jürgen fauth’s muckworld

Robert Zemeckis’ high-tech “performance capture” adaptation of the Old English poem turns actors–Ray Winstone, Anthony Hopkins, Robin Wright Penn, John Malkovich, Angelina Jolie–into rubbery action figures. Only Crispin Glover, covered in a disgusting, festering texture, manages to infuse some sort of twisted soul into his Grendel. I saw this in 3-D, which is sorta groovy if you’ve taken some preventive aspirin, but it also further increases the sense of artificiality. The action sequences have all the excitement of a video game cut scene.

Beowulf is only one of a slew of recent movies that wouldn’t have been possible without The Lord of the Rings, and Zemeckis lifts dozens of shots directly from Peter Jackson. Of course, Tolkien in turn would be unthinkable without the Anglo-Saxon poem — and so we come full circle.

Long ago, in the Age of Heroes, I wrote an essay about “hyperfiction” that used the cheap carnival effects of early 3-D movies as metaphor for the teething troubles of a new form. I was tickled to see that even at this late stage, 3-D still means “Poles in Your Face,” along with all manners of swords, naked torsos, dripping saliva, and flaming arrows. It’s true that Neil Gaiman’s script manages to put a somewhat interesting spin on the original epic, but first and foremost, Beowulf is self-satisfied spectacle. I’d rather play God of War. Opens Friday.

Beowulf. Robert Zemeckis, 2007. **

• 300
• Beowulf and Grendel
• Beowulf at Rotten Tomatoes
• Wikipedia
• The trailer:

D.W. Griffith’s epic about “Love’s Struggle Throughout the Ages” is surprisingly compelling for a silent film from 1916. “Out of the cradle endlessly rocking,” four stories take shape. In the modern tale, a working family endures greedy bosses, meddling “uplifters” and false murder charges. The other three stories tell of Christ’s crucifixion, the St. Bartholomew’s Day Massacre, and the fall of Babylon. As the opening credits helpfully announce, the common theme, invoked again and again, is intolerance (you have to say it with a booming carnival-barker’s voice: in-tol-er-ance!). The accelerating back-and-forth between historical periods keeps things interesting, and of course you already heard about the unbelievable sets of the Babylonian sections. The gargantuan siege contains more than a few moments that will seem familiar from The Lord of the Rings, but hey, everybody’s ripping off Peter Jackson. Intolerance is recommended for anyone; if you have a taste for silent film, it’s a must-see.

Intolerance: Love’s Struggle Throughout the Ages. D.W. Griffith, 1916. ****

• The entire movie on Google Video
• Intolerance at Wikipedia
• Tim Dirks’ Review at Filmsite.org

Here are ten minutes of the siege of Babylon:

After over a year of exile from Middle-Earth, the itch was getting too strong to resist. Much too much has been said about these movies already, so here are just three thoughts: (1) If you’re going to do a marathon, I strongly recommend the theatrical versions over the extended edition. You want the epic span of the story, but you don’t want all the buttnumbing footnote scenes. Sorry, purists. (2) In retrospect, The Two Towers is the weakest of the series. Gollum is terrific and the film’s climax offers good payoff, but the subplots about Faramir, Rohan, and Treebeard just aren’t nearly as interesting as the major storylines in the other two movies. (3) Return of the King has such a wealth of incredible visuals and is pitched at such an intense level of drama that it’s bound to remain a milestone for a long time to come. It also makes King Kong seem especially pointless–everything that movie was supposed to do, Return of the King had already done much better. As epic genre film, as ensemble melodrama, as special effects extravaganza, and as literary adaptation, The Lord of the Rings still reigns supreme.

The Fellowship of the Ring. Peter Jackson, 2001. *****
The Two Towers. Peter Jackson, 2002. *****
The Return of the King. Peter Jackson, 2003. *****

• Return of the King at Rotten Tomatoes: 94%

[tags]the lord of the rings, fantasy, hobbits, peter jackson, viggo mortensen, sean astin, elijah wood, cate blanchett, orlando bloom, ian mckellen, tolkien, adaptation, trilogy, marathon, film, 5 stars[/tags]

For the third special edition, Jackson added a hefty 50 minutes, for a total of almost four hours of Hobbit action. There’s more fighting, more dwarf jokes, and more speeches about friendship and hope, all of which I can take or leave. What works are the more fleshed-out bits about the Paths of the Dead (which now has a much-needed bump in the dramatic arc), the Houses of Healing, and various odds and ends that slow the rush toward the finale in the last hour. Saruman gets a final scene (you remember Christopher Lee went public with his anger at being cut out), the Mouth of Sauron makes a great appearance, and Gandalf faces the King of the Nazgul. As always, the extended edition makes for a more filling experience.

Now I’ve got six hours of documentary footage and sixteen hours worth of commentary tracks to watch….