Beowulf

Code Horror · Post by **Code Horror** » August 31st, 2007, 7:56 pm

Looks cool, I'll see it.

Post by **rebelrex** » September 7th, 2007, 11:14 am

Actually, they just updated the site...again...and added a newer version of the trailer, too!!

http://www.beowulfmovie.com/restricted/index.html

This one shows a lot more action with Grendel...and some more Angelina

Post by **Ben** » September 7th, 2007, 12:43 pm

That's the same Restricted trailer that's been going around for a few weeks.

I saw this on a big screen the other night with the slow, boring, generally awful "1408", and I have to say that the going to film didn't help the digital look...if anything it looked even more fake blown up to a massive size.

I still can't see why, with all the money and technology he has, these Zemeckis films don't look any better than Final Fantasy over <I>ten years ago</I>...

Post by **rebelrex** » September 10th, 2007, 2:29 pm

Nah...actually the one that went around a few weeks ago had a lot less footage of Grendel's lair and that whole blood-fest...

The second one is a bit different.

I actually saw a cut-scene for some videogame on TV the other day, some girl taking out all of these soldiers surrounding her...I think this looks 100x's better...

Post by **Dacey** » October 12th, 2007, 2:05 pm

BOO! It's been rated PG-13:

http://www.comingsoon.net/films.php?id=10851

Post by **Meg** » October 12th, 2007, 3:53 pm

Boo? This is a good thing. American animated films need to have more variance, and creating PG-13 and R movies is part of pushing the bar.

(Unless I misunderstood you?)

Post by **Dacey** » October 12th, 2007, 8:19 pm

No, I wanted an R. That's why I was complaining.

From what I understand, "Beowulf" was supposed to be an R, but it would seem that studio execs got squeamish about the budget, which would explain why they're now settling for a PG-13.

Post by **Meg** » October 12th, 2007, 10:40 pm

Ah, okay.

Well, even getting a big animated project a PG-13 rating is a feat.

Post by **Ben** » October 13th, 2007, 8:52 am

Yeah, not bad!

We could have gotten the G version!

Post by **CharlieBarkin** » October 13th, 2007, 10:09 am

I saw a trailer for this yesterday, and to me it just looks weird. I couldn't tell it was CG until towards the end, and the characters look really off-putting IMO. I'll give this one a miss.

Post by **Dacey** » October 13th, 2007, 11:22 am

Yeah, a PG-13 is better than a PG, I suppose. Besides, a good thing for me is that this will mean less blood. The bad thing, of course, is that it'll mean less of Angelina.

Post by **Josh** » October 13th, 2007, 12:49 pm

Last year, Ain't It Cool News wrote that Robert Zemeckis was considering two versions of Beowulf: a PG-13 version to play in regular theaters and an NC-17 version to play in IMAX. Even if that NC-17 version never makes it to theaters, I figure it will still make its way to DVD.

Here are those AICN reports:
http://www.aintitcool.com/display.cgi?id=22409
http://www.aintitcool.com/node/30502

Post by **Meg** » October 13th, 2007, 1:17 pm

Woo, NC-17, eh? That would be a bit too much for me...

Post by **Dacey** » October 13th, 2007, 1:52 pm

Yeah. I don't do NC-17s...

But an R-rated cut on DVD would be nice.

Post by **Josh** » October 13th, 2007, 2:04 pm

I agree that NC-17 may be a little too much. If that version of Beowulf ever does make it to DVD, I think it'll probably be labeled 'Unrated'.