Grendel

rkzenrage • Jan 17, 2007 11:36 am
Sucked!

How stupid was I that I thought they were actually going to use Grendel for "Grendel", huh?

I keep falling for shit like this.
wolf • Jan 17, 2007 11:46 am
Is this the movie with Angelina Jolie as Grendel's Mother? Of course it was going to suck. You should have known that going in.
Griff • Jan 17, 2007 11:53 am
Not Beowulf?
rkzenrage • Jan 17, 2007 12:02 pm
Yeah, Beowulf, the SciFi one. Sorry.
Unrecognizable.
Happy Monkey • Jan 17, 2007 12:04 pm
This one, I assume.
Shawnee123 • Jan 17, 2007 12:05 pm
They made a movie of that? Is it a cartoon?

Yikes. They can't leave anything alone.

Edit: or this one?
Happy Monkey • Jan 17, 2007 12:31 pm
The one I posted is the one from the SciFi channel. I almost never watch the SciFi Original movies, they're almost all bad.

That Neil Gaiman one, I'm looking forward to, though. I'm a fan of Gaiman, and I've got no problem with Jolie's casting. Jolie is doing the voice and motion-capture for Grendel's mother; I doubt the creature is gonna look much like her.
Shawnee123 • Jan 17, 2007 12:45 pm
How confusing. They managed to make it since 700 AD (give or take) without movie-butchering and now everyone's jumping on the Beowulf bandwagon (which wouldn't be a bad user title.)
Trilby • Jan 17, 2007 1:12 pm
as someone who was, until recently, intimately involved with the study of Beowulf and all it's intricacies, all I can say is:

I FCUKING HATED BEOWULF!

and, I rooted for Grendel.

Sorry the movie sucked. I know how that feels.

But, still, my idea of a Good Time is not listening to a bunch of egomaniacal :vikingsmi pat each other on the back because of this battle or that battle, playing wife swap via the auspices of 'peace keeping', whilst hoisting flagons of ale to their mustachioed lips and vowing to slay the coming dragon.

Or, maybe it IS my idea of a good time, I've forgotten.
;)
Griff • Jan 17, 2007 1:17 pm
I thought the movie had camp value.
Trilby • Jan 17, 2007 1:22 pm
Griff;308043 wrote:
I thought the movie had camp value.


Why? Did John Waters say it did?
Griff • Jan 17, 2007 1:29 pm
They had a neat idea and none of the tools to pull it off. It was so awful it became interesting. Was Waters the filmaker?
Happy Monkey • Jan 17, 2007 1:31 pm
Which one are you talking about? SciFi or the one with the Highlander?
Griff • Jan 17, 2007 1:41 pm
Highlander.
rkzenrage • Jan 17, 2007 2:41 pm
I am talking about the SciFi Beowulf.
cowhead • Jan 18, 2007 10:24 am
Beowulf the one with christopher lambert wasn't all that bad. .I mean If you forget anything you may have ever read about the song of roland.. just pretend it has a different name and it somehow becomes just another crap movie that he's been in.. although I did like the setting it was shot in both visually and conceptually. my main question is how exactly did Lambert get to be an 'action' star.. almost as mind boggling as Bruce WIllis's transformation from moonlighting to what he's doing now (although obviously he pulled it of and is a vastly better actor). anywhoo! as to the sci-fi channels' grumble.. er.. grendel.. yeah.. waste of electrons.. (although! one upside of the digital age is that they are not actually wasting physical film in making shit like that). and I dunno it was slightly better than that dragon king hunk of shitnit.
deadbeater • Jan 28, 2007 6:05 pm
Damn I hoped for once the movie was based on John Gardner's Grendel, the book from the monster's standpoint, and probably was the inspiration to the musical Wicked. That would be inspiring. But Sci-Fi Network continues to suck.
cowhead • Jan 29, 2007 10:10 am
Wicked is a Musical? as in the book from the 'wicked' witchs' point of view? if so.. I think I'm going to have to renew my theatregeek membership card.
Clodfobble • Jan 29, 2007 1:23 pm
Um... the book Wicked was the inspiration for the musical Wicked.
rkzenrage • Jan 29, 2007 2:30 pm
What sucks more than most can know is, with the money, staff, time that they used...and the talent that is actually out there waiting and wanting for work, they could have made an AMAZING film (not just some piece of crap to take-up time and sell commercial spots) & paid them LESS.
Want to know why they do not... it hurts the egos of talentless fucks who are in higher positions who use their influence to get friends and friends-of-friends jobs.
That is really it.
On that level, having training and talent will keep you from getting work every day. Many do their best to try to hide it.
The cable channels are a cesspool, with the exception of HBO (Showtime was getting better when I left, but had a long way to go).