a tribute to his talent that rather than being horrified by a scene in which we see Grendel bowling with victims' severed heads, we identify with the spirit of pure Joy breaking through a monster's lonely existence.

Providing a context for the Hero/Monster mythos is a superb cast of supporting characters. Stellan Skarsgard is the alcoholic Danish king Hrothgar, not only unwilling to accept responsibility for the scourge of Grendel, but not even wanting to consider "why a f***ing troll does what a f***ing troll does." Eddie Marsden plays the foaming-at-the-mouth crazed Irish Catholic priest, Brendan, heralding the advent of Christianity and the desire of a people to unburden themselves of any and all accountability for their actions. And Ronan Vibert embodies the equivalent of modern day mass media as the Bard, Thorkel, through whom the saga is transformed (over Beowulf's objections) into a revisionist history which does not bear close examination. As Martin Delaney notes as the young warrior, Thorfinn, what we are left with are "tales of sh*t." The old Beowulf is not gone. The tone of the original oral tradition is maintained by Berzins' strict adherence to Anglo-Saxon and Norse root words and an ongoing thread of bawdy humor against a relentless musical score rife with tribal drums. The comic relief serves, as in Shakespeare's tragedies, to lighten and make palatable the raw impact of some harsh realities revealed. But a new Beowulf & Grendel rises from the ashes. This blood and guts epic, with its undeniably spiritual undercurrent, balances swordplay with word play, and the audience is left to draw their own conclusions in the bloody aftermath. The tag line, "Heads will roll!" refers not only to the blood-soaked battle scenes, but to the thought processes set in motion that will leave you re-evaluating concepts of and motives behind Love, Loyalty, and War long after you leave the theater.

Vastly superior to King Arthur, Troy, Alexander...

[caressque · 6/10 · 10 April 2006]

Beowulf & Grendel is, as Sturla Gunnarsson says, "a CG-free zone." I saw this Viking epic at the 2005-2006 Sarasota Film Festival in Sarasota, FL with Gunnarsson in attendance to answer questions. This was my first screening experience with the filmmakers actually there so it was exciting for me.. and I'm glad Beowulf & Grendel was the one I saw. This movie is truly a wake-up call to all those old directors who have been coming out with mediocre and generally uninspiring hero epics. King Arthur's script was bad, although the battle scenes were very unique and gave you the chills; Alexander didn't know what to do with itself. Troy just didn't live up to our expectations, but it has one thing in common with this version of Beowulf. Brad Pitt brings Achilles a new persona, new motivation, and pretty much a new attitude. Whether you like this or not is up for debate, but Gerard Butler no doubt did the same with Beowulf. I support these decisions because it gives the actors more to go by, it gives them a challenge by playing deep characters, and they do a heck of a job. Also, I think it's common sense to assume that these stories came from either the imagination of a brilliantly nutty person (probably an ancestor of J.R.R. Tolkien) or things ordinary men did and was desperately changed for the dramatic and entertaining aspect of their storytelling through the years. Why stay true to the book when nobody else does? Anyway, I recommend this film to you people. It's a great adaption and makes me want to know what Sturla Gunnarsson has planned next.

AWFUL -- "Why Can't We All Just Get Along?" -- suggested alternative title.

[thepurr · 2/10 · 7 January 2007]

This movie was watchable if you have never read the original, in addition to having no taste for heroic tales whatsoever, but otherwise avoid it. The original story was basically replaced with a soppy morality tale.

"Gosh, Grendel is just so darn misunderstood!" should have been the tagline for this anti-hero flick hacked out of solid source material.

The language was neither modern nor ancient nor beautiful (like Lord of the Rings), nor authentic, but somehow seemed cobbled together from the worst of each of these. This is a movie which screamed for subtitles, but in retrospect, I'm glad they were omitted, sparing me the pain of having to deal with the poor lines twice. The costumes looked authentic in style, and the terrain was well chosen, but it was all wasted on the directing, which failed to make the most (or most anything) out of what was there.

The writers obviously hated "Beowulf", the original, and made this movie their soapbox to say so.

Watch this movie if it shows up in the dollar bin, and only if you've never had a taste for the ancient tale and have absolutely no other use for the next two hours.

pretty awful

[excusemebrah · 10 January 2007]

between skarsgard dropping f-bombs left and right and the troll bowling with human heads on a mountainside, i'd say the 13th warrior wipes the floor with this movie. almost unwatchable. all the praise below is from canadians that see maybe 1 movie a year and must appreciate each one accordingly. oh and don't get me started on this polley chick, she gives quite possibly the worst performance i've ever seen and appears to have rehearsed for this movie at a las vegas nightclub. looks like i need 10 lines of text to finish this review, although this movie isn't worth writing that much, but one other thought i will give is that this DVD would make an excellent coaster or possibly a mirror for a poor child in a 3rd world country. i would only pray he doesn't slip, fall, and drop this thing into a DVD player and be subjected to this debacle of a movie because sarah polley's acting alone might cause an uprising and further national strife.

Great Setting and Atmosphere but Movie so-so.

[newfiesailor · 6/10 · 24 July 2006]

I recommend this movie for the scenery and atmosphere alone. The viking ships skirting ice floes, the horse rides on the spume flecked beaches and the lonely fog enshrouding the wooden hall is worth the price of admission. You won't have to be a fan of the story to admire the work that went into this film.

Unfortunately the acting and story do not share the same drive as the sets. Everybody here seems to fall flat, the only charismatic performance by Ingvar Eggert Sigurðsson as Grendel. To his credit, he nails his part, revealing the rage, anguish and loneliness felt by the forlorn monster.

The rest of the cast, (even Stellan Skarsgård who flawlessly executed a similar role in King Arthur) seems to be going through the motions, so this film plays like an expensive made for TV Sci-fi channel movie rather than a film on screen. It's really too bad because the story is exciting and the potential was there but it simply didn't deliver.

Gerard Butler wasn't bad as Beowulf, but he never really shone either. Sarah Polley was terribly miscast as Selma, her flat and inexpressive tone seemingly inappropriate in a cast of rich accents.

I didn't really get caught up in this movie as I did with similar films such as the Thirteenth Warrior. So I can give this film a marginal recommendation for the sets and the performance of Ingvar Eggert Sigurðsson as the torn troll.

Experimental approach

[bakchu · 7/10 · 26 December 2006]

An interesting experiment - a heroic tale, in fact one of the most famous heroic tales, told in a very unheroic way. Removing poetic glamour and fantasy, the film leaves us with a bad-mannered bunch of rustic killers, the stark reality of Beowulf's time. In a way, it reminds me of Mark Twain's "A Connecticut Yankee in King Arthur's Court" - it's not as openly satirical, but there are similarities in the demythologizing (or utterly story-deforming, as you could also call it) approach. This contrasts strangely with typical "heroic fantasy movie" cinematography and a sweeping orchestral soundtrack. The result is, as said above, interesting - but not exactly fascinating. Reshaped into the story of a wronged child who kills the killers of its father and is then killed by other killers (of whom one has some doubts and remorse), there is nothing amazing in it all, no supernatural feats are being done (even Grendel being just somewhat deformed, hulky, and very strong) - the latter certainly intended by the director, but I doubt that he also intended the prevalent lack of thrill. There's also a small problem with the setting. I love the Icelandic landscape, I love Iceland, but to me it seems that the coast at Dyrhólaey and Jökulsarlón are too well-known tourist sights, seen in every Iceland coffee-table book and also already used in other films... thus distracting from the story somewhat by being exactly localizable to those who aren't complete strangers to Iceland.

A wasted opportunity.

[gulag · 2/10 · 3 October 2006]

I didn't read anything before watching this. I was hoping that in the aftermath of Lord of the Rings Beowulf might also be a fairly good film. It looks good. The weather is great. Iceland is a joy to see. But that's about it. They really wasted a fine chance to bring us the dark ages in mythic form. And they really destroyed the meaning of the story.

The worst parts are these: Grendel is made into a sympathetic human figure who basically just speaks a different language. The real Grendel is a bloodthirsty carnivorous monster and is the inspiration for Tolkien's Gollum. He's much more like an animal than human. Thus a whole subplot about Grendel's hurt feelings makes the story into an oddly politically correct mess at its core.

Selma... Who the hell is Selma? Just a trendy pretty witch girl. She represents the old magic. She is sensitive and pseudo-mysterious. Now I like Sarah Polley as an actress. But without some dialogue coaching here, she sounds like a refugee from "The Craft", not someone from the past. And her and her son's hairstyles are likewise so much anachronistic tripe. And what was going on with her and Grendel? Brendan the Celtic Priest? Umm, do you think Europe was really Christianized by buffoons like this? This was just a poorly written "comment" upon the Christian implications of the original story. Or rather one more chance to say that the wonderful pagan world was ruined by idiot Christians. If they were going to get all of the Christianity out of the narrator's version they should have just done that without the unclever potshot at Christianity.

Beowulf. Not a bad actor, but where did he get that "What the F..." lingo? Let's just blame the low grade imagination of the screenwriter.

There are I suppose people who don't really care about the original poem. And people who will mistake this for some sort of treatment of the dark barbarian times. Don't be one of them. Educate yourself. Read the original.

The sad thing is that it will be years before someone can attempt to remake Beowulf as it should be done. They wasted their chance.

A New Vision on a Famous Poem

[Kate_Pafford · 7/10 · 10 January 2008]

First off, let me say I have never read Beowulf or seen any film based on it. But my husband wants to watch the new Beowulf film with Anthony Hopkins and Angelina Jolie and a person at the library recommended that I watch this first so I could perhaps understand the new movie better. The directing was fantastic and the scenery was a character itself. I enjoyed Gerard Butler, Stellan Skarsgard and Sarah Polley, and some of the other actors were fantastic as well, including Grendel. If you've read the poem you may enjoy this more, but I had a bit of trouble following the story. A very good effort and amazing costumes, performances and scenery but some of the lines are a little vulgar for my taste. I give it a 7 because it was enjoyable, even if a bit confusing.

Best shot, worst retelling

[supertrooper573 · 3/10 · 15 November 2006]

When I rented this movie, I expected an excellent retelling of the story of Beowulf, instead I was greeted by a horrendously rewritten tale.

To its credit, the costuming was excellent, and the lack of CGI effects was refreshing. The scope of the shots in the film was breathtaking and wondrous. Then it all falls apart.

The people who made this film decided to dress it up; they added a Celtic (irish?) priest, who proceeded to convert the majority of the locals to Christianity. They created a back story for why Grendel was attacking Hothgar's keep. They ignored his mother, reducing her to the role of 'sea hag' who sprouts up now and again. To give it sex appeal they added a witch (who used to be a whore, and is the only person in the film who doesn't even attempt an accent) so that Beowulf can consult her and eventually fall prey to her charms. Grendel is little more than a violent, semi-retarded man-child, and is portrayed as being merely, mis-understood, rather than as a music and revelry hating monster. Then, as a final 'screw you' to anyone who's read the story, they have Grendel awkwardly rape the witch they added, then she bears their child, who sees Beowulf kill the sea hag and challenges him and watches him sail away etc... etc...

The entire goal of the filmmakers here seems to have been that they wanted to tell the story that inspired the story Beowulf, but decided that the story wasn't good enough to stand on its own after centuries. The unfortunate result of which is that people who have not read or even bothered to look up the original will think that this travesty accurately portrays the original story. I feel truly sorry for those people.

Not what you expect.

[ElijahCSkuggs · 7/10 · 16 June 2006]

Like a lot of you here I eagerly anticipated this movie.

Like a lot of you here I was disappointed when I heard that Grendel actually looked human in the movie.

I've read that story a bunch of times. And every time, I pictured this huge hulking monster. It walked on two feet, but that was pretty much it's only relation to humans. Obviously until I read "Grendel". Anyways, I was hoping it'd be a huge monster. It isn't. It's a huge dude. Which surprisingly still kicked ass. The guy pulled it off.

The movie itself didn't follow the story of Beowulf like I wanted it to. Obviously I was hoping for a bloodbath in the hall. I was hoping for Beowulf to actually be a incredibly heroic presence on screen. Didn't really happen. I was hoping for a monster instead of a big man....but oh well. This movie still was enjoyable and easily recommendable.

I enjoyed the acting overall, especially by Grendel, the make-up, the cinematography and the writing. I liked how the story combines the original and Gardener's take.

I didn't care for the love in the story. I didn't care for the lack of violence/gore. And I didn't care for Beowulf's actor being pigeon-toed. Ha! The main actor, walked very funny. He walks with his toes pointed in. Truthfully, I would have told the guy to try to walk normal. It's a fact that people who walk that way are at a disadvantage. When I read the original, I pictured Beowulf to be human perfection. Then again, it's a different take. The guy did a good job.

If you can be open-minded and not think too much about the original story, you'll definitely enjoy this movie. And if you haven't read the original, there is really no reason to dislike this film.

Disappointing, and at times painful

[teganb · 1/10 · 15 August 2006]

Being a fan of the mostly unknown Gerard Butler as well as the source material, I looked forward to his starring in a classic epic. Unfortunately, the film doesn't do him, or anyone else for that matter, justice. The movie opens in a very odd manner that seems to leave the viewer out of the loop as to who the characters on screen are and what their significance to the plot is. Even as a semi-coherent plot emerges, the directing improves little. Several scenes end without coming to a logical conclusion, as if they'd been abandoned. The dialogue, unfortunately, fares no better. Many lines are so ridiculously absurd they become unintentionally funny. To make matters worse, the writers decided to add the character of Selma the witch to the story, who exists solely to provide someone for Beowulf to have sex with by the end of the movie. Now I realize this is an imposing story to have to tell on a budget, but I have to question the decision to reduce Grendel to what is basically a primitive man rather than a fearsome monster. Overall, the film suffers from lack of character development, careful editing, and pacing (for an action movie, it is at time painfully slow) as well as some silly dialogue. There might be a decent movie in there somewhere, but this isn't it.

Beowulf and Grendel: an Updated Classic

[beylim · 8/10 · 26 September 2005]

This is a very updated version of the Anglo-Saxon poem "Beowulf," using contemporary English.This movie still has the mythical, epic qualities of the poem that have inspired readers throughout the ages. In an excellent performance, Gerard Butler effectively captures the conflicted hero Beowulf as he endures the slow erosion of his military code of conduct. Beowulf & Grendel is more than a story of blood and war. Themes of vengeance, loyalty and mercy are powerfully entwined with the beginnings of Christianity in southwest Sweden in 500 AD. Another theme which is explored is human inability to tolerate that which is different. Gerard Butler is extremely effective as Beowulf, but perhaps the best performance in the movie is that delivered by the tempestuous and weirdly beautiful land of Iceland. I think this movie is definitely worth seeing.

Ambitious reworking of epic poem

[SnoopyStyle · 6/10 · 3 February 2014]

Beowulf (Gerard Butler) leads his men across the sea to battle the murderous troll Grendel for King Hrothgar (Stellan Skarsgård). However, Grendel is a real person seeking revenge for past grievances. Beowulf is conflicted. He is also enchanted by Selma the witch (Sarah Polley).

This is a modern envisioning of a simple folktale of good versus evil. Its style is one of stark brutality and isolation. This is a good attempt but it falls short in some aspects.

It's mud and blood, but it needs more bloody action. It could use somebody more used to shooting blood splattering horror movies. The action is fair stage fighting with some decapitations. It should be much more brutal to match the movie's intentions.

The dialog is like bad Shakespeare. The actors try to match the dialog. It mostly feels like a stage play. The director doesn't take full advantage of the cinematography of the vast landscape. The lack of CGI also held it back some. It looks like a movie with more ambition than budget.

The biggest aspect of this movie is the reworking of the epic poem. It's trying to inject human nature into a fantasy. It's a terrific idea to try. Not all of it is successful. And it really takes too long to get going. If the movie is about Beowulf & Grendel, they really need to get battling earlier. And they need to get Selma into the story sooner.

Needs a tighter script and better editing

[jack_thursby · 3/10 · 14 July 2006]

Most of the reviews on "Beowulf and Grendel" are misleading -- this film isn't very good. Its obviously made by "arthouse-movie-people" so the cinematography is good but everything else is lacking (i.e., direction, script and pacing). I was disappointed because the script takes a lot of liberties with the actual story, so much so, that only the character names, locations and the ending (partly) are the same as the epic poem.

There's so many problems with this movie that for the sake of efficiency, I'm just going to list them:

1) The movie is too long. There's a lot of camera sweeps and landscape shots that add nothing to the story but plenty to the length of the film. I didn't want to watch a documentary on the Icelandic landscape, I wanted to see a movie with characters and a story.

2) The Sarah Polley subplot. Sarah Polley plays a witch who clues Beowulf as to why Grendel is attacking. But the witch subplot is forced and feels grafted onto the story. It should have been chopped because its unnecessary -- it seems like they just wanted Sarah Polley in the movie so they wrote this whole subplot just for her. And it was pretty disgusting in the end... if you think about it, it was really disgusting and I wonder just what the hell the film-makers were thinking. They have some serious, serious problems.

3) None of the characters are likable. They grumble, they scowl and they look despondent 90% of the time. There was no character development so there's no attachment as to what happens to them. Half the guys looked the same with long beards and scowls so you never knew who died.

4) The changes to the story were poor. There's a reason the story of Beowulf is considered an epic that has been remembered for hundreds of years -- its a great, great story. Did the film-makers really think that they slap a story together in a few months that would be better than an epic that has withstood the tests of time? If it ain't broke don't fix it, you can't improve on a work of art such as Beowulf, so why rewrite it? Its like repainting the Mona Lisa to add some zazz.

So, unless you like watching endless scenes of the Icelandic landscape and of bearded men, indistinguishable from each other, walking and riding through the Icelandic landscape while scowling, skip this snoozefest, you'll be glad you did.