 For the most part, critics are amused by the translation of Beowulf from weighty Olde English epic poem to 3-D cartoon. Claudia Puig in USA Today observes, "It's a lot more fun than the mythic adventure most of us read in school." But Roger Ebert in the Chicago Sun Times notes that it only "resembles the original in that it uses a lot of the same names." He also notes that, as in "all 3-D movies it spends a lot of time throwing things at the audience: Spears, blood, arms, legs, bodies, tables, heads, mead, and so forth. ... Not bad for a one-dimensional story." Lou Lumenick in the New York Post remarks that they're "some of the most spectacular 3-D effects I've ever seen." Manohla Dargis in the New York Times notes that the 3-D images may be necessary in order to keep "your eyes engaged when your mind starts to wander." Kenneth Turan in the Los Angeles Times is also impressed with the performance-capture animation used in the film but suggests it is overused. Nevertheless, he adds, "Beowulf is still more something to see than to hear. Rarely has so much expensive technique been put at the service of such feeble and pathetic screenwriting." And Mick LaSalle in the San Francisco Chronicle says that, in the end, Beowulf, is all about the 3-D and the effects, "which means that as soon as the novelty of 3-D wears off, the experience has been had. That takes about 45 minutes." |
