ROTTEN TOMATOES: Trailer Bulletin: Beowulf Second Trailer!

Trailer Bulletin: Beowulf Second Trailer!

See the second clip now!

by Jeff Giles | September 20, 2007

Jonesing for a peek at some more Beowulf footage? Apple Trailers has what you're looking for.

The second trailer for Robert Zemeckis' adaptation of the Old English epic, starring Angelina Jolie, Ray Winstone, and Anthony Hopkins, is up now. Less Jolie-centric and more action-heavy than the first trailer, it should help tide you over until November 16. Click the link below!

Source: Apple Trailers (Trailer #2)

Related Items

Movie:	Beowulf
Celeb:	Angelina Jolie
	Robert Zemeckis
	Ray Winstone
	Anthony Hopkins

(1-15 of 15 posts) | Reply

I Am Remote writes:
on Sep 20 2007 08:27 AM

I guess I'll see it. I like Grendel.

(Reply to this)

superfecta writes:
on Sep 20 2007 10:57 AM

Hmm...I think I preferred 'Beowulf and Grendel' but it looks like this also has Icelandic horses. That's really all I need in a Beowulf film, I suppose...

(Reply to this)

jukeboxhero6660 writes:
on Sep 20 2007 11:30 AM

these things keep making me want to see it, and i didnt want to at first because there have been so many awful versions of beowulf but this looks pretty good.

(Reply to this)

rcbaker87 writes:
on Sep 20 2007 11:45 AM

Even if its the worst movie ever made, It won't be as bad as actually reading Beowulf.

(Reply to this)

DaHypr1 writes:
on Sep 20 2007 11:49 AM

In reply to this comment (#1136311)
liar! i liked that book!

(Reply to this)

minderbinder writes:
on Sep 20 2007 01:14 PM

Wow, no posts about the crappy CGI plastic zombie eyes.

I guess I'll have to do it myself.

So why bother to do animation that mostly looks like a poor imitation of live action? And what's up with those creepy plastic zombie eyes that they still can't get right?

(Reply to this)

Ciaranmv writes:
on Sep 20 2007 03:27 PM

In reply to this comment (#1136433)
I don't know about this, either! I appreciated the story (not the best, but powerful if you dig beneath what's going on the surface) and I love Robert Zemeckis' films, but I'm no big fan of the shrek-looking visuals, nor of the way they're portraying Grendel in this one. But I definitely doubt this could be any worse than Christopher Lambert's poor-excuse for an adaptation of "Beowulf" back in 1999! Worst movie ever. Period.

(Reply to this)

IMAmoose24 writes:
on Sep 20 2007 03:56 PM

I too do not know about this one yet. I agree with the statement about the effects. Are directors affraid to make a great epic these days? I mean, look how Lord of the Rings did. Why would Live action be so horrible?

(Reply to this)

renodc writes:
on Sep 20 2007 03:56 PM

I'm all for pushing the envelope in filmmaking, but this CGI motion capture stuff just
looks weird.

(Reply to this)

I Am Remote writes:
on Sep 20 2007 04:09 PM

i agree and was going to say that before. I hate this animation. It looks gawky... gimmicky and very fake. Boo.

(Reply to this)

EmmG389 writes:
on Sep 20 2007 04:12 PM

This movie looks like ****. Why couldn't they have just had real actors instead of animated ones? Didn't Zemeckis see how big of a failure Final Fantasy was and his Polar Express was a cold film and a huge miscalculation at the box office. Zemeckis, go back and make another awesome Tom Hanks movie like Castaway or Forrest Gump where there were real people involved or if you want to make a great movie with no actors do a sequel of Wilson the volleyball and his adventures.

(Reply to this)

apostate writes:
on Sep 21 2007 12:09 AM

Those that made this need to read (or re-read) up on "the Uncanny Valley" effect. This film unfortunately looks loaded with it.

(Reply to this)

CodeClearanceBlue writes:
on Sep 21 2007 01:26 AM

The trailer looks like the opening of an RPG on XBox (a la Elder Scrolls). The music is laughable. Beowulf has been needing a high-dollar film version for many years. It won't get one now. What a waste. The Shrek comparison is right on the money.

(Reply to this)

minderbinder writes:
on Sep 21 2007 02:17 PM

"his Polar Express was a cold film and a huge miscalculation at the box office"

Um...no. It was a cold film, and it started slow at the box office but ended up making money in the long run. The 3d imax definitely helped it a lot.

And apostate, the uncanny valley thing is exactly the problem with these movies. Monster House was better because even though they did motion capture, they made the character designs more cartoony and less realistic.

And yeah, the music editing for the second trailer is an absolute train wreck, some of the worst trailer music I've ever heard.

(Reply to this)

Bondesque writes:
on Nov 18 2007 09:23 PM

It opened with 28 million guys!! doesn't any one see that. 150 million in production and probably 50 mil in marketing!! it is a failure already. and if CGI hasn't reached the point where it is actually better than live-action then why use it for a whole movie? - a movie that could just as easily have been made live-action. all they needed were green-screens and 80 million. now. . . well now it is a disaster.

(Reply to this)

Related Links

Beowulf

Related Articles

Most Discussed

Latest News

Latest Interviews

Latest Features

Sponsored Links