232 out of 387 people found the following comment useful :- Fun, handsome, but spoilt by 3D, 13 November 2007
Author:
mikerichards from Milton Keynes, Bucks, UK
Pretty much everyone knows the story of Beowulf - man fights monster,
monster's mum and then a dragon - but this ancient story has inspired
generations of writers and academics, now it gets a shiny makeover
courtesy of Neil Gaiman and Roger Avary.
Beowulf (the man) could have been written as a cookie-cutter hero, but
fortunately he's something else - fallible and not yet the hero he must
become later in the movie. But (and this is really hard without
spoiling the movie), the battle that turns him into a hero also leads
inexorably to his undoing. That's something the two writers have
brought to the millennia old text and it works perfectly to help fill
in some of the gaps in the original poem and provide a back story to
events.
A special mention also to Crispin Glover's Grendel. I wasn't
particularly struck with the physical realisation of the monster, but
the performance is knock out. Instead of just being a rampaging beast,
Grendel is almost something to be pitied - a misshapen outcast with
noisy neighbours, and his final scene is remarkably touching. Oh and if
you don't understand Grendel, you clearly haven't been keeping up with
your Old English classes!
But let's be honest, everyone watches a movie about Vikings for the
action. And Beowulf delivers this in spades. Here comes my first
proviso - Beowulf in the UK is getting a 12A rating, but there is no
way I would take a 12 year old to see this film in all its eye-ball
spearing, spine-snapping, ligament-tearing glory. This movie would get
a higher rating had it been shot in real-life and it's worth
considering this before packing the kids into the car. Mostly the
violence is justified, but it is there and it's NOT cartoony.
The animation is the talking point of this movie, and its a real step
on from the zombified performance of 'Polar Express'. The impression of
living, breathing flesh is almost complete with the exception of
strangely dead eyes - this movie is a landmark in computer imagery. The
majority of the characters are stunningly rendered (Beowulf in
particular) in close up, but they somehow look less convincing at a
distance. Generally the men are better done than the women, with Queen
Wealthow the spitting image of Julie Andrew's queen in Shrek 2.
So, its a violent special effects triumph - could anything be wrong?
Actually yes.
Two things. One - the accents. Oh dear god in heaven above what were
they thinking - this is a treasure house of appalling voices,
Irish(ish), Scottish(ish), Welsh(ish) are all thrown into the mix, but
the standout horrors are Jon Malkovich's take on Danish which might
have been inspired by the Muppets and Angelina Jolie dusting off her
accent from 'Alexander'.
The second is the 3D projection. For reasons best known to studio
executives we're all meant to get very excited by 3D all over again.
Beowulf is one of the first movies to be released in the UK using REALD
- a system familiar to anyone who has been to a Disney park in the last
20 years. The animators of Beowulf clearly had great fun working out
new ways of making things jump out of the screen at the audience, but
the effect becomes slightly wearisome after a minute or two.
Fortunately things settle down later in the movie and the makers stop
trying to show off their new technology.
More disappointing, the poor quality of the Polaroid glasses you have
to wear make the image slightly blurry and spoilt by reflections. After
years waiting for the crystal clarity of digital projection, the whole
thing has been undone by a gimmick. If you have a choice, you might be
better off seeing a regular 2D version.
A final comment, Beowulf spends part of the movie naked, bet you can't
watch it and not think of Austin Powers.
188 out of 308 people found the following comment useful :- This is a cinema experience for sure!, 12 November 2007
Author:
wesleythomaswilliams from United Kingdom
Just this minute got back from seeing a free preview of Beowulf and OH
MY GOD! This is a cracking film and I highly recommend everyone goes to
the cinema to see it (it's a cinema experience for sure!). Not only
that, but it's 3D (which I wasn't aware of) or rather the all new 3D
(no more red/green glasses). Everyone in the audience was given what
looked like cheap-ass shades, but they did the job wonderfully and
fitted snugly over my regular specs.
As for the movie, the plot was tight and well scripted, the voice
acting was great (Ray Winstone rocks), the action was breathtaking,
some of the CGI was unbelievably gorgeous and the music and incidental
sound was great! The only downside for me was some of the CGI. It
seemed apparent that given an unlimited budget, this movie would have
looked phenomenal in every scene, but unfortunately the budget wasn't
unlimited and it shows in a number of places. Nothing looks horrible,
but you can tell that they had to pick and choose where to go for high
detail. The movie also suffers from the age old, it's creepy because
it's almost perfect.
As for the 3D, apart from an awesome intro, nothing seems to be done
just to exploit 3D, it's all very natural and adds an amazing level of
detail to the movie. The depth of vision you get is truly breathtaking
in parts.
Quite honestly I wasn't expecting much from this movie having seen the
trailer, but I was blown away. I've not been this excited leaving the
cinema in a long long time!
120 out of 177 people found the following comment useful :- Glorious 3D treat requiring little brain engagement, 18 November 2007
Author:
johnnyparker from Oxford, England.
This movie is a lot of fun. In 3D. I suspect its impact will be
considerably diminished in 2D, so I urge anyone who wants to see it to
seek out the 3D version. There are lots of beautifully constructed
tracking shots where the camera glides and swirls forward, back up and
down, and trees, rocks, arrows, dragons or whatever slip past the edges
of the frame, and this effect is stunning in 3D. In fact, all the
action scenes are stunning in 3D, particularly the climactic battle
with a top-notch, fire belching monster of a dragon.
The plot isn't much to write home about (although there's just a hint
of a theological debate about the way Christianity has displaced the
old mythic religions, which made me think for about 5 seconds). The
acting is variable - Robin Wright-Penn is fine, but about as sexy as a
paper cup, Hopkins is his usual reliable self, Ray Winstone is suitably
heroic as the heroic, self-aggrandising Beowulf, and Crispin Glover is
just brilliant as Grendel. Grendel is a lovely creation, oozing slime
and blood, and wracked with pain.
But who cares about all that. This is not a scholarly work, it's
entertainment. And my wife and I were as royally entertained as the
kids surrounding us in the cinema (and we're both 40-somethings). Leave
your serious head (and any timid youngsters) at home, and go and have
fun.
125 out of 198 people found the following comment useful :- Surprisingly Good - A 3D Treat, 17 November 2007
Author:
cdemw from United Kingdom
When going into the theatre to see this I in two minds - it was my
first 3D movie and I had heard good things, however I wasn't
particularly taken by the concept or the trailers. I was unsure what to
expect, however I ended up leaving the cinema extremely satisfied with
the film, and tellingly, unable to stop discussing it long after the
ride home.
Visually it is an absolute treat, Zemeckis uses 3D superbly, some of
the camera angles and sequences are as great an art as the
photo-realistic animation. Occasionally the odd shot appears where the
impression is that it was set up solely to emphasise the 3D (e.g.
starting at the end of a branch and panning out) and whilst this
doesn't add to the film it is actually a pleasant reminder of the
novelty of 3D.
There are only two areas that let Beowulf down aesthetically: the eyes
and the mouth. The eyes were static throughout and it is the little
details that make the difference when trying to make something as
uber-realistic as this, such as the fact that the pupils didn't react
to light. As for the lips - they're just not quite there yet -
sometimes the speech didn't seem to be quite right.
The characters are expertly introduced and developed, most notably
Anthony Hopkins character, Hrothgar and the tension between his wife.
Grendell and his mother are wonderfully creepy and seductive, and
bizarrely enough almost encourage sympathy.
For me the most disappointing part of the film was actually Ray
Winstone as the titular character - he was fantastic when talking in a
low growl, however the film really suffers when he shouts in full
cockney accent. "I will kill your monstah!". I half expected Grendell's
head to be smashed between a car and it's door. John Malkovitch is a
saving grace with his none-more-sinister voice and interesting faith
sub-plot.
The rating for this film has been hotly discussed and in my opinion I
do not think it is suitable for children under the age of 12. Grendell
would have truly terrified me as a child. The violence, as well as
bawdiness, does not make it a family film for young children although
having said that the lewd references do provide good humour and
balances out the movie.
So, overall, this was worthy of an 8. Breathtaking animation,
incredible action (especially the finale featuring an excellent dragon)
and a generally brilliant cast. Beowulf throws down the gauntlet to
film-makers to show what can be done with 3D and is an indication of
the potential. It's not all the way there yet, but it's a damn good
start.
66 out of 91 people found the following comment useful :- Missed chance, this is not the poem., 23 November 2007
Author:
earderne from Scotland
*** This comment may contain spoilers ***
This film has impressive special effects and would be okay as an
adventure fantasy but it should not be marketed as the epic poem.Also
it has been given the wrong rating and should be an R. Why all the
changes? Grendel's mother was not a gold painted,nude,Barbie doll in
stiletto heels.Grendel was not Hrothgar's son. Beowulf killed the witch
he did not have sex with her.The dragon was not Beowulf's son and had
no connection with the witch.Beowulf was not made Hrothgar's heir,nor
did he marry his widow and become king of the Danes.In the poem Beowulf
returned to Geatland after slaying Grendel. He remained the Geat king's
best warrior,supporting him and the son who succeeded him. Only after
the new king died did Beowulf become king of the Geats until his own
death in later years.Also, why all the nudity in this film? This was
Scandinavian northern Europe in the Dark Ages - folk would have Bean in
furs and heavy woollens most of the time.The cartoon-like actors didn't
help either with bland faces and expressionless eyes.
A far better movie 'Beowulf and Grendel' was made in 2004,filmed on
location in Iceland,with an excellent cast of real actors and no CGI.
The Iceland born Canadian director,Sturla Gunnarson,tried to get back
to what could have been the original story that evolved over the
centuries into the legend.It was gritty,made on a shoestring and had
only limited cinema release,but thankfully it is available on DVD and
is well worth a look.There is also an excellent companion DVD
documentary called 'Wrath of Gods'which tells the incredible story of
the filming of the movie, and the struggle to complete it with
financial problems and the absolute hell of shooting it at the start of
the Icelandic winter.
The new 'Beowulf' has also tried to ride on the coattails of '300', but
again it suffers by not having real actors showing their courage and
emotions.'300' scenes were like paintings come to life and the
Spartans' impressive physiques and fighting skills were real,after hard
training,with no computer enhancement.
An interesting point is the actor who links these three films -
charismatic Gerard Butler.He was fiery yet also sensitive as King
Leonidas and the earlier Beowulf and made the roles his own.
This 2007 film is a missed opportunity to bring the epic poem to life.
102 out of 167 people found the following comment useful :- I AM (slightly let down by) BEOWULF!!!, 14 November 2007
Author:
MovieDude1893 (moviedude1893@gmail.com) from Illinios,America
It seems we have a new cinematic fad coming into fashion... the genre
of mythological action. It began with '300' (a film I really enjoyed),
and the first that stands to benefit from 300's success is Beowulf.
Beowulf is the newest film from Robert Zemeckis. Zemeckis implements
many of the same visual themes of his last project, the heart warming
Polar Express, with varied success.
Beowulf tells the story of the kingdom of King Hrothgar (a delightfully
campy Anthony Hopkins)which is currently being terrorized by a monster
named Grendel (Crispin Glover). Help comes in the form of mighty
Beowulf (Ray Winstone), who arrives with an army of 14 men and his
right hand man, Wiglaf (Brendan Gleeson). It his his job to slay the
monster. However, he must also deal with Grendel's mother (Angelina
Jolie). Beowulf is opposed by Unferth (John Malkovich), and has also
been paying close attention to the king's wife, Wealthow (Robin Wright
Penn).
Perhaps the most surprising element of the film is its sly, wink and a
nod, sense of humor. This can be viewed two ways. The first view is one
of enjoyment and laughter. However, it is hard to comply when we are
asked to feel or identify with these characters after so many scenes
presenting them as mere caricatures.
As expected, Beowulf is visually stunning. I'd argue it is the one
category where this film bests 'Polar Express'. The 3-D photography is
shockingly good. It is a film I wouldn't want to imagine in the
traditional two dimension format. I strongly advise anyone who is going
to see this to view the film in 3-D. Without it, the film would be
borderline un enjoyable. The highlight is by far the final battle
scene,which just begs you to forget the film's past misdeeds. Close,
but no dice.
50 out of 65 people found the following comment useful :- Better than I expected, 19 March 2008
Author:
(lexo1770) from Ireland
I didn't expect a lot from 'Beowulf', for lots of reasons, most of
which were to do with the casting: incorrigibly cockney Ray Winstone as
a warrior from what's now southern Sweden; wacky John Malkovich as a
cynical counselor; loony Crispin Glover as a flesh-rending monster, and
weirdest of all, Angelina Jolie as the monster's mother...thaet waes
wundorlic castyng, as the poet might have put it. Then there was the
way they did the whole thing in CGI, running the risk of making it all
look a bit rubbery. Finally, Robert Zemeckis is the director and my
great respect for him plummeted through the floor and into the
crawlspace after he presided over the insufferable 'Forrest Gump'.
Nevertheless, this is a lot better than I thought it would be. I missed
the 3D incarnation as we were watching the DVD rather than the cinema
release, but after a while you stop looking at the CGI and start
enjoying it. This is a 'Beowulf' where the story, although different
from the poem, is actually very far from shabby.
Without giving too much away, the main difference from the poem is that
in the poem, there is no connection between the monster Grendel and his
mother on one hand, and the dragon in the latter half of the poem on
the other hand. In the film, a connection exists. Neil Gaiman and Roger
Avary do a professional job of tying it all together in a satisfying
Hollywood way, without betraying the basic darkness and sadness of the
story; it's not like Beowulf rides off into the sunset with Wiglaf at
the end. Crispin Glover is genuinely scary as the tormented and
raw-boned Grendel, whose main problem is that he just can't stand the
sound of people having fun, although since most of this fun consists of
hairy men singing lewd songs you can see his point. Angelina Jolie's
animated self spends all her on screen time walking around without any
clothes on, something that apparently gave Jolie a blush when she saw a
cut of the movie. (One of the more eerie things about this film is that
the cartoon Angelina Jolie looks marginally more realistic than the
actress herself.)
Despite an accent that's more Stockwell than Geatland, Ray Winstone
does a fine, sombre job as the hero, although my wife thought that the
animated Winstone looked more like Sean Bean. Brendan Gleeson does a
splendid job in the niche he's carved for himself of Hairy Sidekick.
The acting honours, or at least the animation honours, go to Robin
Wright Penn (or whoever worked on her character) as the pale and
melancholy queen; she has moments of subtle hesitation and sadness that
struck me as a triumph of CGI acting.
There is much excellent smiting, some of it unfortunately toned down a
little in order to keep a PG-13 rating - so we don't actually get to
see Grendel biting men's heads off, just people's reactions to him
doing so. Most importantly, the story is not a travesty of the
original. It's thoughtful and interesting, as you'd expect from a
writer of Gaiman's quality (if not from the author of 'Killing Zoe')
and contains some striking meditations on the power of legend and
reputation. Plus, there's a really huge kick-ass dragon. 'Beowulf' is a
strange and unexpected treat.
69 out of 103 people found the following comment useful :- A mildly amusing mix of "Shrek", "300" and computer-games, 13 November 2007
Author:
(tinuvielas@stuerzerleuschner.de) from Hamburg, Germany
*** This comment may contain spoilers ***
Take a thousand year old heroic subject matter, spice it up with a dose
of modern" morals such as men's only weakness is women" , add a few
females according to type e.g. saints and whores and shoot this
script as a CGI-mix of Shrek", 300" and popular computer-games: The
result is Robert Zemecki's version of Beowulf". Works alright, the
flick, as long as you don't take it seriously. However, whenever the
Shrek"-Elements dominate the scene, the film runs into problems. Queen
Wealtheow for instance fatally resembles the green Oger's mom. Besides,
almost all Characters have a squint that would make Christopher Lambert
at his best look good. Wet hair is still a problem of
computer-graphics, too. Otherwise, the film is technically well made
and gives you an idea how far Ralph Bakshi might have gone with his
concept of graphically alienated live-action.
Still, over long stretches the motion-capture-technique is too
reminiscent of computer-games to be convincing, and thus one is left
with the question which audience this film is aimed at. Gaming kiddies
can't watch it because all the ripping and tearing is far too bloody;
adult Lord-of-the-Rings-fans will miss the depth of the original poem,
despite some nice touches in the script such as King Hrothgar talking
of Scops" or giving out rings to his thanes in the initial sequence,
or Grendel and his mother seeming to talk Anglo-Saxonish. The
linguistic climax of the movie is elsewhere, anyway: King Hrothgar,
embodied (well, sort of) by Anthony Hopkins, telling his followers that
Beowulf killed the monster and laid his mother... in her grave". How
do you translate that for synchronized versions? This sequence gets to
the heart of the difference of plot between the script and the heroic
poem, i.e. the introduction of the eternal female temptation as motif
for the hero's curse. Not a bad idea, really, especially in view of the
traditional sword-penis-symbolism that is being exploited thoroughly in
this film. Unfortunately, the way they put the idea on screen is cheesy
to say the least. Thus Angelina Jolie's computerized curves seem
designed to lure the average movie-goer, male, mid-twenties, meager
intellect (is that according to statistics?). The hero Beowulf (one
can't speak of actors or characters in this film) is modeled on the
Gladiator but lacks his character; the monster is a crossbreed of Ent
and skinned Gollum; the jokes are laconic (example: "How is your
father? Dead."). Amusing and once in a while appealing in a darkly
beautiful manner, especially when a whiff of northern Epic or landscape
transcends the CGI. In these moments one gets an inkling of what might
have been done with this script. Even the final fight with the dragon
is impressive. But why does the dragon have a heart, small as a cow's?
Why does the coast-guard sit in front of his fire in the pouring rain?
And why does the final, unbearably long shot have to be so unbearably
kitsch? Shame, really. You can either have grim realism, or you can
have exaggerated, bad-taste fantasy. Try to amalgamate both, and the
thing falls apart.
159 out of 287 people found the following comment useful :- Don't waste your money on the 2-D version, this has 3-D written all over it!, 15 November 2007
Author:
Simon Parker from United Kingdom
I have never had the experience of seeing a 3-D movie before on the
cinema, the only experience I have had with a 3-d film, only courtesy
of some 3-d glasses coming free with a DVD, was Spy Kids 3-D, a movie
while mildly entertaining isn't exactly the best film every to display
the greatness of 3-d. So Beowulf today was my first 3-d experience, I
went in expecting something good because of the 3-d, but I didn't
expect the movie itself to be superb. Part of my reasoning behind this
was because of the one and only experience I had had with Zemeckis and
his new way of making movies. That movie was unfortunately the Polar
Express, a supposedly happy tail that actually freaked me out more than
most horror movies! So what an absolute delight to say that Beowulf not
only works because of it being in 3-D (more on that brilliant factor
later) but also the movie is a genuinely brilliant movie anyway. The
motion capture isn't remotely creepy this time round and actually it
seemed to make sense in some bizarre way as to why they did the movie
like this. The actors surprised me big time, Ray Winstone delivering
actually one of his best performances in a long while, Angelina Jolie
playing the slinky seductress to perfection and Anthony Hopkins being a
joy to watch on screen. Beowulf is an action packed, well written and
entertaining piece of popcorn cinema. Just watch the dragon sequence
near the end, every single person in my cinema was on the edges of
their seat and looked in awe. The action sequences just amaze, and the
dialogue sequences surprisingly really work as well. Unfortunately
however if you see this movie in 2-D then you will not be experiencing
Beowulf in my eyes, take off the 3-D this is a 9/10 movie, with the 3-D
it gets the 10/10 rating with a blink of an eye.
As I've previously said the acting in the movie really caught me off
guard. Ray Winston obviously is not the first actor who comes to mind
when playing an ancient warrior. However when you see the movie and see
the performance you understand why Winstone was cast. Sure his cockney
acting at first seems a bit bizarre coming from the character, but
after a while you see the subtlety of the performance and come the
final half hour you realise he's quite possibly the best thing in the
movie. He delivers a heartfelt and genuinely brilliant performance.
Anthony Hopkins not only looks real in the movie, but he too delivers a
performance truly worthy of Anthony Hopkins. Sometimes Hopkins can do a
role for a sake of a role (see Mission Impossible 2), but here he seems
to be having a blast as Hrothgar and he has some superb moments in the
movie. Angelina Jolie plays the most interesting character of the
movie, Grendell's Mother, alas she appears very briefly. But her few
scenes stick firmly in memory, and her entry scene is one of the most
beautifully pieces of cinema I have seen when watched in 3-D. Crispin
Glover too has brief screen time as Grendell, but he delivers a
heartfelt performance, in fact I felt genuine sympathy with Grendell.
Glover might not be recognisable, but his performance shines through in
the early scenes. John Malkovich and Robin Wright Penn too deserve
considerably praise, as does a brilliant cast Brendan Gleeson.
So as I've said the 3-D really makes the movie have a cherry on top of
an already beautiful cake. After they filmmaker get over the gimmick of
chucking things at the screen the 3-D is used less prominently, until
any action sequences, and when the action sequences begin I doubt you
will draw a single breath. Grendell's attack on a beer hall is the
opening action sequence, and it is surprisingly violent for a 12a and
also amazing to behold. But its the dragon sequence and late battle
sequence that stick firmly in mind. I shall not spoil them, but those
sequences really did make me wish that every action movie ever made
from now will be in 3-D. The problem with the 3-D being so good is that
the 2-D version seems like a cash in, in fact the movie relies so much
on the 3-D at times that I doubt the 2-D version is worth watching.
Swords pointed at screens, the camera pans through trees, the multi
layered effect it gives off, in 2-d it just won't work as well, so my
advice is to find a cinema that does play it in 3-d, you'll get much
more for your money if you do. The storyline and film making is also
extremely effective. The subtle dialogue scenes, especially the stuff
between Winstone and Jolie really are some of the highlights. Also the
relationship between Beowulf and his queen is touching.
So are their any faults? As I've mentioned the 2-D version just won't
be as good, but also the movie doesn't seem like it'll be that good at
the start. In fact at the beginning, for five minutes, I was expecting
to be bitterly disappointed. Thankfully that little slouch at the
beginning is livened up with the arrival of Grendell, and from that
point onwards you will adore the movie. This is Zemeckis' best movie
since Back to the Future and definitely one of my favourite films of
the year. Go and watch in 3-D and pray that more movies will be made
like this in the near future.
56 out of 83 people found the following comment useful :- Chasing the Dragon, 18 November 2007
Author:
David H. Schleicher from New Jersey, USA
*** This comment may contain spoilers ***
*The following is a review of the digital 3D version showing at select
theaters:
Robert Zemeckis has always been a trailblazer with film technology. He
was among the first to utilize CGI in "Death Becomes Her" and with his
adaptation of the oldest surviving epic poem in the English language,
he perfects the life-like digital computer animation he first
experimented with in "The Polar Express". Like his canon of films over
the years, "Beowulf" is an eye-popping mixed bag of cinematic tricks.
The animation has come to a point where it is eerily life-like. In
"Beowulf" every blade of grass, every tree branch, and every strand of
hair has been painstakingly detailed. And while it is hard to tell the
difference between the digital Angelina Jolie and the real Angelina
Jolie, there's still something about the human face, the nuances of the
muscular features, the emotion running beneath, that this technology
will never capture. It still depicts hollow, cold clones of real human
beings that could never fully replace 3D flesh and blood.
What makes "Beowulf" so entertaining is the digital 3D technology. It
creates some breathtaking vistas where you feel as if the landscapes
are moving through you. In some of the more horrific scenes with
Grendel, you'll find yourself jumping out of your skin. Zemeckis is
like a magician with this technology. He's able to bleed something out
of nothing by knowing how to get the reactions he wants from his
audience with just the right sound effect, camera angle, and quick-cut
to complete his trick. It's often ugly, but quite breathtaking.
Zemeckis loses some ground when he relies too much on juvenile machismo
grandstanding to further character development. Sure, I love a good
death by chandelier scene or a man getting ripped in half by a monster
bit as much as the next guy, but all the bawdy humor wears thin. Even
lamer was the scene where Beowulf fights Grendel in the buff, which
contained almost as many laugh inducing sight gags as the scene where
Bart skateboarded nude through Springfield in this summer's "The
Simpsons Movie."
The mixed bag of tricks and sometimes slow build-up, however,
eventually lead to a totally thrilling finale where Beowulf does battle
with the dragon his misdeeds begot. In 3D, it's nerve-shattering fun.
As an action adventure film, it makes the mark.
Ultimately you realize why this story has survived over 1200 years.
"Beowulf" makes legendary the idea of a hero's fallibility and the
global consequences of the sins of the father. These are universal
themes that have been sung again and again in everything from
Shakespeare to this year's best film, "Before the Devil Knows You're
Dead." While the technology used to make this film may seem dated in a
few years, the story will live on, and this just may be the definitive
"Beowulf" for high school English teachers to use in their lame
attempts to connect with their students. The savvier kids won't be
fooled, but there's worse ways to pass the time in class.
Watch it at Amazon
Buy it at Amazon Rent it at blockbuster.comDiscuss in Boards More at IMDb Pro Add to My Movies Update Data
Quicklinks
Top Links
trailers and videosfull cast and crewtriviaofficial sitesmemorable quotesOverview
main detailscombined detailsfull cast and crewcompany creditstv scheduleAwards & Reviews
user commentsexternal reviewsnewsgroup reviewsawardsuser ratingsparents guiderecommendationsmessage boardPlot & Quotes
plot summaryplot synopsisplot keywordsAmazon.com summarymemorable quotesFun Stuff
triviagoofssoundtrack listingcrazy creditsalternate versionsmovie connectionsFAQOther Info
merchandising linksbox office/businessrelease datesfilming locationstechnical specslaserdisc detailsDVD detailsliterature listingsNewsDeskPromotional
taglines trailers and videos posters photo galleryExternal Links
showtimesofficial sitesmiscellaneousphotographssound clipsvideo clipsIMDb user comments for
Beowulf (2007) More at IMDbPro »
232 out of 387 people found the following comment useful :-

Fun, handsome, but spoilt by 3D, 13 November 2007
Author: mikerichards from Milton Keynes, Bucks, UK
Pretty much everyone knows the story of Beowulf - man fights monster, monster's mum and then a dragon - but this ancient story has inspired generations of writers and academics, now it gets a shiny makeover courtesy of Neil Gaiman and Roger Avary.
Beowulf (the man) could have been written as a cookie-cutter hero, but fortunately he's something else - fallible and not yet the hero he must become later in the movie. But (and this is really hard without spoiling the movie), the battle that turns him into a hero also leads inexorably to his undoing. That's something the two writers have brought to the millennia old text and it works perfectly to help fill in some of the gaps in the original poem and provide a back story to events.
A special mention also to Crispin Glover's Grendel. I wasn't particularly struck with the physical realisation of the monster, but the performance is knock out. Instead of just being a rampaging beast, Grendel is almost something to be pitied - a misshapen outcast with noisy neighbours, and his final scene is remarkably touching. Oh and if you don't understand Grendel, you clearly haven't been keeping up with your Old English classes!
But let's be honest, everyone watches a movie about Vikings for the action. And Beowulf delivers this in spades. Here comes my first proviso - Beowulf in the UK is getting a 12A rating, but there is no way I would take a 12 year old to see this film in all its eye-ball spearing, spine-snapping, ligament-tearing glory. This movie would get a higher rating had it been shot in real-life and it's worth considering this before packing the kids into the car. Mostly the violence is justified, but it is there and it's NOT cartoony.
The animation is the talking point of this movie, and its a real step on from the zombified performance of 'Polar Express'. The impression of living, breathing flesh is almost complete with the exception of strangely dead eyes - this movie is a landmark in computer imagery. The majority of the characters are stunningly rendered (Beowulf in particular) in close up, but they somehow look less convincing at a distance. Generally the men are better done than the women, with Queen Wealthow the spitting image of Julie Andrew's queen in Shrek 2.
So, its a violent special effects triumph - could anything be wrong?
Actually yes.
Two things. One - the accents. Oh dear god in heaven above what were they thinking - this is a treasure house of appalling voices, Irish(ish), Scottish(ish), Welsh(ish) are all thrown into the mix, but the standout horrors are Jon Malkovich's take on Danish which might have been inspired by the Muppets and Angelina Jolie dusting off her accent from 'Alexander'.
The second is the 3D projection. For reasons best known to studio executives we're all meant to get very excited by 3D all over again. Beowulf is one of the first movies to be released in the UK using REALD - a system familiar to anyone who has been to a Disney park in the last 20 years. The animators of Beowulf clearly had great fun working out new ways of making things jump out of the screen at the audience, but the effect becomes slightly wearisome after a minute or two. Fortunately things settle down later in the movie and the makers stop trying to show off their new technology.
More disappointing, the poor quality of the Polaroid glasses you have to wear make the image slightly blurry and spoilt by reflections. After years waiting for the crystal clarity of digital projection, the whole thing has been undone by a gimmick. If you have a choice, you might be better off seeing a regular 2D version.
A final comment, Beowulf spends part of the movie naked, bet you can't watch it and not think of Austin Powers.
188 out of 308 people found the following comment useful :-

This is a cinema experience for sure!, 12 November 2007
Author: wesleythomaswilliams from United Kingdom
Just this minute got back from seeing a free preview of Beowulf and OH MY GOD! This is a cracking film and I highly recommend everyone goes to the cinema to see it (it's a cinema experience for sure!). Not only that, but it's 3D (which I wasn't aware of) or rather the all new 3D (no more red/green glasses). Everyone in the audience was given what looked like cheap-ass shades, but they did the job wonderfully and fitted snugly over my regular specs.
As for the movie, the plot was tight and well scripted, the voice acting was great (Ray Winstone rocks), the action was breathtaking, some of the CGI was unbelievably gorgeous and the music and incidental sound was great! The only downside for me was some of the CGI. It seemed apparent that given an unlimited budget, this movie would have looked phenomenal in every scene, but unfortunately the budget wasn't unlimited and it shows in a number of places. Nothing looks horrible, but you can tell that they had to pick and choose where to go for high detail. The movie also suffers from the age old, it's creepy because it's almost perfect.
As for the 3D, apart from an awesome intro, nothing seems to be done just to exploit 3D, it's all very natural and adds an amazing level of detail to the movie. The depth of vision you get is truly breathtaking in parts.
Quite honestly I wasn't expecting much from this movie having seen the trailer, but I was blown away. I've not been this excited leaving the cinema in a long long time!
120 out of 177 people found the following comment useful :-

Glorious 3D treat requiring little brain engagement, 18 November 2007
Author: johnnyparker from Oxford, England.
This movie is a lot of fun. In 3D. I suspect its impact will be considerably diminished in 2D, so I urge anyone who wants to see it to seek out the 3D version. There are lots of beautifully constructed tracking shots where the camera glides and swirls forward, back up and down, and trees, rocks, arrows, dragons or whatever slip past the edges of the frame, and this effect is stunning in 3D. In fact, all the action scenes are stunning in 3D, particularly the climactic battle with a top-notch, fire belching monster of a dragon.
The plot isn't much to write home about (although there's just a hint of a theological debate about the way Christianity has displaced the old mythic religions, which made me think for about 5 seconds). The acting is variable - Robin Wright-Penn is fine, but about as sexy as a paper cup, Hopkins is his usual reliable self, Ray Winstone is suitably heroic as the heroic, self-aggrandising Beowulf, and Crispin Glover is just brilliant as Grendel. Grendel is a lovely creation, oozing slime and blood, and wracked with pain.
But who cares about all that. This is not a scholarly work, it's entertainment. And my wife and I were as royally entertained as the kids surrounding us in the cinema (and we're both 40-somethings). Leave your serious head (and any timid youngsters) at home, and go and have fun.
125 out of 198 people found the following comment useful :-

Surprisingly Good - A 3D Treat, 17 November 2007
Author: cdemw from United Kingdom
When going into the theatre to see this I in two minds - it was my first 3D movie and I had heard good things, however I wasn't particularly taken by the concept or the trailers. I was unsure what to expect, however I ended up leaving the cinema extremely satisfied with the film, and tellingly, unable to stop discussing it long after the ride home.
Visually it is an absolute treat, Zemeckis uses 3D superbly, some of the camera angles and sequences are as great an art as the photo-realistic animation. Occasionally the odd shot appears where the impression is that it was set up solely to emphasise the 3D (e.g. starting at the end of a branch and panning out) and whilst this doesn't add to the film it is actually a pleasant reminder of the novelty of 3D.
There are only two areas that let Beowulf down aesthetically: the eyes and the mouth. The eyes were static throughout and it is the little details that make the difference when trying to make something as uber-realistic as this, such as the fact that the pupils didn't react to light. As for the lips - they're just not quite there yet - sometimes the speech didn't seem to be quite right.
The characters are expertly introduced and developed, most notably Anthony Hopkins character, Hrothgar and the tension between his wife. Grendell and his mother are wonderfully creepy and seductive, and bizarrely enough almost encourage sympathy.
For me the most disappointing part of the film was actually Ray Winstone as the titular character - he was fantastic when talking in a low growl, however the film really suffers when he shouts in full cockney accent. "I will kill your monstah!". I half expected Grendell's head to be smashed between a car and it's door. John Malkovitch is a saving grace with his none-more-sinister voice and interesting faith sub-plot.
The rating for this film has been hotly discussed and in my opinion I do not think it is suitable for children under the age of 12. Grendell would have truly terrified me as a child. The violence, as well as bawdiness, does not make it a family film for young children although having said that the lewd references do provide good humour and balances out the movie.
So, overall, this was worthy of an 8. Breathtaking animation, incredible action (especially the finale featuring an excellent dragon) and a generally brilliant cast. Beowulf throws down the gauntlet to film-makers to show what can be done with 3D and is an indication of the potential. It's not all the way there yet, but it's a damn good start.
66 out of 91 people found the following comment useful :-

Missed chance, this is not the poem., 23 November 2007
Author: earderne from Scotland
*** This comment may contain spoilers ***
This film has impressive special effects and would be okay as an adventure fantasy but it should not be marketed as the epic poem.Also it has been given the wrong rating and should be an R. Why all the changes? Grendel's mother was not a gold painted,nude,Barbie doll in stiletto heels.Grendel was not Hrothgar's son. Beowulf killed the witch he did not have sex with her.The dragon was not Beowulf's son and had no connection with the witch.Beowulf was not made Hrothgar's heir,nor did he marry his widow and become king of the Danes.In the poem Beowulf returned to Geatland after slaying Grendel. He remained the Geat king's best warrior,supporting him and the son who succeeded him. Only after the new king died did Beowulf become king of the Geats until his own death in later years.Also, why all the nudity in this film? This was Scandinavian northern Europe in the Dark Ages - folk would have Bean in furs and heavy woollens most of the time.The cartoon-like actors didn't help either with bland faces and expressionless eyes.
A far better movie 'Beowulf and Grendel' was made in 2004,filmed on location in Iceland,with an excellent cast of real actors and no CGI. The Iceland born Canadian director,Sturla Gunnarson,tried to get back to what could have been the original story that evolved over the centuries into the legend.It was gritty,made on a shoestring and had only limited cinema release,but thankfully it is available on DVD and is well worth a look.There is also an excellent companion DVD documentary called 'Wrath of Gods'which tells the incredible story of the filming of the movie, and the struggle to complete it with financial problems and the absolute hell of shooting it at the start of the Icelandic winter.
The new 'Beowulf' has also tried to ride on the coattails of '300', but again it suffers by not having real actors showing their courage and emotions.'300' scenes were like paintings come to life and the Spartans' impressive physiques and fighting skills were real,after hard training,with no computer enhancement.
An interesting point is the actor who links these three films - charismatic Gerard Butler.He was fiery yet also sensitive as King Leonidas and the earlier Beowulf and made the roles his own.
This 2007 film is a missed opportunity to bring the epic poem to life.
102 out of 167 people found the following comment useful :-

I AM (slightly let down by) BEOWULF!!!, 14 November 2007
Author: MovieDude1893 (moviedude1893@gmail.com) from Illinios,America
It seems we have a new cinematic fad coming into fashion... the genre of mythological action. It began with '300' (a film I really enjoyed), and the first that stands to benefit from 300's success is Beowulf. Beowulf is the newest film from Robert Zemeckis. Zemeckis implements many of the same visual themes of his last project, the heart warming Polar Express, with varied success.
Beowulf tells the story of the kingdom of King Hrothgar (a delightfully campy Anthony Hopkins)which is currently being terrorized by a monster named Grendel (Crispin Glover). Help comes in the form of mighty Beowulf (Ray Winstone), who arrives with an army of 14 men and his right hand man, Wiglaf (Brendan Gleeson). It his his job to slay the monster. However, he must also deal with Grendel's mother (Angelina Jolie). Beowulf is opposed by Unferth (John Malkovich), and has also been paying close attention to the king's wife, Wealthow (Robin Wright Penn).
Perhaps the most surprising element of the film is its sly, wink and a nod, sense of humor. This can be viewed two ways. The first view is one of enjoyment and laughter. However, it is hard to comply when we are asked to feel or identify with these characters after so many scenes presenting them as mere caricatures.
As expected, Beowulf is visually stunning. I'd argue it is the one category where this film bests 'Polar Express'. The 3-D photography is shockingly good. It is a film I wouldn't want to imagine in the traditional two dimension format. I strongly advise anyone who is going to see this to view the film in 3-D. Without it, the film would be borderline un enjoyable. The highlight is by far the final battle scene,which just begs you to forget the film's past misdeeds. Close, but no dice.
50 out of 65 people found the following comment useful :-

Better than I expected, 19 March 2008
Author: (lexo1770) from Ireland
I didn't expect a lot from 'Beowulf', for lots of reasons, most of which were to do with the casting: incorrigibly cockney Ray Winstone as a warrior from what's now southern Sweden; wacky John Malkovich as a cynical counselor; loony Crispin Glover as a flesh-rending monster, and weirdest of all, Angelina Jolie as the monster's mother...thaet waes wundorlic castyng, as the poet might have put it. Then there was the way they did the whole thing in CGI, running the risk of making it all look a bit rubbery. Finally, Robert Zemeckis is the director and my great respect for him plummeted through the floor and into the crawlspace after he presided over the insufferable 'Forrest Gump'.
Nevertheless, this is a lot better than I thought it would be. I missed the 3D incarnation as we were watching the DVD rather than the cinema release, but after a while you stop looking at the CGI and start enjoying it. This is a 'Beowulf' where the story, although different from the poem, is actually very far from shabby.
Without giving too much away, the main difference from the poem is that in the poem, there is no connection between the monster Grendel and his mother on one hand, and the dragon in the latter half of the poem on the other hand. In the film, a connection exists. Neil Gaiman and Roger Avary do a professional job of tying it all together in a satisfying Hollywood way, without betraying the basic darkness and sadness of the story; it's not like Beowulf rides off into the sunset with Wiglaf at the end. Crispin Glover is genuinely scary as the tormented and raw-boned Grendel, whose main problem is that he just can't stand the sound of people having fun, although since most of this fun consists of hairy men singing lewd songs you can see his point. Angelina Jolie's animated self spends all her on screen time walking around without any clothes on, something that apparently gave Jolie a blush when she saw a cut of the movie. (One of the more eerie things about this film is that the cartoon Angelina Jolie looks marginally more realistic than the actress herself.)
Despite an accent that's more Stockwell than Geatland, Ray Winstone does a fine, sombre job as the hero, although my wife thought that the animated Winstone looked more like Sean Bean. Brendan Gleeson does a splendid job in the niche he's carved for himself of Hairy Sidekick. The acting honours, or at least the animation honours, go to Robin Wright Penn (or whoever worked on her character) as the pale and melancholy queen; she has moments of subtle hesitation and sadness that struck me as a triumph of CGI acting.
There is much excellent smiting, some of it unfortunately toned down a little in order to keep a PG-13 rating - so we don't actually get to see Grendel biting men's heads off, just people's reactions to him doing so. Most importantly, the story is not a travesty of the original. It's thoughtful and interesting, as you'd expect from a writer of Gaiman's quality (if not from the author of 'Killing Zoe') and contains some striking meditations on the power of legend and reputation. Plus, there's a really huge kick-ass dragon. 'Beowulf' is a strange and unexpected treat.
69 out of 103 people found the following comment useful :-

A mildly amusing mix of "Shrek", "300" and computer-games, 13 November 2007
Author: (tinuvielas@stuerzerleuschner.de) from Hamburg, Germany
*** This comment may contain spoilers ***
Take a thousand year old heroic subject matter, spice it up with a dose of modern" morals such as men's only weakness is women" , add a few females according to type e.g. saints and whores and shoot this script as a CGI-mix of Shrek", 300" and popular computer-games: The result is Robert Zemecki's version of Beowulf". Works alright, the flick, as long as you don't take it seriously. However, whenever the Shrek"-Elements dominate the scene, the film runs into problems. Queen Wealtheow for instance fatally resembles the green Oger's mom. Besides, almost all Characters have a squint that would make Christopher Lambert at his best look good. Wet hair is still a problem of computer-graphics, too. Otherwise, the film is technically well made and gives you an idea how far Ralph Bakshi might have gone with his concept of graphically alienated live-action.
Still, over long stretches the motion-capture-technique is too reminiscent of computer-games to be convincing, and thus one is left with the question which audience this film is aimed at. Gaming kiddies can't watch it because all the ripping and tearing is far too bloody; adult Lord-of-the-Rings-fans will miss the depth of the original poem, despite some nice touches in the script such as King Hrothgar talking of Scops" or giving out rings to his thanes in the initial sequence, or Grendel and his mother seeming to talk Anglo-Saxonish. The linguistic climax of the movie is elsewhere, anyway: King Hrothgar, embodied (well, sort of) by Anthony Hopkins, telling his followers that Beowulf killed the monster and laid his mother... in her grave". How do you translate that for synchronized versions? This sequence gets to the heart of the difference of plot between the script and the heroic poem, i.e. the introduction of the eternal female temptation as motif for the hero's curse. Not a bad idea, really, especially in view of the traditional sword-penis-symbolism that is being exploited thoroughly in this film. Unfortunately, the way they put the idea on screen is cheesy to say the least. Thus Angelina Jolie's computerized curves seem designed to lure the average movie-goer, male, mid-twenties, meager intellect (is that according to statistics?). The hero Beowulf (one can't speak of actors or characters in this film) is modeled on the Gladiator but lacks his character; the monster is a crossbreed of Ent and skinned Gollum; the jokes are laconic (example: "How is your father? Dead."). Amusing and once in a while appealing in a darkly beautiful manner, especially when a whiff of northern Epic or landscape transcends the CGI. In these moments one gets an inkling of what might have been done with this script. Even the final fight with the dragon is impressive. But why does the dragon have a heart, small as a cow's? Why does the coast-guard sit in front of his fire in the pouring rain? And why does the final, unbearably long shot have to be so unbearably kitsch? Shame, really. You can either have grim realism, or you can have exaggerated, bad-taste fantasy. Try to amalgamate both, and the thing falls apart.
159 out of 287 people found the following comment useful :-

Don't waste your money on the 2-D version, this has 3-D written all over it!, 15 November 2007
Author: Simon Parker from United Kingdom
I have never had the experience of seeing a 3-D movie before on the cinema, the only experience I have had with a 3-d film, only courtesy of some 3-d glasses coming free with a DVD, was Spy Kids 3-D, a movie while mildly entertaining isn't exactly the best film every to display the greatness of 3-d. So Beowulf today was my first 3-d experience, I went in expecting something good because of the 3-d, but I didn't expect the movie itself to be superb. Part of my reasoning behind this was because of the one and only experience I had had with Zemeckis and his new way of making movies. That movie was unfortunately the Polar Express, a supposedly happy tail that actually freaked me out more than most horror movies! So what an absolute delight to say that Beowulf not only works because of it being in 3-D (more on that brilliant factor later) but also the movie is a genuinely brilliant movie anyway. The motion capture isn't remotely creepy this time round and actually it seemed to make sense in some bizarre way as to why they did the movie like this. The actors surprised me big time, Ray Winstone delivering actually one of his best performances in a long while, Angelina Jolie playing the slinky seductress to perfection and Anthony Hopkins being a joy to watch on screen. Beowulf is an action packed, well written and entertaining piece of popcorn cinema. Just watch the dragon sequence near the end, every single person in my cinema was on the edges of their seat and looked in awe. The action sequences just amaze, and the dialogue sequences surprisingly really work as well. Unfortunately however if you see this movie in 2-D then you will not be experiencing Beowulf in my eyes, take off the 3-D this is a 9/10 movie, with the 3-D it gets the 10/10 rating with a blink of an eye.
As I've previously said the acting in the movie really caught me off guard. Ray Winston obviously is not the first actor who comes to mind when playing an ancient warrior. However when you see the movie and see the performance you understand why Winstone was cast. Sure his cockney acting at first seems a bit bizarre coming from the character, but after a while you see the subtlety of the performance and come the final half hour you realise he's quite possibly the best thing in the movie. He delivers a heartfelt and genuinely brilliant performance. Anthony Hopkins not only looks real in the movie, but he too delivers a performance truly worthy of Anthony Hopkins. Sometimes Hopkins can do a role for a sake of a role (see Mission Impossible 2), but here he seems to be having a blast as Hrothgar and he has some superb moments in the movie. Angelina Jolie plays the most interesting character of the movie, Grendell's Mother, alas she appears very briefly. But her few scenes stick firmly in memory, and her entry scene is one of the most beautifully pieces of cinema I have seen when watched in 3-D. Crispin Glover too has brief screen time as Grendell, but he delivers a heartfelt performance, in fact I felt genuine sympathy with Grendell. Glover might not be recognisable, but his performance shines through in the early scenes. John Malkovich and Robin Wright Penn too deserve considerably praise, as does a brilliant cast Brendan Gleeson.
So as I've said the 3-D really makes the movie have a cherry on top of an already beautiful cake. After they filmmaker get over the gimmick of chucking things at the screen the 3-D is used less prominently, until any action sequences, and when the action sequences begin I doubt you will draw a single breath. Grendell's attack on a beer hall is the opening action sequence, and it is surprisingly violent for a 12a and also amazing to behold. But its the dragon sequence and late battle sequence that stick firmly in mind. I shall not spoil them, but those sequences really did make me wish that every action movie ever made from now will be in 3-D. The problem with the 3-D being so good is that the 2-D version seems like a cash in, in fact the movie relies so much on the 3-D at times that I doubt the 2-D version is worth watching. Swords pointed at screens, the camera pans through trees, the multi layered effect it gives off, in 2-d it just won't work as well, so my advice is to find a cinema that does play it in 3-d, you'll get much more for your money if you do. The storyline and film making is also extremely effective. The subtle dialogue scenes, especially the stuff between Winstone and Jolie really are some of the highlights. Also the relationship between Beowulf and his queen is touching.
So are their any faults? As I've mentioned the 2-D version just won't be as good, but also the movie doesn't seem like it'll be that good at the start. In fact at the beginning, for five minutes, I was expecting to be bitterly disappointed. Thankfully that little slouch at the beginning is livened up with the arrival of Grendell, and from that point onwards you will adore the movie. This is Zemeckis' best movie since Back to the Future and definitely one of my favourite films of the year. Go and watch in 3-D and pray that more movies will be made like this in the near future.
56 out of 83 people found the following comment useful :-

Chasing the Dragon, 18 November 2007
Author: David H. Schleicher from New Jersey, USA
*** This comment may contain spoilers ***
*The following is a review of the digital 3D version showing at select theaters:
Robert Zemeckis has always been a trailblazer with film technology. He was among the first to utilize CGI in "Death Becomes Her" and with his adaptation of the oldest surviving epic poem in the English language, he perfects the life-like digital computer animation he first experimented with in "The Polar Express". Like his canon of films over the years, "Beowulf" is an eye-popping mixed bag of cinematic tricks.
The animation has come to a point where it is eerily life-like. In "Beowulf" every blade of grass, every tree branch, and every strand of hair has been painstakingly detailed. And while it is hard to tell the difference between the digital Angelina Jolie and the real Angelina Jolie, there's still something about the human face, the nuances of the muscular features, the emotion running beneath, that this technology will never capture. It still depicts hollow, cold clones of real human beings that could never fully replace 3D flesh and blood.
What makes "Beowulf" so entertaining is the digital 3D technology. It creates some breathtaking vistas where you feel as if the landscapes are moving through you. In some of the more horrific scenes with Grendel, you'll find yourself jumping out of your skin. Zemeckis is like a magician with this technology. He's able to bleed something out of nothing by knowing how to get the reactions he wants from his audience with just the right sound effect, camera angle, and quick-cut to complete his trick. It's often ugly, but quite breathtaking.
Zemeckis loses some ground when he relies too much on juvenile machismo grandstanding to further character development. Sure, I love a good death by chandelier scene or a man getting ripped in half by a monster bit as much as the next guy, but all the bawdy humor wears thin. Even lamer was the scene where Beowulf fights Grendel in the buff, which contained almost as many laugh inducing sight gags as the scene where Bart skateboarded nude through Springfield in this summer's "The Simpsons Movie."
The mixed bag of tricks and sometimes slow build-up, however, eventually lead to a totally thrilling finale where Beowulf does battle with the dragon his misdeeds begot. In 3D, it's nerve-shattering fun. As an action adventure film, it makes the mark.
Ultimately you realize why this story has survived over 1200 years. "Beowulf" makes legendary the idea of a hero's fallibility and the global consequences of the sins of the father. These are universal themes that have been sung again and again in everything from Shakespeare to this year's best film, "Before the Devil Knows You're Dead." While the technology used to make this film may seem dated in a few years, the story will live on, and this just may be the definitive "Beowulf" for high school English teachers to use in their lame attempts to connect with their students. The savvier kids won't be fooled, but there's worse ways to pass the time in class.
Add another comment
Related Links