If u enjoy Polar Express CGI effects, u might appreciate this brave approach in movie history.

http://www.apple.com/trailers/paramount/beowulf/

It's gonna looks spectacular in Imax 3D cinema!~!

This post has been edited by dinodog_Jr: Jul 26 2007, 03:14 PM

when is it releasing here?

I've been looking forward to Beowulf ever since I heard of the project, but I found myself doing a double take at this and still thinking 'What the hell? Wasnt it supposed to be a cartoon?'





TRAILER HERE

This post has been edited by BurgaFlippinMan: Jul 28 2007, 12:22 AM

the main actor looks kinda old.

body still solid though

Its a fully CG animated movie. Angelina Jolie looks like...Angelina Jolie...

Holy mother of all things holy...
CGI Jolie...

looks like crap. why bother with CGI when you can use real actors? I dont find them real at all, all of them look fakey to me. Like a superbly done videogame cutscene. I like the 28 Weeks Later trailer music though, nevermind the fact that it doesn't fit in with the trailer at all.

Eh, I was definately more excited about the movie before watching the trailer. I'm also dissapointed to hear that the R-rated script was toned down to make it PG-13.

Btw, the international trailer is out, it has some scenes not in the US cut.

This post has been edited by screech: Aug 1 2007, 09:06 AM

what did they show of Jolie? why was it R? boob or butt or bush?

it has a Silvestri score. I think Silvestri doing an action fantasy score is good enough reason to catch it at least once. He doesnt get much such work these days. what with producers seemingly preferring the by-the-numbers Zimmer and company sound

This post has been edited by BurgaFlippinMan: Aug 1 2007, 01:59 PM

The CGI looks like crap!? Are you seriously kidding.

yeah crap in the sense that they tried so hard to make it look real and it still doesn't look real. wait for a few more years la then only try a full realistic CGI movie. for the time being I'll stick to the non-realistic animations of Pixar.

There's no harm trying really. At least this looks far better than the crappy Final Fantasy: The Spirits Within. LOL

---

Added on August 1, 2007, 11:12 pmWell they have to move step by step. In the mean time I guess things like this pay for further development in some ways. It is already a significant step forward from the Polar Express for one. The thing about CGI is, they look great when they are released, but they age fast. For example, the CG F-18s in ID4 may have looked awesome in 1997, but now they have dated worse than the post-Return of the Jedi model effects of Star Trek III. As for CG humans, its a fact that the closer they get to the real thing, the more we tend to nitpick.

This post has been edited by BurgaFlippinMan: Aug 1 2007, 11:14 PM

okay a bump up. its showing on 15th of Nov?
fake angelina showing her b00bsies?

truly said,bro..

went to watch that in cinema,my frens hated it, though i liked it.. i dont know why.. lol
maybe coz the bad guy looked a little like seph..

I had no idea it was in CGI when I watched the trailer for the first time. It looked real. But then again the trailer was in crappy quality so I couldn't really tell.
Kinda makes it less exciting to know that its in CGI and at the same time meant to look real. For some reason. I'd prefer if it was the actors themselves than some animated character. At least the feel is there. If you get my drift.

i read from newspaper that Beowulf is going to show in Imax 3D.

But i've check the schedule of IMAX and no plan to release this movie in 3D also la...

any one has updates?

The first time i came into Polar Express i felt surprised wif the Realistic human CGI style. It looks almost real human to me. I had the same feeling why tried so hard to make CGI characters.

After watched the full movie, the effort is awesome to impress me enough.

Final Fantasy is still one impressive CGI masterpiece to me despite the not so fantasy storylines.

From the trailer of Beowulf, the CGI skills haf reaches into another milestone in the industry. It is either to accept it or skip it from audiences.

The concept is to make perfectnism characters outlook in a movie without "troubling" the real actor/actress that much like keep muscular figure or complex make-up effects spending with long hours.

Besides, Richard Linklater is one of the Director who done cel-shading animation wif manually painting skill in two of his filmworks. You may called it a style or revolutionary in film presentation.

I believe Beowulf is one of the kind to show how's the future film making.
Beowulf style needs multi-talented artists + Artistic technician + Artistic programmers to reach this level of realism CGI.

Hopefully, there would not be overflow realistic CGI human movies like the CGI cartoons nowadays.

Myself still prefer real human movie plus necessary CGI effects. So far i had no problem with Beowulf CGI style as i know such quality of filmwork is pretty rare & hard to achieve.

This post has been edited by dinodog_Jr: Nov 15 2007, 02:33 PM

oh no dun mention Final Fantasy.
the CGI is good enought,but the worst thing is the mouth can pair with the voice.

beowulf sound like god of war.
i hope i wrong.

but no matter how.i going to watch this for sure

well polar express is superb if you watch it on 3D in IMAX. if you go to normal cinema, the excitement is down at least 30% of it.

so any of u guys know if beowulf is shown in imax 3d?

I'm gonna give this a skip. I dont want to sit through a 2 hour long videogame cutscene.

beowulf won show in m'sia IMAX.
soli to tell u tat

what is wrong with video game cutscenes? have you ever seen any of the cutscenes produced by Blizzard? Epic is the word the describe them...

Are they showing in on IMAX 3D (with 3D glasses and IMAX sound)?

When is it comming out?

i've just called IMAX out. the employee there is quite blur la when i ask them if IMAX malaysia planning to release Beowulf 3D.

They seems like dont understand me and just say "
No beowulf. only bee movie"

sigh...communication error. worse still, they ask me to go to gsc to purchase.

I guess there is no plan for beowulf 3d to be shown in malaysia for time being.

sad to hear that...i think it will worth every single cent since it is 3D.

but well, too bad.

yup.... apparently some ppl think they have higher taste compared to the rest

but they did show polar express when it come out back then rite, is it in full 3d?

yup Polar Express and Open Season was shown in full 3D version. I manage to watch Open Season in full 3D and it was spectacular.

There is progress in our film censorship board. I saw tits on the big screen for the first time in my life.

Its warmly received on RT.com so far. Plus, vgm cutscenes dont come anywhere close. Plus, Zemeckis is a good filmmaker any way you cut it. Plus, its got a freaking Silvestri action score for pete's sake!!!

Burga - who wonders when Zemeckis will work with live action again, considering his next movie post Beowulf is yet another CG fest

---

Added on November 16, 2007, 5:28 pmI saw them in 300.

This post has been edited by BurgaFlippinMan: Nov 16 2007, 05:28 PM

ever heard of 'opinions'?

the story, direction, score, etc wont do nothing for me when the visuals themselves make me wanna throw up. the people look like walking wax figures for chrissake! with dead cold eyes not unlike of those found on dead fishes. and to top it off... unnatural movement that I really, really cannot stand looking at for more than a minute. the closer they want it to look like the real thing, the more it pisses me off.

oh and also crappy fire effects.

I have to agree with Quickfire. It was a step forward in film making but nothing would have beaten real Jolie tits and real Butler like muscles. I mean CG should be the backdrop and not become to a point where it is repulsive. Realistic when doing monsters and scenery but for humans? Lacks a touch.

I seriously dont mind if not of the crappy story line.. My friend who read the book told me actually it's actually different from that..

eu.... i have mixed feeling coming out from the cinema.. thumbs down compare to recently watched movie

Only if you actually based your opinion after watching the movie not based on a trailer. But then again i'm sure you're pretty much clueless when it comes to the technical achievements in 3D animation so far. Progress takes time u know.

just caught the movie a few hours ago, and the funny thing about it is,the CGI seemed to get better as the movie went on!

most of the time the cgi either stays the same throughout the whole movie,or gets progressively worst towards the end.but this movie is the opposite

then again,maybe my eyes got used to it later on..

but in any case,the beginning characters looked wooden with hardly any expression at all...but later on it become more life like

Yeah they did the wrinkles very well eh? And the cave part with the dragon coming out, damn it was awesome. Robin Wright Penn looked nothing like Robin Wright Penn and I know how Penn looks like. A damn angel, is she. They did old-age Beowulf well but still lacked a bit. And you think when he cut his arm off, he'd fall to his death but it still dangles.

forgot to add:
you dont see TITS in this movie,you see BOOBS.

it's no different than the usual movies where the heroine/villainess wears skin tight clothing

In the end, you could see her nipples afloat. It counts!!!

And the big tittied girl wiping the table LOLX

right...

i was a little scared for

Tak nampak penis pun. Wondering if we would have seen Hopkin's CG-ed penis. I mean it did fall off

The creators of Beowulf probably saw how successful 300 was with its visual effects and decided to run with it. It's like sequels; the second movie tries to play on the success of the first. If people loved 300, they might think "Hey, Beowulf seems like 300. I should go see it." Instant money-maker.

1st person saw the trailer and thought it was real human acting, with angeline jolie as naked mermaid.
2nd person is convinced that the 1st person is telling the truth.

end up 2 extra movie tickets sold and contributing to the biggest concase in film industry.

i just got back from watching this in 3D. quite okay laa. there are lots of scenes in the film that specifically shot to show off the 3D effects. they're using polarized glasses, so now i know why it's shot in 3D and not live action. it's easier to render the graphics to produce 3D effects rather than shooting it live action.

anyways, i recommend watching this in 3D. quite fun. especially the battle at the end.

but to watch it without 3D? the story's very typical, the characters are so-so, and the graphics are quite okay but nothing that i've not seen before.

well of course I'm basing my opinion upon the trailers. are you telling me the people in the movie itself look better than on the trailer?

its commendable that they try to up the ante for 3d animation but with results like, this sticking to using real humans would be far better. sure the details are all there, but what use is that when you cant even get the movement, eyes, and that damn glossy waxy looking people right? and as azarimy said, the cgi doesn't look all that groundbreaking at all, only more detailed.

then again watching it in 3d might be fun, so I dont know.

oh yea today's The Star review.

This post has been edited by QuickFire: Nov 17 2007, 11:44 AM

does anyone knows when IMAX will show it? if not, i have to settle for 2D

So this film doesnt have real actor in it?

The way I look at it. Its nothing wrong trying to push visual effects into new grounds. The thing is, how long do you wait till you show it? Wait till its perfect? The money spent has to be recouped somehow. This looks far better than the Polar Express, which looked great in its time or the digital humans in the Matrix sequels. Its the same as everything else. Attack of the Clones was a breakthrough with its digital world, looked pretty darn good at its time but naturally, being the pioneer, has aged a little quicker than usual. But without AOTC, would we have gotten stuff like Sky Captain, Sin City or even 300? The same goes for early CG, or even the motion control of Star Wars.

Plus like I said, a big Silvestri fantasy action score should be worth the price of admission alone. He's not getting these kinds of assignments much anymore, with the field being dominated by the sounds of Zimmer and his army of clones, and with Poledouris and Goldsmith dead. If this sounds anything like Van Helsing, a score which teaches MV how it should be done (and from preview clips, it does), its a good listen to me.

---

Added on November 17, 2007, 2:09 pmRubbish. This went into production around 2005

This post has been edited by BurgaFlippinMan: Nov 17 2007, 02:14 PM

well, just an average flick....

no harm watching

It was quite decent act and not bad for a story line..good but not tat good though...but i was mesmerize by da vast improvement of CGI in tis movie..Kudos to them..

That's one small step towards a world beyond imagination..

good storyline. nice ending. 3.5/5 star.
but .. it feels like watching shrek.

So this movie is funny as hell?
I've got to watch it then.

I think wat he means is its like watchin a CGI movie..in between realism and...er...animation...?

not only b00bsies - t1ties included

---

Added on November 18, 2007, 6:08 amerm - beowulf = x anthony hopkins lah . Hopkins plays' beowulf' good friend and hopkins wasnt shown naked. Beowulf was - totally naked while fighting the montrous Grandel (Angelina's son)

Ray Winstone plays beowulf



This post has been edited by g5sim: Nov 18 2007, 06:14 AM

anthony hopkins is the king la.. the one the garment fell down and he "catch" it on time..

fair enough point, though I still feel the filmmakers are trying to overcomplicate things by doing a full motion capture and then synthesizing it and resulting in something that doesnt look half as good as real actors.

Yeah I was talking about the king la. They censored halfway while he was giving his speech.

I think it's a clever move to made it in 100% CGI. We could get awesome angles and actions. I think another 5 yrs down the road it's hardly could differentiate cgi and real life but by then cgi will use as more of artistic impressions. Only blizzard would made 2hrs movie of their cgis , pure cash galore for them not to mention the stories were wonderful as well. IMO Transformers should be made into CGI rather than life action so that we could see more robots interactions rather than puny humans. CGI Megan Fox anyone!

^ Then shud make a CGI oscar instead.

I watched the movie too yesterday, it is pretty well done! like the effects, the color, the texture, the approach, the direction, it's all good, i just don't like the chinese subtitles

Lack of emotion could be portrayed la. It lacks a touch of ermm....yeah that's right HUMAN!

BurgaFlippinMan and NasiLemakMan... any affiliation??

---

Added on November 18, 2007, 10:08 pmBurgaFlippinMan and NasiLemakMan... any affiliation??

This post has been edited by QuickFire: Nov 18 2007, 10:08 PM

that's what people said of FF TSW..
but look where we are now...

one is western,one is eastern

can you please stop using acronyms? I had to take 15 seconds to figure out it's Final Fantasy The Spirits Within.

And now it's pretty good with freckles and old age depicted well. Wait for Avatar and then we'll judge. Cameron has always been great with technology. Look at T2 FFS.

i am only looking forward to watch this movie just so i can watch the cloverfield trailer early on.I hope they will show it in malaysia

already watch it. give it 3 out of 5... fantastic cgi but the storyline just so so...



and yes, scaring your audience with sudden appearances of monsters with loud noises are soooo old school

Have tonnes of that in recent so called 'scary movies' so cheapo.

CGI movies like that, personally dont impress me anymore....bugs life to me is a better cgi movie....a least it has better story element.

her boobies. heard no censor. true?

huh?? really? i am 'might' watch this film with my mom and my cousin...!!!

also... is this film BETTER than Bee Movie?

Bee Movie or Beowulf ?

PS : I hope Beowulf is not the 'all dark, all raining, all night-time, monster slaying film'...

This is a movie forum. TSW isnt all that uncommon an abbreviation, tho not up there with TMP, TWOK, RoTLA, JP, the various SWs....

---

Added on November 19, 2007, 1:36 pmTo be fair, the closer they get, the more critical people are. We are just so used to the nuances of human movement its an overwhelming task for the animators to get right.

This post has been edited by BurgaFlippinMan: Nov 19 2007, 01:36 PM

ok I am lost. TMP is The Monty Phyton? RoTLA - Lost Ark? .

OK, I am going WTF on this.

Here's some good movie acronyms...

WAWOM - what a waste of money
WAAM - what an amazing movie
WTFDIWTF - why the **** did I watch this film
TMCML - this movie changed my life
ISHGMTPD - I should have gotten my that p****ed DVD
TFIRMM - That ****ing idiot ruined my movie
IWTTLAMTEM - I went to the loo and missed the entire movie

many audiences did not find this movie to be interesting........at least from the cinema that i watched this show.....

everyone was like WTF?

and the group of guys behind me said "cheebai....wasted my rm11...i want them to farking refund me!!"

It was ok but i didnt really like those fake people..

TMP is 'The Motion Picture', which in turn is short for Star Trek: The Motion Picture. you got the other one right, tho admittedly simply using Raiders is even more popular.

i admire the simplicity of the story of this movie, but not many people appreciate it. This is a well executed film

ya. it is ok but it will be better if those actors are human.

why is it that when something finally comes around which is probably worth an IMAX 3D viewing, the 3D version never comes to Malaysia? We missed out on Superman Returns, and now this. Grrr

I am going to watch this on Saturday. Hopefully, it won't disappoint me.

gonna watch it tmr....it better be good...

Want to ask. Is the end part is real human or animation. Noticed the eye motion got different. Like real human.

everything's 3D in my opinion. bcoz out of all the actors, only the grendel's mother and the former king resembles angelina jolie and anthony hopkins respectively.

Finally get to watch it. The animation looked real at times but fake during others. So uh..don't really know what to think of it. Definitely prefer the real thing.
There was also way too much talking. A lot. But I thought the story was kinda interesting so I didn't really get bored like I usually do.And there was only like two or three fighting scenes. But they were quite well done and entertaining, especially the last one with the dragon which I thought was pretty intense.
Overall it was alright. I'll probably remember Angelina Jolie's wet p*ssy more than anything else.



This post has been edited by masterelr: Nov 28 2007, 09:00 PM

I've watched it. I thought Angelina Jolie looks like Adrianne Curry renders by nvidia, seriously. I don't like it, I don't fancy Angelina Jolie in the first place

The graphics is only nice sometimes, most of the time I just see flaws. Especially horse, and some movement are still robotics and unnatural

Storyline is quite interesting, but to much talking like masterelr said. My friend got so bored that he falls asleep

3/10

1. Heroes never went pass beauty despite it's actually demon.
2. Nothing to cheer about. CG
3. Gilded Angelina Jolie

"...the most intense, cinematic and drop dead gorgeous animated film ever produced..." - Roger Ebert

the writers had made the hero flawed and corrupted, the scary monster grandel seems to be so fragile and pitiful.

well sometimes i think the story is still nice when ther is totally respectable hero. just a fight of good and evil

boring animated movie i've ever seen i thought i'm watching real live actor but i double check with the movie poster only notice its animated...

i still haven't watch this movie..
few days ago only i know that this movie was all in 3D..ll this while i thought it was acted by real ppls....who knows...hehehe....will go watch maybe...

quite violent this movie...especially the opening scene so be prepared. And also have some nude scene. I know it is just animation but still looks like angelina jolie in the nude. Not sure why no censor. So definitely not suitable for kids.

This post has been edited by SpectacularButter: Dec 2 2007, 02:27 AM

yeah summore nude scenes..not for kids..but jolie boobies were well designed hehe..

---

Added on December 7, 2007, 2:16 amdon't frgt to bring pillows or extra-caffeine coffee!

This post has been edited by izzathamidon: Dec 7 2007, 02:16 AM

Yeah yeah those censor board prolly thought its a cartoon lets just steal some chicken.

worst animated movie I have ever watched ....