1. Reflect on the movie Beowulf vs. the Epic of Beowulf. If no particular thoughts come to mind, answer my questions. Did you prefer one over the other? What do you think was the message in each version? Why do you think so many changes were made in the movie?
2. Read through other people's posts and respond to at least one other person's comments.
The movie was completely different from the book. The one major difference is Grendel's mom(Angelina Jolie). In the book, Beowulf kills Angelina Jolie, however in this movie, he slept with her and the dragon turned out to be their love child. We also find out that in the movie Angelina Jolie seduced the previous king, Hrothgar and their potential love child is Grendel. Another difference that I noticed is that in the movie, Beowulf became the King of the Danes, not the Geats. Also at this moment right now, Owen Li is sitting right next to me and screaming, "WIGLAF WHYYYY".
ReplyDeleteToo funny, I found myself screaming the same thing...j/k :)
DeleteLol That was me right there. I wonder whether Wiglaf would succeed in killing her or would it be an endless cycle until a woman comes and kills her? I also just noticed as I was answering this that Beowulf didn't fight any sea monsters to get to the mere and the mere is not underwater but across it...
DeleteWHY WIGLAF WHYYYYYY
DeleteMy heart and soul bled for the poor warrior.
I wonder what happened to Wiglaf after the closing scene in the film.
I wonder what happened to Wiglaf in the poem.
I wonder how Grendel's mom ever disappeared from the face of the Earth, or if she's around today.
I wonder how hideous Grendel's mom looks in the poem.
The differences in the poem and the film make me much more attracted to the film (aka Grendel's mom) jk...
I just wanted to comment on this because I wanted to say how much I love Owen. But, yes, why is the epic poem so different from the movie? Sometimes, at the plot changes, I just looked at Ken to try to ask him what was happening. As usual Ken ignored me because he was preoccupied with movie (Just Kidding Ken <3), but Im sure he was also puzzled by the lack of the filmmaker's consideration to at least keep most of the plot true to the epic poem. I felt the film was definitely presented more forcefully than the novel, as if the film was telling us to like it. There were no subtexts in the dialogue, and the lack of subtleties presented with a film that felt empty, and left more to be desired by the viewer.
DeleteI completely agree with you Tina. The movie was completely different because of Grendel's mother. The movie was trying to emphasize on sexuality. This was the one part of the movie that I didn't like because it felt so out of place. Everything else in the movie that was changed didn't seem like a big deal at all but that one scene with Grendel's mom just messed up the movie, it shouldn't have been there at all.
DeleteThe movie and epic, while having their similarities, has a lot of variation in plot and delivery. In the Epic, Beowulf is portrayed as a flawless hero. In the movie, the reader eventually sees Beowulf as a vulnerable human. This characteristic of Beowulf is something that would make the old Anglo-Saxans roll in their graves. Another difference, of course, is that of Angelina Jolie. In the epic, we never see Grendel's mother's face. It is never described to us. The movie turns her into a beautiful person-thing, which countless kings lust after. In the movie, Grendel turns out to be Jolie's lovechild with Hrothgar, and the dragon the lovechild of Jolie and Beowulf. Maybe Wiglaf and Jolie's lovechild will be Medusa, or the Kraken...we will never know. I think the changes were made to the movie to appeal to a more modern audience. The straightforward epic of Beowulf might have been a bit too boring for this era. Plus, Angelina Jolie probably raked in a lot of viewers, with her fame and her....other things. Tina is telling me to hurry up so I'll stop now.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteYes Owen Li, I agree that the changes to the movie were made to appeal to a more modern audience (us). By using a common face (Angelina Jolie), the viewers will become more interested in the movie. I also agree that in the movie Beowulf is portrayed as a flawed human being instead of a mighty hero.
DeleteInteresting thought there about the kraken and medusa... mythology is a very interesting thing!
DeleteYes, its quite overt. The changes, pointed out by Tina, were made in order to capture the attention of the contemporary audience. And to a degree, it worked. Without the changes, I believe that only a very small percentage of the population would watch a movie based off an epic told over thousands of years ago.
DeleteMy first thought was... what the heck am I even watching. It was really different from the book. The main differences were: Beowulf x Weathlow (why?? Like who thought that this would be a good idea?!) Then Hrothgar x Grendel's mom (it was surprising but weird.) and there was Beowulf x Grendel's mom and they had a son that could shapeshift into a dragon. (at this point I'm just about ready to flip a table. like wtf?) <-- I hope that was school appropriate... This is by far the weirdest movie I have ever watched in my life! Who made this??!! It has barely anything in common with the original story. and the ending!! the freaking cliffhanger!! I was like WHYYYYY!!! T^T I can imagine Wiglaf being smart and make Grendel's mom (I'm just gonna call her GM now.) think that he likes her and when GM tries to kiss him, he brings out his sword, surprising her and cutting off her head. I pondered about the ending during Gov class in 5th period and thought "who in the world could defeat her?" Then I wondered whether my awesome Jack Sparrow could and I was like "nah. he'd probably end up like the rest of them..." Then I came to the conclusion that only a woman could kill her. I really liked the book more than the movie. I also drew fan art for the book when we first started and now, if I'm bored, I may make my own short version of it with more magic and mythology 'cuz magic is awesome. Basically,i give the book a rating of a 5 for being so much better than the movie and the movie a 1 for being so weird and also, Beowulf was so OOC in the movie... Oh, another thing.., I never did find out why Hrothgar and Beowulf were naked in the beginning of the movie... What was the point of that?
ReplyDeleteI agree that this was one of the weirdest movies I have ever watched! I definitely did not expect many of the changes that were made in the movie. Your concept that only a woman can kill Grendel's mother is also very interesting. It definitely makes sense-- it seems like the men may be too susceptible to her charms to be able to kill her.
Delete:) Thanks! ^u^
DeleteIt's interesting that you concluded that only a woman would be able to kill Grendel's mother. However, I think that Grendel's mother would not even give a woman the time to talk before killing her, making it much more difficult for a woman to defeat her. I believe that because Beowulf and Hrothgar were men, she was willing to let down her guard. So, the only way for her to be killed would be for a man who is not charmed by her to do so. I guess we'll never know, though.
DeleteBeowulf the movie was very different from the epic! Of course, I did not expect the movie to be a perfect adaption, but I also did not expect so many of the major plot points to be completely reinvented. For example, Beowulf getting with Grendel's mother and Beowulf becoming the king of the Danes instead of the Geats really surprised me. Overall, I think I preferred the epic over the movie. While I appreciate how the movie's creators were creative in their interpretation of the plot, the emphasis on the sexual themes seemed pretty out of place in most of the scenes. I think the changes were made to appeal to a modern day audience which may be more interested in gory violence and sex than the typical traditional Anglo-Saxon audience. Also, the movie's creators probably decided to take advantage of the fact that many of the characters were not explicitly described (namely Grendel's mother) and use their creative liberty reinvent the character.
ReplyDeleteYes! there was too much getting together in there! I agree that it was not neccesary for Grendel's mother to get together with any of the men in the story... I like the thought of Grendel being a separate species instead of a hybrid of human and monster. :)
DeleteI completely agree with you! I don't believe the emphasis on the sexual themes were too relevant and appropriate at times either. It was a very hollywood-like movie rather than depicting the traditional Anglo-Saxon times. I prefer the epic as well; this version was quite surprising and disturbing.
DeleteI agree. I think some of the changes made in the plot were a little extreme but it was probably done to draw a bigger audience and to get more people to watch the movie.
DeleteThe movie and the epic are very different from each other. I think that the filmmakers needed to make changes to plot because the original story would not be interesting enough for a modern day audience. One difference is that Hrothgar is portrayed as a wise and knowledgeable mentor to Beowulf in the Epic. But, in the movie, Hrothgar’s suicide make him seem somewhat cowardly, which is an aspect of the movie that I didn’t like. On the other hand, I admire how the movie emphasized that Beowulf is fallible and that he does have flaws because it shows how people aren’t perfect, even if they seem to be. Another difference in the movie is that Grendel’s mother is a siren like creature who seduces Hrothgar and Beowulf. I thought it was odd at first, but I realized that this also shows that people are fallible. Ultimately, I think that the main message of the movie is that people are flawed and that those who succumb to their desires will suffer consequences later on. All in all, I prefer the epic over the movie because I think that the characters are better developed and the message of the epic is much clearer and more meaningful.
ReplyDeleteI agree! The epic is long and convoluted, and it really emphasized values that we don't share in our current day society, so it excuses the massive changes to the plot. However, I feel like if the filmmakers weren't going to commit to the moral of the original, they shouldn't have bothered with the story of Beowulf, and instead simply made an original story.
DeleteMaybe the filmmakers wanted to find a new angle at which the common people in the story look at Beowulf. We as viewers see Beowulf in the same way as those citizens of the town, and the difference, like you said, is clear. In the epic, Beowulf was definitely portrayed as strong and perfect, which is what the common man would view him as. However, in the movie, perhaps Beowulf was shown as human, because the common people also see him as a human. This bestows more respect upon Beowulf because we are able to relate to him easier, and maybe this was used to display how much the people looked up to him as well.
DeleteI agree with your points. Although the movie had more action, I think the epic was much easier to follow and the characters seemed more developed.
DeleteAfter reading the epic, Beowulf the movie seems very strange...however, interesting. The first big plot difference I noticed that was Hrothgar and Wealtheow appeared to have a very unhealthy relationship-- mainly from Hrothgar to Wealtheow. What also confused me was when Beowulf appeared to have romantic interest in the queen, and vice versa...this was not once considered in the poem! Similarly, the past connection between Hrothgar and Grendel's mother was a huge shock, because that creates the idea that Grendel is the king's own son...and technically, the heir to his throne?? In general, there was simply many romantic affiliations that were not mentioned in the epic: the ones listed above, as well as Beowulf and Grendel's mother, and Beowulf and his mistress. One of the strangest movies I've ever watched, but nonetheless quite entertaining.
ReplyDeleteI totally agree with you! There were so many references/hints to having more than one romantic relationship. I personally think it is funny how the directors of the movie chose to emphasis the love relationships between the characters rather than on Beowulf. Maybe they thought that the women didn't have enough parts in the original story? Nonetheless, I was interesting how both the storylines emphasized different character traits of humans.
DeleteI definitely agree. All the romantic relationships really forged a chasm between the epic and the movie, and they altered the storyline quite a bit. I think that if I had not read the epic, the movie actually would've been pretty interesting to watch--I would've never thought of making the connections between Grendel being Hrothgar's son and then the dragon being Beowulf's son! I also agree with Marisa in that the movie producers were able to give more parts to women in the movie, because they played a miniscule part in the epic. However, the parts of the women in the movie were not very respectable at all, so that was frustrating.
DeleteI think, despite the cringe-inducing absurdity of the movie, I enjoyed the emphasis that no hero is flawless; the movie takes the god-like Beowulf and brings him down to earth. Beowulf displays human weaknesses, is seen to be a compulsive liar, and is corrupted by greed; he takes the ego that made me dislike the original Beowulf from the epic and blows it into larger proportions. Unlike the original Beowulf epic, the movie is more of a tragedy. Though unexpected, the fact that both Grendel and the dragon were the children of heroes, men, and a monster, stood out to me. It symbolizes that we make our own monsters through our sins. It makes the overtly sexual aspect of the movie a bit more sensible; both Hrothgar and Beowulf's sins are lust based. Not only this, being naked represents a lack of civility; a return to primal desires. Overall, despite the theme of the folly of man and monsters, I did not value watching the movie, and would rather have read more of the epic or, the novel
ReplyDeleteI was thinking the exact same thing that the movie portrayed him as more of a flawed character which kind of made his personality to be more believable (even though the whole movie was just ridiculous in general).
DeleteEven though this movie was probably the most painful thing I have ever watched, in the end I kind of enjoyed it. If I hadn't read Beowulf before I probably would have thought it was a solid movie, maybe a little inappropriate, but still solid. I thought it was interesting to see other people's interpretations of the poem and obviously this was a very Hollywood-influenced version of it but I thought it was pretty cool to make Grendel Hrothgar's son and the dragon Beowulf's son because it reminds people that these over-the-top characters could have their own flaws and shame and manifests itself in different ways.
ReplyDeleteTrue... If we didn't read Beowulf, I would never have watched the movie because I would have thought that it was weird from the trailer...
DeleteI agree, I thought it was very cool to reveal that Grendel is Hrothgar's son and the dragon is Beowulf's son. Also it was surprising to see how although Hrothgar and Beowulf are these very powerful characters they still have their flaws just like everyone else.
DeleteThe movie was definitely not a good portrayal of the book but I didn't think the plot twist was bad. Instead, I think the director did a really good job of changing the story line so that fits today's society. There were so many changes in the movie because the movie makers wanted to make the movie more interesting and related it to the problems that we have today.The poem kind of glorified Beowulf and focused on explaining Beowulf's manliness and his loyalty to his kingdom. In addition, no one really becomes the "bad guy" in the end. On the other hand, the movie depicted Beowulf as more of a lustful human being who indirectly causes the downfall of his kingdom. It seems as if the movie was trying to say that humans make mistakes and that everything works out well in the end. On the other hand, the book just glorifies heroes.
ReplyDeleteYeah the movie is definitely more relateable and shows Beowulf as more human than hero.
DeleteThere is actually a part in the movie where Beowulf asks Wealtheow to remember him as a flawed man instead of a great hero, which I think exemplifies your point that the movie is trying to show that all people make mistakes. The movie focused a lot on how everyone thought that Beowulf was perfect and invincible, but also on how he knew that he wasn't.
DeleteI agree that the main theme of the movie is that people have flaws. The filmmakers show this theme through Beowulf’s actions, like when he succumbed to his desires with Grendel’s mother. In the epic, the poet portrays Beowulf as God-like, instead of a human being who makes mistakes.
DeleteThe movie was definitely very different from the book, not necessarily in a good or bad way. Before I go on to plot, I just want to say that I really didn't like the animations and the way Grendel was animated. The plot twist was rather unexpected (or at least I didn't see it coming). Heroes are thought of being near perfect beings, and I think that having Beowful give in to temptation showed him to be more realistic. I also find it interesting that Grendel's mother cursed Hrothgar and after Hrothgar declared Beowulf king Beowulf also realizes he is cursed. However, when Beowulf is dying next to the ocean and names Wiglaf king, Wiglaf isn't cursed (Beowulf asks Wiglaf if he can hear the imaginary voices and Wiglaf can't) because Wiglaf never met Grendel's mother. Since it seems that in the movie Grendel's mother wasn't willing to leave her cave, maybe she won't be able to find another man to father her demon childred. Or maybe another runaway slave will stumble into her cave and the cycle will continue again...
ReplyDeleteI agree with your point on the movie being VERY different, especially the characters. Personally I didn't envision Hrothgar to be a lazy, piggish kind of person, but more as a respectable and well aged king. Beowulf, depicted as heroic and courageous till the end of his life was depicted as flawed and fallible to temptations in the movie, which deviates from the usual portrayal of AngloSaxon thanes.
DeleteAs I was watching the movie, Beowulf, I was so confused as to why it was completely different from what we read in class. Towards the beginning, the storyline was fairly similar, however, as the movie progressed, it diverted in a completely new direction. I never imagined Hrothgar as being so drunk all the time and for having slept with Grendel's mother. I mean who knew that Grendel was Hrothgar's son? I first thought it made sense since Grendel was unable to attack Hrothgar. However, since Beowulf slept with Grendel's mother as well, causing another demon, the dragon, to be born, why was the dragon able to kill Beowulf at the end of the book? Wasn't he the son of Beowulf? Also, there was no mention of Hrothgar committing suicide in the epic, which was quite surprising. The movie was quite disturbing to watch, in my opinion, but it was an new, interesting interpretation of the epic.
ReplyDeleteThe movie was waaay too different... having read Grendel the book in Mr. Seike's class, my imagination of Grendel is a furry, almost human but more bear, monster (as on the cover of the book) and not a drooling, icky ogre. Furthermore, the movie delineates from the original story, taking it's own spin on the traditional story. Far too many plot twists. What the movie did well, however, was depict the fear that Grendel and the Dragon instilled into the minds and hearts of the Danes, and the heroicness of Beowulf to stand and fight them; in his youth and at old age, Beowulf was courageous and well respected.
ReplyDeleteI thought the animation used int the movie was pretty weird and even somewhat cartoonish. I would have deferentially preferred live action with cgi. I thought the changes to the original story were unneeded and unnecessary. I would have preferred if the movie stayed more accurate to the book.
DeleteI agree that the movie was ridiculously different and can certainly understand where you're coming from as I also read Grendel in Mr. Seike's class. The gore-filled, sexualized movie completely contrasted with Gardner's philosophical and thought-provoking novel. When Hrothgar first suggested that he slept with Grendel's mother, I puked in my mind because I still thought of Grendel's mother as Gardner's version-- a disgusting, foul, writhing mass of fur, which spoke in gibberish. Grendel's appearance also surprised me as I imagined him as a bearish creature, like you did.
DeleteI agree that the movie was completely out of line and showed little connection to the book. The producers of the movie did indeed twist the movie too much so that parts of it made the story entirely different. I also agree that the producers of the movie did a good job of portraying Beowulf as this heroic and courageous soul, but I think that one thing they could have done better was to not portray Beowulf as being this sex-driven man. I think that also contributed to tainting the story.
DeleteI think the reason there was so many changes from the Epic of Beowulf to the Beowulf movies was to make it more interesting to the viewers. As Ms. Ene said the Beowulf movie is very "hollywood", meaning that the director did not care to stay true to the story. The director just wanted to create something Epic that would appeal to many viewers, resulting with the sexual tension between Beowulf and the Queen, the king committing suicide, as well as the King and Beowulf having a child with Grendel's mother. But overall I really enjoyed the plot twist, especially when it was revealed that Grendel was the Kings son and the dragon was Beowulf's son.
ReplyDeleteI too, agree that the reason Hollywood made the major changes that they did to the story of Beowulf was to lighten the mood and captivate its audiences. By adding the drama between the Beowulf and the Queen, the king's suicide, and the plot twist at the end, the story of Beowulf is keeps an essence of the original plot of Beowulf experiencing fate, but at the same time is interesting to see the story unfold with both Hrothgar and Beowulf's offspring carrying their fate.
DeleteI also agree with you that director wanted to create a movie that appealed to people today, since that is the audience. The poem was told hundreds of years ago, which is why the plot may not be as interesting to us compared to other storylines created recently. The plot twists were unexpected, making the story more interesting.
DeleteAlthough I preferred the poem over the movie, I agree that producers had to dramatize the plot in order to attract audience. In another prospective, it is good to see Beowulf in another interpretation. Plot twists may diverge from the original story, but is needed to appeal to modern day audience. The complex relationships between Beowulf, Hrothgar and Grendel's Mom builds tension, making the story more exciting.
Delete"The book is always better than the movie." Yet, as I was watching the animated movie iin class, I did not necessarily feel that way. The epic and the movie boh reflect on different ideas. I would say that the epic concentrates on the heroism of a character (Beowulf), while the movie focuses on the sins and flaws of man through a specific character (again Beowulf). I enjoyed both versions of the story since they presented different ideas that were equally interesting. I think they had to make many changes to the movie since to cover the different topics that the epic did not cover, such as the dragon being Beowulf's son and how Grendel's mother wasn't killed. Overall, both epic and movie were interesting.
ReplyDeleteJoseph, I would disagree with you because the movie was a lot more entertaining than the book. When I was reading the book, sometimes I would be confused with what was actually happening, but in the movie, it is more engaging and clear even though the plots for the book and the movie were very different.
DeleteIn the epic poem, the story presented suggests that Beowulf has nothing that is amusing or humorous. I believe the reason why Hollywood had created a version of Beowulf was to make the story of Beowulf seem less serious and more intriguing to watch. After reading the epic Beowulf, it felt like just another epic I had read about a hero like The Odyssey . When i watched the Hollywood version of Beowulf, it was initially flattering to see that the story plot had altered so much that it didn't seem like the story of Beowulf. I felt the movie had unnecessary parts where the characters would do questionable actions. Towards the end of the movie, I gained an appreciation of the movie because it was eye opening to me to know that Grendel was Hrothgar's son and the dragon was Beowulf's son.
ReplyDeleteI agree when you say that it felt like just another epic. All epics follow the same plot making it kind of boring. Your comment on appreciating the movie makes me realize that the movie really brought the story to life. If this were another book, it wouldn't have been as significant. But the movie brings out certain details that makes the audience want to keep watching and want to relate to the characters.
DeleteI see where you're coming from when you mentioned that Hollywood's version was very downplayed, and made Beowulf less serious and godly. I feel as if the comedy and childish jokes were added in to help set the mood for viewers. Especially for viewers that had not read the poem, it gives them some light hearted laughs. But I don't think it was the best way to project the poem Beowulf because it simply does not do it justice. There is so much more depth within the poem that is completely disregarded in the film.
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThe Epic of Beowulf gives us readers a perception of a stereotypical heroic leader while the movie makes Beowulf a more relatable, real person. Near the end of each version, the Epic Beowulf wants to be remembered as a legacy while the animated Beowulf just wants to be remembered as the man he is. These two versions aim to convey different messages. I only prefer the book because the movie's animations, although very detailed, were so cringeworthy. The random screams and awkward pauses between actions made it seem like a video game. I also thought Grendel's Mother's role was odd. She was the mother of both Grendel and the Dragon, which I see as completely changing the symbolism behind each character. Her position gives me the idea that evil's root cause is undeniable, as both kings succumb to her seduction and creates two monsters.
ReplyDeleteI agree that the Beowulf in the movie is more realistic in the movie. In the movie he is shown as someone who is susceptible to human flaws but in the book he was exemplary. I also agree with you about the role of Grendel's mother. I thought the change in her character made the movie stray far too much from the central theme of the book-good ultimately triumphs over evil. However, in the movie, it is implied the evil wins out because even though Beowulf kills the dragon, Wiglaf - the new king - is on the verge of succumbing to Grendel's mom just like his predecessors.
DeleteCrystal,
DeleteI agree that the movie illustrates Beowulf as more relatable! The poem portrays Beowulf as a typical Anglo-Saxon hero: brave, honorable, and without weakness. Beowulf's love interest with Grendel's mother makes him seem human, rather than flawless and god-like. He gives in to her seduction at a time of weakness, as i'm sure many viewers can relate to.
I agree that the movie portrayed Beowulf as someone, who we can believe actually existed. Beowulf can be defeated in the movie, but in the epic it seems that he's impervious and invincible. No one can defeat him, which seemed kind of a stretch to me. I can't say I disagree with you on the part about Grendel's mother because that twist changed the story completely and it really changed some of the most important traits to certain characters.
DeletePersonally, I preferred the poem Beowulf much better than Hollywood's dramatic and overdone take on Beowulf. I enjoyed the poem greatly because there was so much substance within the text, and the best part of reading text is that everything is left off to my imagination. When I watch a movie with a given expectation or having read the text itself, the movie can never do the text justice. I think that it is just the way it is, we go in with a set expectation. And when our expectation is not met in the smallest of ways, we are disappointed and unable to adjust to this difference. With this particular film, I felt it was overdone in numerous ways, but I understand the strategy and reasoning behind this. Movie producers are always trying to cater to the widest of audiences. It was very clear with the comedy the producers incorporated, and emphasis on sexual tensions. In many ways, it could have done the poem justice, but overall I believe it didn't.
ReplyDeleteI agree, when I saw the characters in the movie, they were completely different from what I have imagined and pictured. That's always what makes me unsatisfied whenever I watch a book's movie and the characters don't match up to what I imagined them to look like. Even though Beowulf, the movie, was dramatized, I still enjoyed the movie.
DeleteI agree with everything you said. They definitely changed the movie so that more people would like it and they made it more Hollywood. I also liked the poem a lot better because I feel that the original meaning is definitely portrayed better in the poem.
DeleteI found that both the poem and the movie of Beowulf had their strengths and weaknesses. The movie strays so far from the original poem that it almost could have been its own story with no relation to the poem at all. I think that it would have been better for the movie to stay as close to the original plot as possible, but I also see how the original plot and the original characters would not have appealed to a modern audience. In the poem, Beowulf seems to be flawless, both in strength and goodness. Most of the characters are portrayed as either completely good (like Beowulf or Hrothgar) or completely evil (like Grendel and his mother). While this may have been considered normal in Anglo-Saxon culture, people prefer more realistic characters with flaws today.
ReplyDeleteI don't think that the movie would have been very successful today if it had followed the original text because people are not as interested in stories where heroes only save people from monsters and never make any mistakes. One way the movie avoided this was by implying that Grendel was Hrothgar's son and that the dragon was Beowulf's son. This gave each king a deeper need to destroy their respective monsters, since they had personal reasons as well. All in all, while I may prefer the poem, I do consider the plot of the movie to be a better story given today's society's values and traditions.
I agree with you when you say that the heroic characters were given more realistic flaws because I felt like I was able to relate more to the characters. If the movie's plot stayed in tune to the poem's, I also think that people would find the movie boring and bland (mostly because this plot is so similar to most epic poems). Because of the changes made the movie seemed more in tune is Hollywood's standards.
DeleteI preferred the movie of Beowulf. The incredible graphics that were displayed by the animations were breathtakingly beautiful. The hideous face of Grendel himself could not have been any more repulsive than I ever imagined. Violence was terrifyingly awesome. Beowulf's boasts could not have been more entertainingly pathetic. Grendel's mom could not have been any more naked. Beowulf's torn off arm could not have been any better karma for what he did to Grendel's arm. The ending could not have been any more sad for Wiglaf. Never has my heart bled more for an animated character.
ReplyDeleteCompared to the poem, the film was the more "epic" of the two. The film shows everything more clearly than the poem does. I could not have imagined my life without this prepossessing film.
I thought the movie portrayal of beowulf was interesting. I was pretty shocked on the fact that they made Grendel's mom Angelina jolie, because the book described Grendel's mom to be an ugly old hag. However the movie portrayed her to be a beautiful young seductress. However, I can sort of understand. Because the devil is known to be a great tempter. Therefore it does sort of makes sense to portray Grendel's mom in such a way. I didn't like the amination. I thought that it was too cartoonish and even tacky. I would have preferred an actual live action movie with cgi for the dragon and Grendel. Overall, I thought the movie was pretty entertaining to watch. I think the book was a better version than the movie. Also it was pretty awkward for Beowulf just to inherit the king's wife.
ReplyDeleteI agree with you that using actual actors rather than animation would have been better. However, I think that if they did a direct adaptation of the book into a movie, it could be not interesting, as the story is very simple compared to the movie version we watched, which has twists and drama.
DeleteI agree with you on the fact that Grendel's mother was really attractive as opposed to her character in the poem. Though, I disagree that the poem was a better version than the movie. I think the movie portrayed the poem in a way that people today would understand and enjoy. Also I am not surprised that you wrote about the attractive Grendel's mother first. ily xiao
DeleteI really enjoyed the movie, except for the use of animation over actual actors. Although the book and the movie are both named Beowulf, they have extremely different story lines starting after Beowulf kills Grendel in the mead hall. In the book, Beowulf swims down into the lair where Grendel's mother is hiding, and kills her outright. After that, he finally returns to his homeland, where he becomes king and eventually must kill the dragon. In the movie adaptation, rather than killing Grendel's mother, she seduces Beowulf, promising him and his new kingdom in Denmark safety in return for treasure and a son. Time passes while Beowulf is the king of the Danes, rather than the Geats like in the book, until a dragon attacks the land after a slave took the treasure back. In the movie version, Beowulf battles it out with the dragon, eventually killing him by ripping out his heart. After slaying the dragon, Beowulf dies and it is revealed that the dragon was really Beowulf's son, who was shape shifting. As Beowulf is burning at his funeral, Grendel's mother rises out of the water and has a staring contest with Wiglaf, leaving the movie on a cliff hanger. Overall, while I enjoyed the movie and I see why they would change it to make the story line more interesting, it is completely different from most of the book.
ReplyDeleteI agree with you that both Beowulf's are very different. I believe that the movie adaptation has more to do with temptation while the text had more to do with deeper themes. I definitely thought the movie was more exciting as well, however having read the text first made me think that some parts of the movie were weird.
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteIn the poem, Beowulf was characterized as the typical Anglo-Saxon Hero, someone who is loyal, brave, and strong. Beowulf was compromised of the culture's values of ideals. To the Anglo-Saxon people, the poem was probably a typical story they would hear for entertainment, which is like Hollywood movies to people today. The poem catered to what the Anglo-Saxons wanted, which is why the directors of the movie purposely changed the plot to cater it towards the people today. Many of the changes in the plot reflected ideals and problems in our society such as sexual desires and the flawed character of Beowulf. The unexpected plot twists that changed the direction of the plot helped make the storyline more thrilling. This is why I think that the movie was more entertaining than the poem.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Tim, the movie catered more towards society and less towards tradition Anglo-Saxon values. The plot twists definitely made the movie much more interesting and enjoyable to watch compared to reading the poem.
DeleteThe movie was significantly different than the epic version of Beowulf. One part of the movie that was different than the epic was when Beowulf didn't actually kill Grendel's mother. In the epic, Beowulf slays Grendel's Mother's head. The movie as a whole was more dramatic and gruesome than the epic, which wasn't visually appealing to watch. I prefer reading the epic than the movie because of the details the epic provides. I feel that many changes were made to the movie version of Beowulf to make it more attractive to the movie crowd. A movie that doesn't have much action wouldn't appeal to the mass movie crowd. The movie was intended to have more action, sexual references, and comedy. Overall, I preferred reading the book.
ReplyDeleteI actually thought the changes from epic to movie for the most part were pretty entertaining. I liked the concept of Grendel and the Dragon being the children of Hrothgar and Beowulf. It shows that while they portrayed themselves as high and mighty individuals, they made their own mistakes that had consequences and were flawed just like everyone else. This made the characters more relatable to me. While I do agree with you on the fact that the sexual references were a little too much, I found that most of the changes in the movie were justifiable.
DeleteI agree with you Ronan. It seems like movie directors need to comply with a formula to make a Hollywood movie. May be the director wanted to infuse the story of Beowulf with modern movie themes such as action and sexual references to make it more relevant at the cost of losing the integrity of the story.
DeleteIn the epic, Beowulf was portrayed as an almost perfec Anglo-Saxon influenced hero. He displays amazing amounts of bravery, cleverness in tight situations, and obviously great strength. I thought one of the most interesting departures the movie took from the book was the idea of Grendel being Hrothgar's son and the Dragon being Beowulf's. It shows that these characters are flawed, just like everyone else is. I thought while the movie was obviously very different from the book, it's changes were in good taste (other than a little bit too much emphasis on romance for an epic) and it was very entertaining.
ReplyDeleteI agree. The change of storyline with the sons of the kings creates a new and interesting outlook on the story. I also think that while the visual changes were very dramatic at times, the storyline created an enjoyable path and outcome.
DeleteI agree on the fact that Hrothgar and Beowulf displayed with flaws throughout the movie made it much more interesting. In the Epic they don't show the weaknesses of these characters making them seem as if they don't have aspects of a human.
DeleteI personally liked the movie more than the book because it was interesting and had more details. The movie added more things to make the plot more interesting. For example, in the book, King Hrothgar's wife Wealhtheow was barely mentioned but in the movie, she was one of the main characters and ended up marrying Beowulf after Hrothgar died. Another major change in the movie was the battle with Grendel's mother. In the book, Beowulf fights with Grendel's mother and kills her, bringing back the head of Grendel. In the movie, however, Grendel's mother seduces Beowulf and promises to make him the most powerful king. Beowulf lies to Hrothgar and says that he killed Grendel's mother. I think these changes were made in the movie to make it more interesting since the original novel could be quite boring and unrelatable for some people.
ReplyDeleteI personally like the movie better, too. I also agree with you that the changes, for example, the relationships among the two kings and the queen, were added into the movie to make it more interesting. I think the movie made a nice balance between male characters and female characters, while the poem mainly focused on the male heroes, and that change made the movie more appealing to the audience.
DeleteI prefer the book over the movie. While the movie did try to add more depth to the characters and spice up the storyline, it strayed to far from the central themes and changed the symbolism behind the characters.
ReplyDeleteThe one major difference was the role of Grendel's mom (Angelina Jolie). In the book, Beowulf kills Grendel's mom right away, however in this movie, he shows weakness and sleeps with her even though she is evil. And while in the book the dragon comes out because a common man stole from it, in the movie the dragon comes out because it is the lovechild of Beowulf and Grendel's Mom. We also find out that in the movie Grendel's Mom seduced the previous king, Hrothgar and their love child is Grendel. The movie shows that everyone is vulnerable to evil but the book shows that good always wins and that there is hope.
I think that it would have been better for the movie to stay as close to the original plot as possible, but I also see how original story would not have appealed to a modern audience. People today aren't interested in perfect heroes. While this may have been considered normal in Anglo-Saxon culture, now people prefer more realistic characters who show and overcome their flaws. So while I do prefer the book over the movie I do think that the movie does a good job on reflecting today's culture.
Hi Alekhya!
DeleteI agree that the movie strayed far from the themes that were embodied in the book. I also agree that people aren't as interested in perfect heroes anymore. I, personally, believe that a flawed hero is more believable and easier to empathize with than someone who is always perfect. I also think that perfect heroes are a little boring and that heroic flaws explore more about our humanity and our struggle towards perfection or towards a better self.
I feel that the movie Beowulf had a story line that strayed from the book probably to add excitement towards the movie. In the movie, Beowulf does not kill Grendel's Mother, but sleeps with her and has a child who ends up becoming a Dragon. How did Hrothgar's child turn out so ugly I don't know but they could have expanded on that part of the story. Grendel was also depicted as a more unpleasing character to look at compared to how he was described in the book as well. Overall, I enjoyed watching the movie more as it was easier to follow and more exciting overall.
ReplyDeleteHey Jeff! I also agree that the movie was much easier to follow, one of the reasons why I preferred it too. It was definitely a strategic move for the producers to exaggerate certain scenes in the film seeing as how the original writing is an epic poem. Also, I felt a lot of sympathy for Grendel in this film. Poor guy spent the entire time whining and moaning.
DeleteI personally prefer watching the movie, since it is more appealing to us and it is more interesting. I think the movie focused mainly on making connections between powerful mankind and the devils, stating that fame and wealth are somehow related to evilness. The movie made the demons sons of Hrothgar and Beowulf, and also made the relationships among the kings and the queen interesting. However, the poem focused on building a heroic figure, and passing on the religious beliefs in the Anglo-Saxon society. I think those changes were made in the movie to make it more entertaining; the strange relationships among characters are apparently more interesting than Beowulf's boasts in today's society. While the poem contains what was considered as fashionable during that time period, this movie also put in what is considered as fashionable today.
ReplyDeleteHey Wendy!
DeleteI completely agree that the movie was adapted to the time period of today.
I think it's very interesting that you draw the connection between fame and wealth and evilness. I think that the movie was most likely trying to send the message that fame and wealth obtained dishonestly will eventually cause ruin. This sounds similar to an Anglo-Saxon value yes? The poem did a great job of building the image of a true hero, and the movie did a great job of being appealing to a wide range of audiences. To each their own.
Great thinking!
Although the movie was a bit much at times, I felt like the storyline in the movie made Beowulf seem more exciting. Although many points in teh book weren't present in the film, the movie did do a good job of portraying Beowulf's strengths. Because the movie was really graphic I was able to see things in the film that I couldn't even imagine from reading the book. I do feel, however, that the movie was often sidetracked from showing the audience Beowulf's strength and humbleness (ex: taking Hrothgar's crown, sleeping with Grendel's mom, his mistress, etc).
ReplyDeleteI personally think that the reading the Epic poem was more appealing. When we read, there are many different ways to visualize the setting of each scene. However, the movie gives us a visual representation of the story and leaves us no room for imagination. In addition, the translated poem is more true to the original story that the author tried to convey. When a movie is produced, many times different elements are exaggerated to appeal to the audience. In my opinion, I believe that if I had not read the book prior to watching the movie, I would think the movie is better, but given that we all read the book, we all have an expectation as to what the movie should be like.
ReplyDeleteThe movie was completely different from the Epic in both plot and symbolism. An example not present in the Epic is the golden drinking horn in combination with Grendel’s mother. The combo represents the temptations of all men (the fruit of Adam and Eve) and the scene of the burning cross burned down by beowulf’s’ son (the dragon) represents the punishment by god. The creators probably made this modification in order to increase the tension of the story, and to put a hollywood twist.
ReplyDeleteHowever, in the epic, there is not such a symbol, and instead represents the ideals portrayed by the author at the time. The Epic does not need to have a tense story, but instead chooses to identify the important elements of an Epic hero.
I think you're right about the symbols shown in the movie because they're made really obvious as to what they mean and how they contribute to the story. It definitely did make the movie more "hollywood". I think the movie needed to have such obvious symbols because otherwise, it's difficult to understand what they mean. The Epic on the other hand, doesn't need obvious symbols because the story portrays the themes and symbols pretty well by itself.
DeleteHi Michael,
DeleteI thought your connection between the drinking horn - Grendel's mom was really interesting. I never really looked into the horn and what it could have possibly meant nor did I notice much symbolic meaning in the burning of the cross. I agree with what you said about how the actual poem focused more on creating an Epic, and developing the hero by providing him with all the facets that a "hero" consists of.
When it comes to preferences, I definitely preferred the movie over the original poem. The poem, although beautifully written with its kennings and what not, was very difficult to follow. I found myself spending more time trying to understand what was happening rather than absorbing the message being portrayed. Although the movie went in many peculiar directions and made some rather disturbing changes, it was still very enjoyable and easy to understand.
ReplyDeleteHey Weixin! I also preferred the movie over the original poem as the movie was easier to follow compared to reading the poem. Although the poem retained traditional Anglo-Saxon values, the movie overall was a more enjoyable process as I spent more time engaged in it and less time thinking about the messages that were being portrayed.
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteIt's clear that the movie, Beowulf, is extremely different than its original epic counterpart. This is to be expected, as each piece is a representative work of its own era and contains values or entertaining factors associated with its own culture in order to best entertain or appeal to its audience. For example, the epic featured ancient pagan traditions as well as newer Christian ideas while incorporating many Anglo-Saxon values into its themes. These are fitting choices for the poem, as it originated in Old English society, which encompassed a mix of old Anglo-Saxon traditions, like the strong hero, in addition to Christian ideas, and some older elements of paganism, such as fate. On the other hand, the 2007 movie version included many things that would be considered more entertaining in the modern era, like an abundance of sexuality, deluging gore, and a flawed main character. It would not make sense for the movie to only contain elements of the Old English culture, as the movie would then be unrelatable to a modern audience, consequently attracting fewer viewers and reducing Paramount Pictures's revenue. Thus, while the movie and epic both sought the same goal of entertainment and vaguely had the same plot and characters, they were produced in different eras and hence emphasized differing entertaining qualities or values that pertained to their own time periods.
ReplyDeleteThough it is a valid point that most of the artistic liberties were taken to make the movie more appealing to a modern audience, I still don't like what they did with Grendel's mother. At the very least, they should have had Wiglaf or even Beowulf himself go after her, as the ambiguous end removed the sense of completion at the end of the movie. Seeing her get away with no consequence to her actions was rather offputting.
DeleteI agree with your thinking. I believe that the changes that they made in the movie made the plot much more interesting for the audience listening. I feel that because they changed it, the audience can understand the themes and motifs much better and thus the movie has more of an impact than a direct translation of the book into a motion picture.
DeleteI like how you hit on this point of different eras. It serves to show that societal expectations influence what kinds of values are being presented in works of art. Societal expectations and traditions have changed drastically, and having both read the epic and watched the movie, we can decide if society has become better or worse.
DeleteI agree that many of the changes were due to marketing realities. In addition, understanding the epic in context would require learning at least a little about the Anglo-Saxons or Christianity, while the movie was much more accessible.
DeleteAs it is quite obvious that there are many differences between the movie and the book, I think the filmmakers actually held true more than the class gives them credit for. Like in the book, Beowulf is a fearless Hero. Beowulf also has this great sense of pride that upon closer inspection can be his heroic flaw. Like in the book, he must be the one to kill the dragon because of his pride in the movie.
ReplyDeleteI liked the artistic liberties that the movie took. As many people have said, they made it fit the audience of our time, and so many things had to be changed.
Overall, I thought it was great. Although in hindsight Beowulf maybe didn't need to strip naked all the time.
I agree with Justin! It is really obvious that the movie is different from the Epic. Beowulf is still a hero all the way till the end which is the same as the story line in the Epic. I don't think a lot of people mentioned the artistic part of the movie and I would agree that it did add a lot of valuable qualities in order to get more audiences.
DeleteThe movie was really different from the book. Even though the movie kind of followed the plot of the Epic, overall the movie added a lot of addition action that changed the plot a lot. For example, Beowulf never had a son in the Epic, especially not with Grendel's mom. The Epic describes Beowulf as a hero, but through the movie I felt like Beowulf had more flaws than described in the Epic. For example Beowulf lied about killing Grendel's mom and he let everybody believe in his lies for years. I would say that is not a quality of a hero.
ReplyDeleteI preferred the Epic more than the movie because the movie reflected the values of Hollywood, like plot twists, lies and scandals. The movie is still very interesting even though it didn't fully reflect the Epic.
The movie and the poem may as well be two completely different stories. Although they share similar characters, many things are changed for the sake of entertaining today's audience. This in itself isn't necessarily bad, as the changes did make the movie rather entertaining. However, where the movie failed was that it tried to force a corny "no one is perfect" moral in. In general, any story that tries to outright force a moral is inherently bad, as the action of trying to force said moral in to a story tends to make the plot predictable and preachy. Another downside of the movie is that there was no real conclusion. Although ambiguous ends can add to the depth of a story (see: Inception, The Dark Knight Rises), the modified end removes the sense of conclusion from the story. When Wiglaf is shown moving towards Grendel's Mother, that removes the sense of completion from the story, and feels like a "to be continued" type of thing. Despite the flaws, the movie was fine as simple entertainment, but nothing more than that.
ReplyDeleteThe movie and the poem were extremely different. Although the beginning was relatively the same, the movie took some personal liberties that made it much more entertaining. Even though the movie was extremely violent and some of the different liberties it took were strange, I enjoyed the plot of the movie more because I found it more entertaining and it tied the story together well. When I read the book, I felt like Beowulf was an amazing hero that barely had any flaws whereas in the book, Beowulf seemed more human as his flaws were described well. Since I could relate to what the movie described better than what the novel did, I enjoyed the movie more.
ReplyDeleteI definitely preferred the book over the movie mainly because I thought the movie had a lot of effects that were really just disgusting. There is a level in film making that gore should reach but Beowulf hit that level and went beyond and it was a lot of unnecessary gore and nudity that didn't contribute to the story at all. If anything, the only reason Angelina Jolie was in the movie at all was to give it a chance with male viewers. I think the message in the Epic was really obvious, and definitely portrayed Beowulf as the hero and showed the Anglo-Saxon values, but the movie's only purpose was for entertainment. While it did show Beowulf as a hero, the over violent nature of the movie overshadowed Beowulf's heroic nature, and didn't make as much of an impact on me. I think the reason that so many changes were made in the movie was so that it would attract viewers due to the action and sexual scenes that were encompassed in the film.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Shivani! Although I would initially prefer the movie over the book just because it was easy to understand, I think the book was a lot more meaningful. The movie, while easier to understand, had a lot of entertainment effects that took away from the story.
DeleteHowever, Angelina Jolie may also be in the movie to add another important theme, which was appearance vs reality, the evil that lies within lust etc etc.
I agree with Shivani that the movie overshadowed Beowulf's nature. While watching the movie, I occasionally forgot Beowulf was even a hero! All I could be thinking about for a good portion of the movie was "Some hero you are...sleeping with Grendel's mom when your duty was to kill her!"
I agree that I preferred the book and there were a lot of gross and unnecessary features added. I think it took away from the movie because that is a majority of what is scarring my mind instead of focusing on the messages. I think Beatrice made a good point that Jolie could have been there for appearance vs. reality. I also think Beowulf was questionably portrayed as a hero because I was questioning his heroic deeds throughout the movie. He didn’t always seem like he had all the traits of a hero, more of a cocky greedy boy.
DeleteThe movie was very different from the epic because many romantic elements and different relationships between the characters were added to the movie. Also, the characters were slightly different, such as Beowulf because he was much more flawed in the movie than the poem. Even though the movie was very different compared to the epic, I enjoyed the movie more because there was more excitement since a romantic element/different situations were added and twists at the end of the movie. To me, the only exciting parts in the epic were when Beowulf killed the different monsters.
ReplyDeleteI agree with you that the characters were very different. Though Beowulf may have boasted a lot, he didn't seem as arrogant as he was in the movie than in the epic. I also think that the movie was more exciting than in text. That would be probably largely attributed to the fact that we could actually see what was happening instead of having to read what was going on.
DeleteI enjoyed both the epic and the movie in completely different ways. The epic was a wonderful read because it was easier to understand than other epics that I have read. The simpler writing style made me more engaged in the book and I was able to better appreciate the beautiful writing and spend time looking for thematic elements that I otherwise would have spent trying to understand what was being said. Even though the writing is simple, I thoroughly enjoyed how events in the epic could be stated so simply and beautifully.
ReplyDeleteAt the same time I enjoyed the movie as well because of it's comic factor. I laughed so had while watching the movie because there were so many disparities between the movie and the book, as well as there being completely over-the-top dialogue and unrealistic situations. I thought the sexual themes were dramatized to the point of disbelief, making it all the more humorous for me. I also thought the dialogue that the men had with each other and the pick-up lines they attempted to use on women were hilariously outrageous. The plot twists were very amusing and quite creative, which I really appreciated. I also really liked how the movie humanized Beowulf and portrayed his flaws as well as his strengths. The changes were probably made to cater towards a modern audience, and it definitely captured my attention.
Overall, I enjoyed the movie and the book. The book awed me with its beautiful writing and the epic made me laugh so hard with its larger-than-life characters and strange plot twists.
I agree that the movie had a much more modern feel to it, to cater to modern day audiences. I feel like there was more character development in the movie based on the characteristics stated in the epic. Beowulf is portrayed as very noble, brave hero but also has his flaws and insecurities. My favorite part of the movie was the symbolism of the golden horn which portrayed glory and the wealth of Beowulf and Hrothgar, but also the curse of the demons.
DeleteOne of the main differences of the poem and the movie was the portrayal of Beowulf's character. In the epic, Beowulf is an almighty hero who conquers the three demons of the Denmark. In the movie, Beowulf is a flawed man who is extremely prideful and relies on his status and achievements. I think the movie version humanizes Beowulf more by granting him physical rewards and fame, but on a human level rather than a hero level. Hrothgar is also portrayed as an alcoholic and unfaithful to his wife. Since Hrothgar does not give Beowulf his advice on how to act with the pride and glory, Beowulf ends up making the same mistakes Hrothgar made and continuing the cycle of of the curse.
ReplyDeleteReflect on the movie Beowulf vs. the Epic of Beowulf. If no particular thoughts come to mind, answer my questions. Did you prefer one over the other? What do you think was the message in each version? Why do you think so many changes were made in the movie?
ReplyDeleteI prefer the poem over the movie because I can choose to interpret the story the way I thought it to be. The poem was more about the theme of heroism and Anglo-saxon culture. The movie was more about the blood and gore infused with the rush of action-packed adrenaline. I think so many changes were made in the movie because the vision of the story needs to be predetermined by the director. The audience does not have the time to analyze content during a movie, and thus the director must analyze the story for the audience. Sometimes the director's vision of the story is not consistent with the true intent of the story's author.
The movie, Beowulf was very different from the original Epic. For instance, the movie was in Hollywood mode, where aspects of the story were focused through entertainment and also altered to make it more interesting. For instance, the wife of Hrothgar didn't have an important role in the Epic; however, the film focused on her more than the Epic did. Also, Hrothgar's son was revealed to be Grendel, as he slept with Grendel's mother. Another example is when Beowulf doesn't kill Grendel's mother, instead he sleeps with her and the dragon that he fights later on is his son. In the Epic, Beowulf is portrayed as a hero without any flaws, but in the movie he is shown to have weaknesses as he succumbs to his temptations as he sleeps with the enemy. Overall, I think the movie was much more exciting than the Epic, as it was made more entertaining and interesting even though the plot had changed.
ReplyDeleteThe movie and the epic were very different, and I felt that the movie's changes, while probably disturbing and super weird, may have brought up good points to think about. Beowulf in the Epic is portrayed as a flawless hero, and the movie portrays him more realistically. He is vulnerable to Grendel's mother's beauty, which was never described in the book. I think even though the whole change about Grendel's mother in the movie is an unnecessary addition to the Epic, it has an interesting theme, in my opinion. Maybe Grendel's beautiful mother is added into the movie to have a new theme: appearance versus reality. Grendel's mom is a beautiful being that men lust after. However, she is really a monster and the love child always turns out to be a monster. Thus showing that her beauty is deceiving, and that one's sinful desire can lead to the downfall of the whole society.
ReplyDeleteI probably would have preferred the movie just cause it was a lot easier to follow along.
I agree! Having Grendel's mother become a temptation for this paragon to seek does add a different dimension to the tale of Beowulf. It also shows a more human aspect to Beowulf, not just the demigod-like hero that he was portrayed as in the epic.
DeleteI totally agree with what you said! Many of the points in the movie were more modern and realistic, and modern day society may be able to relate to the movie better than the book. I also agree with the theme you mentioned, that temptation can lead to downfall and that appearance can be deceiving.
DeleteThe film and the epic were so different I feel like there were more differences than similarities and I’m not sure how the movie followed the epic at all. I think they should have said the movie was “loosely based” on the epic. In the movie there was a lot more nudity that was not really necessary. However, I did find the movie somewhat humorous at times. I was surprised about Angelina Jolie and the fact that the men had to sleep with her to escape her. I am questioning the PG-13 rating… I didn’t like the way Grendel looked, I thought it would be more like the videos we saw before we read the epic. Overall, I thought the epic was better than the movie.
ReplyDeleteI agree that the movie went to far away from the epic to really be the same story! Grendel looked so different than I imagined him it took me a minute to change my perception of him. I see what you mean about the whole Grendel's mother story line, I would never had thought to add even more conflict to a story that already has three major fight scenes.
DeleteAll movie adaptations change the story up from the original novels though, so it's kind of expected that there would be differences, whether obvious or minor ones, between the epic and the movie.
DeleteThe movie was probably focusing more on the theatrical, dramatic aspect of the plot. I found the scene where Beowulf decides to fight sans clothing to be pretty awkward and completely unnecessary.
DeleteAlthough the movie seemed ridiculous at times, in my opinion it was more entertaining and engaging than the epic poem. The movie Beowulf and the epic Beowulf have many clear differences, but the most interesting is the addition of a love interest and sexual desire in the movie. The love interest component between Beowulf and Wealtheow, Ursula, and Grendel’s mom adds some depth to the plot and the characters, and overall makes the story line more intriguing. In the movie, Beowulf has another motivation for success besides glory and proving his strength: love. Beowulf’s sexual desire also gives him some more diverse characterization besides the typical courageous and strong traits. In fact, the movie actually portrays a weakness in Beowulf when he succumbs to Grendel’s mothers’ temptation; much different from the epic where Beowulf is portrayed as having limitless strength and being practically untouchable by all evil. A character with flaws, which the viewer can often relate too, is often more attractive than a seemingly all-powerful character.
ReplyDeleteOverall, the poem seems very predictable; Beowulf is brave, kills all the beasts, dies honorably in battle, and hands the crown to another brave soldier. The movie, on the other hand, contains twists and unexpected connections between characters that captivate the viewer.
I completely agree. The film adaptation made it more interesting and in depth, yet also ended up changing the meaning of a hero. Giving Beowulf more flaws and more of a realistic character, made the movie more intriguing than the poem. The love interests definitely adds more to the story, and the characters/women involved in them.
DeleteI totally agree. I think the movie was so much more capturing and it really drew people in. I noticed how our class was laughing more and really watching the movie and more drawn in than in the epic poem because it was a little more relatable.
DeleteI personally preferred the epic of Beowulf to the movie. The epic was presented in a more grandiose manner while the movie was slightly underwhelming and somewhat absurd. Though, having read the epic before watching the movie may have had an impact on which I thought was better. The original Epic's message was about fate vs. God, whereas the message of the movie was about temptation. I think that the movie was made the way it was is because the original Epic would not have fared as well as the animated version.
ReplyDeleteSo, in the movie, there are a lot of differences from the book. Such as Grendel's mom, she isn't an old hag-but a pretty women. She slept with Hrothgar and their son is Grendel. Next, she slept with Beowulf and their son is a dragon. However, in the book, grendel's mom is a old hag. Beowulf kills Grendel's mom and she didn't sleep with anyone. And Grendel isn't Hrothgar's son, and the dragon isn't Beowulf's son. I liked both the movie and the book, but if I was to choose, I would choose the movie because it is a lot of entertaining than the book.
ReplyDeleteI would definitely agree with you, there are a lot of differences in the book than the movie. I thought that was interesting how the mother wasn't an old hag but a beautiful woman. A woman so beautiful that he couldn't resist the temptation of sleeping with her without considering the consequences. I also agree with you that the movie was much more entertaining than the book.
DeleteI think that I liked the poem version of the epic much better in comparison to the movie, because the movie tried to hard to gain an audience. Through the continuous indecent exposure of Beowulf and certain female characters within the movie, the producers tried to appeal to the audiences sexual desires rather than focus on what happened in the book. Even though the movie was relatively close to what was written in the poem, major changes to the plot and objectifying certain characters in the movie made it more distasteful in comparison to the poem. For the most part, the movie remained relatively close to the plot of the poem. The most major change to the story is that the mother of Grendel survives and bears the dragon as a son of Beowulf. I feel as though Grendel's mother served no other purpose than to attract people to sell the movie. I feel like the producers did not make Grendel's mother belong in the movie. Also there were many lapses in logic, for example, if one cannot reach an area with a dagger in his hand, how is he expected to be able to reach it with just the length of his arm? Anyhow, I believe that the producers really could have done a better job, but all-in-all not bad. I believe most of the changes which were made to the poem were to try and attract viewers. The producers may have thought that simply telling the tale as it was wasn't exciting enough, thus they decided to twist it a little.
ReplyDeleteYeah, I will have to agree with you that I preferred the poem version of Beowulf over the movie version of Beowulf. It does seem like the sexualization of the characters was to help rake in a bit more cash for the movie. I thought that the movie was quite different compared to the poem though, as it was a major plot twist for me that Grendel's mother was not slain and that the dragon that terrorizes Heorot was their son. The change in plot was definitely interesting though, as it offered a different point of view to the poem I guess. As such, the movie itself with all of the animations was, like you said, not too bad. However, accuracy-wise, I would have to say that the two versions are very much different.
DeleteThe movie and the epic were very interesting pieces of work. Something that I noticed About both of them where that they shared a similar yet different look on Beowulf. Throughout the epic, Beowulf often boasted which made his character which made his character portrayed as strong, brave, and courageous hero, while the movie version didn't quite describe his character as well of the book. The movie was quite entertaining to watch because of the frequent violence and different plot twists that the book didn't include, but I would have to say that the epic was much better than the movie because to me, Beowulf has such a vivid description for himself which made me think of him as a very courageous hero Plus the fighting scenes and the plot we're perfectly described as if I could just picture it in my mind. I quite enjoyed the movie because it let off a little humor and the violence was very vivid as well . -Maddie Lopez
ReplyDeleteI agree I thought the fighting scenes were really entertaining (and a little bit awkward) and I also agree with the fact that Beowulf was portrayed differently in the movie than he was in the poem.
DeleteThe movie, despite being nothing like the poem, added a lot of factors in order to make it more interesting to the viewer. While both of the adaptions are interesting in their own way, the relationships between the characters were changed in the movie quite drastically. The story seemed to focus more on the adventures and courageous acts of Beowulf, while the movie portrayed him as 'more human' with flaws- such as his inability to kill Grendel's mother. I did not expect Grendel to look the way he did at all based on his description in the epic. Also I found the movie to be a lot better than I expected since it managed to keep my attention almost the entire time.
ReplyDeleteThe movie was definitely more wild and a lot more action packed than the epic. From the beginning, the movie portrays the Anglo Saxons to be very vulgar people. Hrothgar decides that it's appropriate to take off all his clothes in the mead hall. Everyone is drinking, chanting, and having a merry time. However, the mead hall environment in the epic seems to be much more contained, with people sitting down and having civilized banter. I liked how the movie portrayed the fight against the dragon. It had a lot more action and suspense than the epic, especially when Beowulf's women were in danger. The part where Beowulf cuts his arm to kill the dragon was a creative plot twist, and it makes him more of a hero than in the epic. This is because he chose to take his life for the sake of others instead of being wounded by the dragon. Overall, watching the movie was an interesting experience.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteAfter watching this film and reading some of Beowulf I noticed a massive difference in both stories. First off the film's story is different from the poem because in the poem Beowulf slays Grendel and his mother and doesn't fall victim to any of their tricks. Also the dragon in the poem is not a result of Beowulf but just a dragon who roams the land in search of his gold that was stolen from him. In the movie Grendel's mother is a beautiful woman who sleeps with Beowulf to give him power and to let her live. It seems that the movie revolves around the idea of temptation and the consequences of giving into it as for Beowulf the poem the theme is very heroic. Another I found interesting about the film was the way that they depicted Hrothgar and his people, in the poem I felt that they were a little noble as for the film they were extremely barbaric and rough people as the king would drink from his glass while spilling all over his body. Personally I enjoyed the film more than the poem because I found it extremely entertaining other than the sexual tension in the movie and I liked the idea of temptation and the consequences of it.
ReplyDeleteNicholas Alva
The movie was very different than the movie, so much so that it was even hard to follow sometimes. I missed the middle portion because I was sick, and I was so surprised with all the changes I missed. I can't believe that the directors didn't find this epic poem dramatic enough, so they had to add even more drama. The fact that Grendel's mother has been seducing all the kings for this kingdom really changes the moral of the story, completely changing the plot. Sometimes I thought it was over the top especially when Beowulf cut his armpit to make his arm longer.
ReplyDeleteThe movie was obviously really different from the book, and it's probably because of the different entertainment value we have now. If the movie was as the epic was written, then the main character wouldn't be seen as flawed enough. In the movie, he had a flaw/fault, and it eventually came back to bite him in the end. He didn't kill Grendel's mother, which was part his undoing, and it also changed his character and heroism. In the epic, he killed Grendel's mother, and his only flaw was that he bragged and thought too much of himself, yet those are qualities of heroes in epics. With his faults in the movie, he isn't able to be the perfect hero of normal epics, but that's what is suppose to make it more interesting and realistic. They involved other story plots, and gave more depth to all the characters as well. The queen had her own opinions and thoughts, and Grendel's mom was more scheming, and was portrayed to fit her new character. This made the story seem less sexist than compared to all the complaints I've heard about the epic. Also, Hrothgar's faults seemed larger, and Grendel seemed like he was in more torturer than envy. In the end, the dragon even turned out to be Beowulf's son. There were a lot of different symbols, character development and background added to the movie that made it a little bit more like modern day heuristic.
ReplyDeleteI agree with your point that the changes were most likely made for entertainment purposes. I think the changes made to Beowulf to make him more flawed make it easier for the audience to relate to him, making them more likely to find the movie interesting/entertaining. I also agree with your point that movie seems to be less sexist than the novel in certain ways. In the movie, the female characters tend to play a larger roll and they are present throughout. In the novel however, female characters are given little attention and don’t often appear (except Grendel’s mother).
DeleteWell, I didn't think the movie and the Epic could be so different. One notable change includes the modification of what the characters looked like (or were wearing). Beowulf, in the movie, took of all his clothes and went naked. The movie also emphasized Beowulf's love for Wealhtheow and the subsequent temptation to follow. Basically, I think the movie tried to be more sensual for the audience, perhaps up to an unnecessary amount as it corrupted some of Beowulf's' traits like being honorable. I was also a bit disappointed that the movie did not reflect the battle against Grendel in the mead-hall very accurately. Towards the end, Beowulf needed the metal chain and door to rip off Grendel's arm instead of just using his own brute strength. I think this took away even more from Beowulf's characteristics because it portrays him as less heroic, but more realistic. Lastly, another main difference was Beowulf being seduced by Grendel's mother and the subsequent curse that was placed upon him. This further undermined Beowulf's integrity as he was unable to resist the temptation to fall in love with Grendel's mother. This leads to the birth of a son, who later is the dragon that terrorizes Heorot. Basically, when Beowulf is unable to resist the temptation, practically every event that happens afterward is a departure from what happened in the Epic. These very obvious differences ranged from Hrothgar's suicide to the dragon trying to kill Wealhtheow and Ursula. Overall, the movie had degraded Beowulf's heroic qualities so that unlike the Epic in which he was seen as honorable and heroic, his new qualities would be something along the lines of being a cheater and being fallible. In terms of the movie relating to the Epic, I would say that they're quite different, but at least the movie decided to go on a completely different path, which did bring in some excitement from the uniqueness of the plot. I still prefer the Epic version though, as I think it makes more sense—that last scene where Wiglaf and Grendel's mother stare at each other was just plain weird.
ReplyDeleteI also recognized a lot of the differences in the movie, and I think they really changed the epic's messages. Personally, I thought the movie was somewhat exciting but obviously much different. For example, rather than going back to the Geats after slaying Grendel and Grendel's mother, he stays in the Danes, which is a huge plot twist. Also, the fact that Grendel's mother was not killed really surprised me.
DeletePersonally, I thought the film's degradation of Beowulf's heroic qualities only added to the modern audience's respect towards him. His ability to rise from his mistakes and do the right thing in the end is somewhat inspirational and succeeds in creating a connection with the audience.
DeleteI think the movie was very clearly different from the book. I preferred the movie to the book because I found it more compelling and easier to get interested in. I found the epic poem very difficult to picture. I also think I liked the movie better because it was very light-hearted and the humorous parts were conveyed well whereas the places where jokes or sarcastic remarks were made in the poem were hard to grasp. I think the most surprising change was Beowulf sleeping with Grendel's mother. I don't really think anyone saw that coming. It was kind of confusing but I felt like that was done as a part of Hollywood's notion that people like movies with sex better. It was freaky but I guess that's what people like. Another change I noticed was that in the epic poem, Beowulf returns to the Geats but in the movie, he stays and becomes king. I also found it really cool to see the realization of both characters (Hrothgar and Beowulf) when they realized that Grendel and the dragon were their sons, respectively. I think the changes were made because what present day movie goers want to see is something with lust and love and thrill. People don't want to see a movie set in "pre-historic" times just for fun, at least the people I know don't.
ReplyDeleteI also think the movie was much more interesting to watch and did a great job in telling the story in a humorous fashion. Although they changed the plot quite a bit, it was definitely necessary to fit today's audience. If someone were to invite me to watch a movie or documentary based on an ancient piece of literature, I would most likely decline. However, this adaption did a great job in appealing to the current audience. Plus, it's hard to go wrong with Angelina Jolie.
DeleteMovie adaptations of novels, for the most part, skew the story in order to captivate the audiences. In the movie, Beowulf, the story is completely changed. Most of the events still occur, such as the slaying of Grendel and the dragon, but the most of the characters seem like new characters. In the poem, Beowulf did not have sexual attraction to Wealthow, nor did he have sex with Grendel's mother and father the dragon. Hrothgar didn't father Grendel either. All of these changes were made into the movie adaptation in order to do one thing, appeal to the general public. Although very different from the poem, quite a few people actually enjoyed the movie. It was definitely was different from the poem, but if none of us had read the poem, we would have viewed the movie as truth. The general movie-goer probably hasn't read the poem, which is why the director has the opportunity to change up the story in hopes of making it more appealing to the general public. Although I did laugh through out the entire movie, it was due to the eye-cringing scenes. Sure it was a complete departure from the epic, but in its own right, it still was an entertaining movie.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteFar from being disjointed, such as the movie was, the form of the poem, with its Anglo-Saxon half-line metre emphasised by alliteration, clearly reflected it’s Anglo-Saxon roots and background, managing to both capture and relay ideals and values of the time era. The movie contrasts greatly, taking innovative routes and capturing a different storyline than the original.
ReplyDeleteA few key differences that I found the most apparent: Grendel's mother is never described as covered in gold and looking like Angelina Jolie. She and Grendel are both descendants of Cain, who represented pure evil. Because Beowulf is an Anglo-Saxon piece of literature, it is imperative that the societal beliefs of loyalty and valor be reflected in the poem. Obviously, the movie did not uphold this particular view.
Hrothgar is not portrayed as a man who has many lovers aside from his wife in the poem. For that matter, neither is Beowulf when he becomes King. Both men are respected and considered honorable men who are faithful to their wives. Perhaps this was not true for real-life Kings, but in the poem both men are portrayed as faithful and loyal; not only to their wives, but also to the men who have pledged their lives to these Kings.
I agree with your realizations with the differences between the two pieces but do you think it was necessary for the producer of the movie to make changes such as these? In addition do you think these changes made the movie slightly better than the book for bringing up real problems and flaws characters might have instead of treating them like flawless characters?
DeleteAt first, I did not understand what was going on in the movie because I had gotten to understand the book really well. There were a lot of changes that really changed the story, so i definitely preferred the book to the movie. I think the changes in the movie does not allow the viewer to fully capture the messages from the book. Some of the scenes in my opinion made no sense at all. I did not understand why the plot of the epic was changed completely in the movie. For example, in the movie, Beowulf did not even kill Grendel's mother, which changed much of the ending as a result.
ReplyDeleteI agree with you Richard. Many of the subplots in the movie feel out of place and forced having read the book. Personally I found the cliffhanger at the end very irritating because of how definitively the epic ends. While the movie is meant to be very open to interpretation with its many symbolisms and themes, i feel that it also deviates just a little too far from the original story to be fully enjoyed by lovers and enthusiasts of the original epic.
DeleteI agree with you Richard. I felt that the movie producers just wanted to introduce a new twist to the movie to make the movie seem more enticing. however the plot twists completely changed the story line introduced in the epic, which to me ruined the experience.
DeleteThe movie was ridiculous and added a whole bunch of unnecessary, theatrical, plot twists to an otherwise tolerable plot. I did enjoy the emphasis on Beowulf's flaws, like when he succumbs to Grendel's (gorgeous) mother, and his ego getting the best of him, and his flaws weren't mentioned much throughout the book. It gives him a more humanistic persona whereas the book portrays him as an almost supernatural being with godly strength. One major difference is that Beowulf kills Grendel's mother at Mere, but in the movie, Grendel's mother never dies, seduces Beowulf, and has this awkward staring contest with Wiglaf at the end. I was also really slow and didn't realize until Ms. Ene had told us that the dragon/golden dude was Beowulf's son. Oops. I also wasn't too thrilled about Grendel; I think his hideousness will definitely give me nightmares. Surprisingly, I preferred the movie to the poem because despite the overall ridiculousness of the movie, it was pretty entertaining to see the plot unravel in a way where each scene would surprise you. You never really see any of it coming.
ReplyDeleteI think that the movie was pretty different from the epic in general. There were lots of significant changes that changed the entire plot line drastically. Some of it was confusing at first, because we had read the novel first, but I thought that some parts of it were entertaining/interesting. I think that many changes were made to the movie in order to make it more "Hollywood-like", so it would have a more "exciting" plot line and attract more people to watch it, since most of the people who watch it probably have not read the epic. I also thought that the movie was easier to get immersed in, than the book and I had a hard time picturing scenes in my head just from reading the book. I think the message in the movie version was that people shouldn't succumb to greed. Because Beowulf succumbed to Grendel's mother's offer, his greed had a reverse effect and ended up killing him.
ReplyDeleteHey Melody, I agree with your comments on how the movie had a changed plot in order to make the film more exciting, and I believe it achieved that goal. Of course, perhaps the themes and messages may have been altered, but the general tone that Beowulf was a mighty warrior capable of defeating huge monsters stands true, albeit a little tainted after his succumbing to Grendel's mother.
DeleteThe epic told the story of a God-like mortal who was courageous and could do no harm. On the other hand, the film told the story of an ordinary man who isn't very noble and has major flaws. Thus, the film and epic send two very different messages to their audiences. One thing to consider is the possibility that, to Anglo-Saxons, war was a large aspect of life, which is why their audience thrived on stories of heroes who could save the day. In modern day culture, we like to see stories about worldly problems and basic human conflict, which obviously involves love. This is where the shift from Grendel's mother comes in. In the epic, she was portrayed as devilish and almost like a deranged widow. The modern day adaptation saw the glimpse of human in her when she showed sorrow for the loss of her son, and decided to run with it, attempting to make her as human and capable of flaws as possible.
ReplyDeleteThough the two versions have the same characters, the themes are much more different. In the epic, the Heroic Code is emphasized, with Beowulf incapable of any wrong, while the film values human flaws, which is why they film his mistakes and bad decisions. Also, while the epic revolved around religion, the modern day film made close to no reference to it, showing a shift in the audience's belief in fate vs God's will.
Overall, though the two versions are like apples and oranges and therefore impossible to compare, I think the film version was a successfully creative take to the epic!
The movie adaption of the epic was very different from the epic itself. The most apparent being the entire catastrophe known as Grendel's mother and the plot change caused by her appearance. However, what struck me as the most interesting change was the King Hrothgar's suicide. Since the book did not have the king commit suicide and the movie does not explain why he does so, it is interesting to analyze his potential motives. Perhaps it was the idea that Beowulf would not make an authoritative leader due to his lack of self control, or maybe it was the fact that he would have to give up his wife and queen to someone else.
ReplyDeleteSuch thoughts occurred to me when I originally watched the movie. However, upon re-watching the clip with the king's speech, I have noticed that there were peculiar pauses that took place before he announces that he does not have any heirs. He even restates it with a different wording,"I have no heir...I have no sons", as if Upon doing so, his facial expression displays one as if he were remembering something. This leads me to believe that the movie displayed Grendel as his son and he had had sexual intercourse with Grendel's mother.
In addition, prior to announcing the new king, Hrothgar states that he is aware Grendel's mother "is no hag". This statement further confirms Hrothgar's sexual history with the mother. Knowing that any human that mates with Angelina Jolie will produce demon children (just ask Brad Pitt why he doesn't have biological children with her -Rags), evident by the dragon Beowulf produces in the movie, it is of no surprise that a demon that lives near Hrothgar could be a child of the king himself.
Mel you are a homie. Thank you for acknowledging my comedic genius when no one else did :'(
DeleteI definitely agree that the movie adaptation of the epic hardly resembled the original writing. Whether that's good or bad is clearly debatable. Like you, though, my interest was piqued by the mystery surrounding Hrothgar's connection to how Grendel came to be. And when finally the dragon turned back into the demon man for a split second on the beach before he was washed back into the sea, making the connection between the dragon and Beowulf was only one step further. I thought this really added to the film, and was a major reason why I enjoyed it.
I generally preferred the book Beowulf to the movie because the book was more believable. In the book, Beowulf is a great hero who stops at no lengths to rid the world of evil creatures, including Grendel, Grendel’s mother, and the dragon. However, in the movie, Grendel’s mother seduces Beowulf in attempt to keep him from killing her. If Beowulf were the true hero he was in the epic, he would not have strayed from his intentions over an event like this. I think the message emphasized in the epic was the hero’s journey and the ideal characteristics of a hero. For example, the novel included many events in which Beowulf displayed his courage and boasted about his achievements. However, in the movie, they show Beowulf as a much more flawed human being who gives in to temptation. The movie shows his son as a reminder of one of the numerous mistakes he has made. I think the main message in the movie was to emphasize the fact that Beowulf is a human, and like others, he makes mistakes as well. Overall, I think the main reason for the changes made to the novel, including the plot twists and added conflict, was to make it more entertaining for the public.
ReplyDeleteAs it often is in movie adaptations of literature, the plot of Beowulf was changed in order to make the movie more appealing to the general audience. While I still do prefer the epic poem to the movie, I think that the creators of the film did an overall good job portraying Beowulf as an epic, even if there were numerous changes. For example, instead of having Beowulf defeat Grendel's mom, and then finally a dragon, the two battles were someone merged into one. Perhaps it was better that this was what happened in the movie because the movie may have been a little repetitive if it were only Beowulf fighting and fighting and winning and celebrating, which brings out some of the different aspects of the messages of each respective media. In the epic poem, Beowulf time and time again defeats his adversaries and survives to celebrate, with the exception of the final dragon. Nevertheless, Beowulf is almost godlike. In the movie, Beowulf was seen as more of a human, succumbing to Grendel's mother's sly tactics. The two versions of Beowulf's story each have their own feel to it, and while much was changed in the movie format, it can't be said that the movie was terrible.
ReplyDeleteWere the filmmakers feeling ok when they made this movie? We all have our reasons for watching movies. But sometimes, the filmmakers ignore the artistic process in favor of CGI effects and apparently attractive characters. This is apparently the case in Beowulf. The characters were presented as one-dimensional, boring, monotone characters. In the book, however, we can see layers to characters, especially in Beowulf's. We all have different ideas of how a book should be turned into a film. It is thus understandable if the film was made differently than what a viewer would think. However, that does not excuse the fact that the movie makes completely different changes than the book presented. Didn't Grendel's mother die in the book? So, why was she not only not dead in the movie, but presented as an attractive seductive woman to not only Beowulf, but Wiglaf. I felt Angelina Jolie, who played Grendel’s mother, was only brought in as a marketing/advertising ploy. Her character is reduced to nothing but seducing men and acting as a weird snake (slithering on floor). For a movie that has a running time of almost 2 hours, it is strange that the movie felt so slow, until we get to the gory fights. WHY WERE THE FIGHTS SO BLOODY? It was unnecessary and added nothing to the plot. Literally, in one scene, we see Beowulf holding the dragon’s heart in his hand. HOW DID Beowulf not die after falling off the cliff? There are just so many things that needs to be explained by the filmmakers. Movies can become beautiful pieces of artistic expression, but apparently the filmmakers did not read that handbook. They turned a classic epic poem into a bloody, gory, boring film. Movies are a way for some people to escape reality, but I wanted to escape from watching it. The best movies are often the simplest and the most realistic, and those that surprises us from its realism. However, Beowulf did none of these, except surprise because I was shocked by the plot changes and all the bloody fight scenes. That is not the best kind of surprise. I do not mean to be harsh, but all I remember from the movie is Beowulf’s abs and that dragon heart. If the only thing you clearly remember is Beowulf’s abs, then I think that says a lot of the movie that I watched.
ReplyDeleteAfter reading your post I have to agree with you, there are many new ideas introduced by the movie that doesn't make any sense. Going back to what you said about Beowulf fighting the dragon. How could one possibly cut his own arm off but still be able to have the might to swing his body twice into the dragon, grab the dragon's heart, and let out a scream before dying? However, could it be because the movie was made this way because Beowulf itself is not 100% a true story? Beowulf is an epic poem constructed back in the 700 A.D. and it was based off a possible event in Denmark. Could dragons and strange looking creations like Grendel really be real?
DeleteIn general movies tend to draw my attention more than epic poems. However in this case I would have to say I enjoyed the epic more. There was just something about how it was composed that made Beowulf seem so much more realistic. I don't know if part of the reason is because the movie itself was very computer animated?
ReplyDeleteI have to say though, the movie caught my eye in a different way. While the epic was more realistic, I thought the movie was more interesting due to the change in the plot. If the movie had Beowulf defeat Grendel's mom it would have made the movie too repetitive. I think by having Beowulf "seduced" by Grendel’s mom, it created a message/ lesson to the viewers. Be careful for what you wish for, because it may come back to haunt you.
I thought that the movie was a little too different from the book. All the character got jumbled together, it was as if someone sat there with checklist of "Hollywood cliches" that needed to be inserted into the movie and just tried to mark off every single box. Without reading the original story, it might have been a pretty intriguing movie but I think its very hard compare the two because so much plot was added it was practically a completely different story. And the characters turn out quite differently too I think. However the soundtrack was pretty cool. Much appreciated.
ReplyDeleteI totally agree with the cliches and plot differences. It started turning absurd the moment Beowulf started eyeing Hrothgar's wife.
DeleteThe epic focuses on portraying Beowulf as a flawless being in an effort to impart the values of the warrior code and Christianity. The movie paints Beowulf merely as a man with exceptional strength who suffers from major flaws. I think some of the changes were made to appeal to a modern audience. While an Anglo-Saxon audience may have enjoyed tales of superhuman feats executed by an embodiment of the warrior ideals, modern audiences could possibly have found a faithful movie version of the epic to be somewhat trite.
ReplyDeleteThe movie was so different from the poem. The movie producers kept the major characters, of course, but they made so many significant changes to the story. There were some changes that spiced up the movie but did not alter the plotline--for example, Grendel was covered in this blue fire, and when he was killed, Beowulf shut the door on his arm instead of ripping it off himself. However, there were other changes that were so typical of romance-based Hollywood: Beowulf and King Hrothgar's queen get married, Beowulf has a child with Grendel's mother, who is so much more attractive than the monster the poem describes her as; and the child from that encounter becomes the dragon that Beowulf faces in the final battle. These plot twists did make the movie more interesting, but at the cost of the integrity of the story and character development.
ReplyDeleteI think I'm going to have to play the devil's advocate and say I actually preferred the movie to the epic poem. When we first started this unit - before we had read any of the epic - we were told the tale was of a hero slaying demons and fighting dragons. I understandably began to get excited for Beowulf, ready for a tale of a man transforming into a hero. But that's where my expectations exceeded reality. In the poem, Beowulf hardly undergoes any transformations; he remains this static, flawless character, whose motives are never selfish and actions are always glorious. I found that while reading the poem, I felt no connection to the character besides recognition that he was courageous and brave and strong and whatever other good Anglo-Saxon qualities he of course possessed. I felt that what Beowulf lacked was that sense of humanity and weakness that all heroes carry, and most notably, a fatal flaw.
ReplyDeleteThe movie, on the other hand, displayed a different side to the character. He wasn't portrayed as the perfect, borderline-Godly warrior he was in the poem; he had flaws and weaknesses and recognized them as such. Although the movie did throw in a lot of unnecessary gore and plot details, I'd say it was overall a much more entertaining and realistic version. I thoroughly enjoyed the inferred plot twist to Grendel being the demon lovechild between Hrothgar and Angelina, and I loved it even more so when we later found out that Beowulf had fallen down the same path. It was interesting to see how Beowulf, this supposed supreme and mighty being, was as vulnerable to desire and lust as regular humans, and I think that in adding character developments like that, the writers of the movie made the film as a whole, better.
Also shoutout to Mel for actually laughing at my Brangelina joke in class today. (Refer to his comment to experience it secondhand).
I agree with the Rags on this one, I feel like I enjoyed the movie better than the poem which from what I can tell he did too. It was funny and a lot more enjoyable that the poem
DeleteI feel like the movie was very different from the poem, but at the same time it was a lot more enjoyable than the poem. Both the movie and the poem both tried to portray the same themes and important parts but in different ways, especially the movie. It made it in a way that it was easy accessible and enjoyable for everyone unlike the poem, which is why I personally enjoyed the book more than the poem. Some parts that stood out to me were Angelina Jolie and all of the funny jokes in the movie, unlike the poem.
ReplyDeleteThe movie came as a surprise to me as it was very different from the poem we read. In the movie we find out that Hrothgar is the father of Grendel, and that Beowulf is the father of the dragon. The poem does not mention either of these things, however the movie focused most of the plot on this idea. I think the movie and the poem both tries to portray the themes of loyalty, courage, reputation, and revenge, but just in a different way. The movie wanted to spice things up with plot twists, while Beowulf the poem stuck to its context more.
ReplyDeleteI agree Lunxi, I really think that the movie came as a surprise with the changes in the plot. While they were trying to make it more appealing to casual viewers they missed out on a lot of details which make it more realistic.
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteLike many people have already said, the movie and the epic are very different, but I don't believe this is a bad thing. Often people read a book that they like, and when they discover that a movie is going to be made about it they immediately become excited only to be disappointed by the movie because of their high expectations for it to be exactly like the book. In most cases, movie directors purposefully do not make a movie exactly like a book otherwise it would be boring or redundant. So of course in the case of Beowulf the producer did not make the epic and the movie exactly the same and that is understandable. Now whether the movie was good or not is another question. I personally thought that it was very entertaining but in many cases I noticed plot flaws and points in the movie where I was saying to myself, "that is not realistic" despite the fact that it is a movie. In addition, I agree with other people who have said that the movie more accurately depicts Beowulf, as a hero, but susceptible to harm, unlike the book which portrays him as an invulnerable god. To sum up, I do like the movie for it's entertainment purposes but I think in the end the book is the better of the two.
ReplyDeleteThe Movie and the Book are very different. The Book portrays Beowulf as a brave courageous hero the entire way through. But the Movie portrays Beowulf as a lier and a fake hero. In the movie Beowulf have to save his kingdom because of his own mistakes and failures of the past which is completely inaccurate because in the book he never really made any mistakes and only saved the people from monsters.
ReplyDeleteIdk about being a liar but he is still quite the hero
DeleteI agree with that. He was portrayed very differently in the book than in the movie. It was so different that people would not be able to recognize Beowulf's character in the book if they had seen the movie first.
DeleteThe Movie and the Book are very different. The Book portrays Beowulf as a brave courageous hero the entire way through. But the Movie portrays Beowulf as a lier and a fake hero. In the movie Beowulf have to save his kingdom because of his own mistakes and failures of the past which is completely inaccurate because in the book he never really made any mistakes and only saved the people from monsters.
ReplyDeleteI think that the movie was so far removed from the original epic that it might as well have been named something completely different and stood on its own. The movie put much more emphasis on romance by creating at least three that were not even implied in the poem. Although, the sexualization of the epic was most likely done to appeal to a wider audience, I believe that they should have trusted in the greatness of the epic, as it is still being read in classrooms across the world today, to attract a wide audience. That being said, I think if I did not associate the movie with the epic, I may have found it a lot less cringe-worthy. However, since all I could focus on while watching it was the strange differences, I was not able to appreciate the movie on its own.
ReplyDeleteI think the movie would have been a lot more interesting if it wasn't associated with Beowulf as well! I felt that Wiglaf had a limited role in the movie because his role in the poem was limited.
DeleteThe movie was entirely different from the epic. It took all of the exciting moments from the poem and forced them into a Hollywood plot, leaving all the back story or intricacies of the original story.
ReplyDeleteThere were a lot of changes in the movie because there really isn't a complete version of the epic because much of it is destroyed. And they had to make it for attractive to the audience
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThere were a lot of differences between the movie and the poem itself. The movie was modified to be more interesting and to attract more viewers. In the movie, there was connection created between Beowulf and Wealtheow that did not exist at all in the poem itself. Beowulf also killed Grendel's mother, whereas in the movie it showed that he fell under her temptation. I actually liked the poem better because I feel that there was more meaning in it. Although the way that the movie portrayed Grendel as Hrothgar's son and the dragon as Beowulf's son was very interesting and actually made the movie a little better.
ReplyDeleteI actually preferred the movie over the book because I felt that it was less boring. I think the message expressed in the movie, "everyone has their flaws" was more relatable than the poem's theme of heroism and good vs. evil. I think the movie made changes to the poem in order to make it more interesting. I feel that very little people nowadays enjoys watching perfect heroes like the Beowulf in the poem; tragic heroes are more common now to make them seem more realistic.
ReplyDeleteI like how you mentioned and related the movie to the them of imperfection! I agree with you that the movie is much more relatable than the actual poem and that's probably what the movie was intended to do. Now, people seem to be stressing the idea that nobody is perfect and everyone has their own flaws. Even the bravest and most courageous, like Beowulf, has his flaws. I think that's part of what makes the movie more interesting and with the altered plot, more enjoyable to watch.
DeleteI thought that the movie was over dramatized in order to make it more attractive from the poem. The plot line was almost entirely altered with Grendel's mom and Beowulf having a child who turns out to be dragon, whom he also kills. A lot of the intricacies were also left out, with the dragon not stealing treasure and etc. It also was not what I visually thought the poem looked like in my mind, and missed out on a lot of necessary themes. The message of Beowulf as a hero was kept though, but not so much stress on his loyalty as the poem did.
ReplyDeleteIt's interesting how the movie included several plot twists, which made it more interesting and appealing to the audience. However, I think those additional elements did not accurately portray the true meaning and themes of the actual poem. In the poem, it portrayed Beowulf as a courageous and perfect hero. But in the movie, it emphasized his flaws and failures. Overall, the movie was enjoyable and provided a different perspective of Beowulf.
ReplyDeleteI agree with you that the movie showed more of Beowulf's flaws, as it proves that Beowulf is not as perfect as the poem suggests. In addition, I like how you mentioned that the plot twists made the movie more enjoyable. Of course, the story was changed a lot, but they actually made the movie more interesting.
DeleteI feel like the movie wanted to depict the fact that all people, even heroes, have flaws. Although Beowulf does perform heroic deeds, he is shown to exaggerate or lie, such as when he boasts about the sea monsters and when he does not kill Grendel's mother. By taking this angle, the movie makes its audience feel like the actual poem, which is supposedly told by bards throughout Europe, is a censored version, and does not talk about Beowulf's flaws. However, I still thought the movie was good.
ReplyDeleteThe movie portrayed Beowulf much differently than the epic did. In the epic, Beowulf was a brave, fearless hero with no flaws. In the movie, Beowulf made major mistakes, which in turn, affected his whole kingdom. I think the movie depicted Beowulf as flawed so that he could be more relatable to the audience, more human. Both were entertaining and offered different outlooks on Beowulf's character.
ReplyDeleteLike many other stories, the book/poem seems to appeal more to people than the movie. Personally, the storyline for the peom makes a lot more sense than the movie. I understand that it was meant for entertainment purposes, however, I found it unrealistic and weird. The book wasn't exciting on its own, but it made more sense than the movie.
ReplyDeleteI don't know if this film can be counted as the Beowulf "movie". There were so many differences starting with Grendel's mother. In the epic, Grendel's mother is killed by Beowulf, but in the movie Grendel's mother slept with Beowulf and had a child, which turned out to be the dragon. Also Beowulf isn't the King of Geats, he is the King of Danes. Lastly, Beowulf turns out to be the child of Grendel's mother and Hrothgar, which I found rather absurd. Nonethless, these were some of the many differences between the epic and the movie
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteI agree with your comment. I don't know why Beowulf, a hero, slept with Grendel's mother, a demon. I was surprised that the dragon was a child of Grendel's mother. I prefer a poem because I don't like the brutality in the movie.
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteI enjoyed the movie more than the actual epic mostly because it was really fascinating seeing a visual representation of the story. The visuals made the movie more entertaining than reading because while reading the epic I'd often not know what would be going on in the story. For this reason I'd pick the movie over the epic. I think the movie was trying to focus on sexuality more than anything else because of the fact that Grendel's mother never tried seducing Beowulf in the actual epic and there were many other situations in the movie where it happened. The epic itself was written to be a story of a hero's journey. I guess many changes happened in the movie because it was someone else's interpretation of the epic. Many times movie makers will take classic stories and turn them into a "hollywood story" meaning they'll change the story to make it more suitable for all kinds of audiences. I feel like that's exactly what happened with this movie because many scenes shouldn't have been in the movie but they were there to add plot twists or simply because the makers wanted to show people a different version of Beowulf.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThe difference between the movie and the poem of Beowulf is that in the poem, Beowulf becomes a ruler of Geatland, but in the movie, he became a king of Denmark. Also, Beowulf is characterized as a flawed man in the movie instead of a flawless man in the poem. On the other side, Grendel didn't look like a demon monster; instead, he looked like a disgusting creature. Overall, I prefer the poem because I don't like the cruelty in the movie.
ReplyDeletePersonally I preferred the epic over the movie. While giving Beowulf flaws and making him more understandable and human was nice, the movie also changed and added a lot of dumb things that sometimes didn't even make sense. Obvious changes were Beowulf having a child with Grendel's mom instead of killing her, and becoming the king of danes rather than geats, as well as having to face his son, the dragon. The "goblet" that the dragon liked was the one that Beowulf gave to Grendel''s mother in the movie, there were no swamps or sea monsters, and the final battle took place at Beowulf's castle rather than the dragon's lair. Beowulf had flaws, succumbed to desires, and was shown to be a liar (when he boasted about killing 9 sea monsters and when he claimed to have killed Grendel's mom). There were some parts of the movie that made me cringe and yell internally, like when he was totally eyeing Weathlow. There were also parts that didn't even make sense, like when Wiglaf's horse managed to run across a broken burning bridge, or how Beowulf couldn't reach the dragon's heart with a sword but could somehow just swing in and grab it with his hand, or how the dragon managed to keep flying with a torn wing and just kept trying to attack Beowulf's wife and mistress rather than just reaching up and swatting Beowulf away from his chest, or how at the end the tide only washed away his son, and never came back and instead let Wiglaf and Beowulf have their moment without sea water splashing all over Beowulf. Some small parts of the movie were nice but I didn't like it overall.
ReplyDeleteTo be honest, I did not really enjoy neither the book nor the poem. The movie was undeniably more entertaining and out there, with its sexual content and extreme violence and gore, compared to the conservative and proper writing style of the poem. The characterization and plot was also far more developed and intricate and entertaining in the movie. Instead of being portrayed as an almost-flawless, flat, super-hero in the poem, Beowulf was portrayed as a very flawed man like the rest of us. However, he still showed signs of being a genuine hero, especially when he sacrificed his own life to save his kingdom.
ReplyDeleteThe poem, while it was fairly concise and straightforward, left generally a lot to be desired in terms of being stimulating or interesting. It read extremely predictably and perhaps its status as the oldest surviving written story in the English language shows, since it almost seemed generic. The narration style was devoid of any character, texture, or color, making Beowulf a very boring read.
The movie was just too much. There was too much content just stuffed in there just to be in there, and the storyline and scenes could have used a lot of heavy-handed editing, but I appreciate their effort to fatten up the story and make it more interesting for the big commercial hollywood studios. Perhaps artistic credibility was lost at the expense of making it more commercial.
I agree with your point of view about the poem, but I still believe that the movie was far worse than the poem. Some gruesome scenes, especially during the battle with Grendel, were extremely unnecessary and gruesome. In addition, I think that depicting Beowulf as a flawed man, just like the rest of us, is deviating from the gist of the story because Beowulf is supposed to be the paragon of a tragic hero.
DeleteI did not like the Beowulf movie as much as I liked the epic. The movie was too focused on sexuality and how Beowulf succumbs to his sexual desires, which I personally thought was because the movie producers wanted more money from the box office. The movie also showed Beowulf as an extremely flawed individual who is more than happy to lie when he succumbs to his own weaknesses. This completely ruins the gist of the poem, because Beowulf is supposed to be a hero for his entire life until the day he dies. Finally, some visuals in the movie were outright disturbing and gruesome (such as the battle scene with Grendel) which did not give a good connotation to the movie. In contrast, the epic was more focused on the tragic tale of Beowulf: the hero who died a hero in combat. Beowulf did not have sexual relations with monsters; he killed off the monsters and sea creatures. He saved his people of great harm, and did not bring upon the doom of his kingdom by his own actions. The one who brought doom upon Beowulf’s kingdom was an escaping slave who happened to enter the dragon’s lair and steal the gold trophy. In all, I did not like the movie because of all the negative messages I got from it and because of its large deviation from the plot of the epic.
ReplyDeleteHm, I don't think the movie's messages were necessarily negative, but they were extremely tangential and removed from the overall theme of the original poem. It seems like you are a huge stickler for authenticity, and that's cool. But for me, personally, I didn't exactly mind the huge derivations in the poem, but they way they chose to go about those and the way they didn't make the movie work very well as a whole was my main problem about it.
Delete