Robert Zemeckis's Beowulf took a lot of hits for its perceived silliness, a verdict I could never quite sign on to. First of all, silly compared to what? Have these people seen the 1999 space opera Beowulf starring Christopher Lambert? Compared to that, Zemeckis's Beowulf is a sober meditation on the human condition. Have they seen the Gerard Butler clunker Beowulf and Grendel? Come on, guys: considering what the movies have done to this story in the past, last year's high-tech effort seems like serious business to me.

What about the source material – the ancient Old English epic poem upon which these movies purport to be based? If you've ever read it (or tried to read it), the perversions of the adaptations shouldn't surprise you. It's both begging for action movie treatment and impossible to faithfully adapt into anything resembling a compelling action movie. The story is credited with generating many of the archetypes we see in our fiction, and indeed, it's so archetypical that by modern standards, it's a skeleton; there's nothing there.

Seriously – you know how people complain about movies whose plots can be fully described in one sentence? A faithful Beowulf would take this phenomenon to new heights. A synopsis would read something like this: Beowulf beats up Grendel, Grendel's mom, and a dragon, and dies. The end. Some complained that the Zemeckis version distorted Beowulf, but I'd have liked to see their reaction to an undistorted adaptation. Trust me, it wouldn't work. There's a reason that all these screenwriters have scrambled to add elements to the story.

Calm down, they aren't filming Back to the Future IV in Manhattan's meat-packing district. But what they are filming there, or were filming a week or so ago anyway, is a music video for an R&B artist named o'Neal McKnight that will feature both Christopher Lloyd as Doc Brown and the DeLorean, to boot. Apparently this McKnight guy is a "huge fan" of the BTTF series and was somehow able to talk Lloyd into reprising his character to create a BTTF-themed video for his hit song, "Check Your Coat." Donning the fright-hair and jacket and tool belt for the first time in a long time, Lloyd as Doc Brown encounters McKnight, who is playing a coat-check clerk, and "the duo leap into the past and future, giving McKnight a glimpse into his life and relationship with a beautiful lady whom he meets while at the dance club." BTTF.com has a bunch of photos from the shoot as well as video and a detailed account of the goings on, and it's actually quite interesting to look at.

I'm not all that surprised that Lloyd would don the outfit again, frankly -- he's never struck me as an actor who is a) all that choosy in terms of what he does or b) one who is likely to avoid his most famous creation. In fact, I'd wager that if there were any opportunity at all to continue the adventures of Doc Brown on the big screen, he'd be there in a heartbeat. Never gonna happen, of course. Robert Zemeckis and Co. have said until they're blue in the face that they are not interested in continuing the series -- they would never want to and Universal would never be interested in doing future installments that would have to be sans-Marty. Oh wait ... Zemeckis is Mr. Motion Capture now ... hmmm ... interesting.

[via Moviehole]

I'm torn. I'm really not a fan of that fancy motion-capture stuff used in Polar Express and Beowulf. I find it distracting, and when I watch it, I mourn the loss of those subtle facial expressions and mannerisms that are just not caught with the technology. That being said, I don't know how I could miss seeing A Christmas Carol sporting the likes of Michael J. Fox, Christopher Lloyd, and Jim Carrey, plus Gary Oldman (be still my fangirl heart) and a stand-in Cary Elwes. Sneaky Robert Zemeckis, luring me in with his cast.

Now it looks like there might be a twist to this whole thing, or one of the cast members is a wee bit confused. While talking to MTV, young (12-year-old) actress Sammi Hanratty, said: "I play the character 'Want,' [of] 'Want and Greed.' They are the evil characters hidden in Santa's coat. Jim Carrey plays Santa Claus. He's like 16 different characters." Yes, that's right -- Santa Claus. As MTV points out, Santa isn't a figure in Christmas Carol, but Sammi insists: "It was in the movie; you have to watch it again!" I also don't remember St. Nick in the tale, but maybe I missed one version. I can't imagine that a young girl would be that confused about Santa -- kids are pretty knowledge about the jolly gift giver. So, is she just confusing him with the Ghost of Christmas Present, is there a version with Santa, or is Zemeckis twisting the world a little and including St. Nick?

Well, I guess if you are looking to cast an unlikely couple, then Ewan McGregor and Jim Carrey would probably be at the top of the list. Variety reports that McGregor has signed to play the romantic lead opposite Jim Carrey in the black comedy, I Love You Philip Morris. The film centers on Steven Russell (Carrey), a Texas conman who fell in love with his cellmate, Phillip Morris (played by McGregor). The script is based on the true story of Russell and his various escape attempts to be with his true love. Some of the more elaborate attempts included "using a green pen and bucket of water to change his prison outfit into what appeared to be surgical scrubs, another time by faking his death from AIDS and signing his own death certificate". But all did not end well for the lovers and while Morris eventually made it out of prison, Russell managed to earn a 144 year sentence for his various escape attempts.

The film is the directorial debut of Glenn Ficarra and John Requa, who are best known as the writers of Bad Santa. Ficarra and Requa also wrote the script based off of crime reporter Steve Mcvicker's novel. The film is set to start production as soon as Carrey is finished with Robert Zemeckis' latest foray into motion capture, A Christmas Carol (where Carrey is set to play multiple parts). McGregor has already lined up the Hitchcock-inspired Number 13 and the big-screen version of I, Lucifer for 2008. Plus, he has just finished work on The List with Hugh Jackman -- now that's the on-screen couple I've been hoping for; but no such luck.

With Beowulf, the latest motion-capture film from director Robert Zemeckis, one of mankind's oldest tales is hurled up onto the movie screen using the cutting edge of new technology. As in The Polar Express, Zemeckis's first foray into motion-capture animated moviemaking, the actors are first shot on a soundstage, wearing motion-indicating elements that allow computers to turn their movements and facial expressions into sets of data; then, that data is animated by computers and artists, so that real motion and facial expressions can be re-cast in fantastic settings and melded with wild imaginings. As if that weren't enough, the resulting movie in this case has also been enhanced so the theatrical experience is 3-D; swords, dragons and flame leap from the screen, hovering right before your very eyes. It all sounds wonderful.

But, as so often happens in life, the execution falls somewhat short of the expectation. I know it seems like a betrayal of the critic's job -- to look deeper, to see beyond the obvious -- to begin with complaints about the animation in the film, but it would be even more of a betrayal of the critic's job to not point out the most obvious and glaring fact about Zemeckis's technique. Namely, that it looks horrible. A scientist working in the burgeoning field of the human perception of virtual simulacra would talk Beowulf's animation in the context of the "uncanny valley," the phenomena where, when confronted with a robot or virtual avatar that has a high degree of match to human movement and appearance, the human mind flip-flops and instead obsesses about the smaller elements of mis-match, jarred by the mistakes in the image instead of thrilled by the accuracies. (Confronted with a 98% accurate simulacra, for example, most people instead fixate on the 2% difference.) But I'm not a scientist working in the burgeoning field of the human perception of virtual simulacra; as a layman, I can only offer that in Beowulf (as in The Polar Express), Zemeckis seems to have created a world peopled by drowning victims brought back to life after a three-week soak: Pale, puffy, slow-moving revenants with no light in their eyes.

Note: The Beowulf screening that I attended was held at a massively awesome IMAX cinema in London. The film was presented in a frankly stunning 3-D format that I honestly cannot wait to experience again. Having said that, I shall try to review the film in two parts: the presentation and the film itself.

Part I: The Presentation

Holy ****ing moly. I've simply never seen anything like it. IMAX 3-D and a movie that was tailor-made for this kind of presentation. Not a "big-scale" movie that just happened to look good on a giant screen (like, say, Superman Returns), but a film that was actually constructed with the giant 3-D exhibition in mind. And to say it works resoundingly well is an understatement on par with "baby ducks are cute." Having spent the last thirty years scouring through as many movies as humanly possible, I consider myself a passionate-yet-cynical flick-watcher. It takes a lot for me to be "stunned," "dazzled," or "amazed" -- but this screening of Beowulf is something I'll remember for a very long time. Basically, this is the finest "3-D" experience I've ever witnessed, from the "yikes, it's coming right at me!" stuff to the feeling of total "immersion" in the story. On a purely visual scale, Beowulf is one of the most entertaining movies I've ever seen.

Spend the extra gas money if you have to, but find an IMAX theater and see the flick there. You won't be sorry.

Part II: The Movie

My main problem with Robert Zemeckis' most recent animated experiment (The Polar Express) was that it was very lovely to look at, but I found a hollow core at the center. Very little heart, and even less of a narrative, basically: A cinematic novelty item. But when I heard that Zemeckis would be teaming with writers Neil Gaiman and Roger Avary for a relatively faithful adaptation of the legendary Beowulf poem, I was more than a little intrigued. Having recalled enough of Beowulf from high school to know that it was a grim and moody adventure story, I filed this flick into my "wanna see" pile and waited to see how things turned out.

If you're a regular reader of this website, then you might have noticed a little something missing over the last two weeks. That missing something is ... me. So my apologies to all (five) of you who look forward to my movie reviews, horror news, and random blather -- but I'll be back in full force next week! Still, after the cinematic experience I had last night, I just had to take a break from my UK vacation and share this anecdote:

Thanks to some contacts here in England, I was able to wrangle an invite to a BAFTA screening of Robert Zemeckis' Beowulf -- and since I was assigned that title for Cinematical review, I figured it was a smart move to go see the flick now. But then I looked a little closer at the invitation: The screenings were being held the BFI London IMAX Cinema! In Hi-Def 3-D! Whoa! (Special thanks to Mr. Alan Jones and Warner UK for the invitation!)

Now, before I continue, I think it's important to share some of my opinions on filmmaker Robert Zemeckis: I think the guy's a great filmmaker, but also that his last few films (particularly The Polar Express) were more interested in technology than storytelling. But it's pretty tough to hold a grudge against the guy who gave us Used Cars, Roger Rabbit and the Back to the Future trilogy, plus I was really curious to see what screenwriters Neil Gaiman and Roger Avary were going to do with the classic Beowulf story, so off we went to the cinema: Myself, UK FrightFest co-honcho Paul McEvoy, Severance screenwriter James Moran, and Guardian film critic Phellim O'Neal. We climbed inside the stunningly massive IMAX theater, the lights went down, and ...

Wow.

My full review will arrive on Tuesday, but if you've never trusted me before, you simply must trust me on this: If you plan to go see Beowulf, you MUST see it in IMAX 3-D. Suffice to say that, for me, it was a cinematic experience on par with the first time I saw Star Wars. I felt like I was just being introduced to the future of movies -- and it was staggering to behold.

Plus the flick's pretty darn good.

I'm still not sold on this performance-capture stuff (Beowulf looks terrible), but leave it to Steven Spielberg, Peter Jackson and a little adventuring character named Tintin to change my mind ... hopefully. Dreamworks and producer Kathleen Kennedy (E.T.: The Extra-Terrestrial) are busy working on their 3-D animated trilogy based on Georges "Herge" Remi's iconic Belgian reporter character, and I'm really hoping they get it right. Although they haven't yet found a third filmmaker to helm the installment not being directed by Spielberg or Jackson, they have hired a screenwriter. According to The Hollywood Reporter, British television vet Steven Moffat will script all three parts. The guy has written for series' as diverse as Coupling, Doctor Who and this past summer's Jekyll. Is he ready to tackle such a big-deal project?

Personally, I'm not worried about the scripts for the Tintin movies. Herge was such a great storyteller that I can't imagine it would be difficult to adapt his work. What I'm more worried about is how the film will look. From what we've heard so far, they're attempting something that looks realistic (or live-action) while still retaining the look of Herge's drawings (which are cartoons). Sure, I want to be able to trust Spielberg and Jackson (as Scott mentioned awhile back: if you can't trust them, who can you trust?), but then I haven't seen any performance-capture work that I've been satisfied with -- at least not anything that encompassed an entire film and all of its characters. Will it be more like Robert Zemeckis' Beowulf, which looks too much like a video game, or will it be more like Jackson's work with Andy Serkis in both his Lord of the Rings trilogy and King Kong? Or will it be something totally new, unlike anything we've ever seen? All I have to say is that I hope Zemeckis isn't the third director hired.

After Polar Express, you've got to gore things up a bit. Robert Zemeckis is soon to return with Beowulf, and now we've got another trailer to feast on at the official website -- one safely housed behind one of those age verification pages. This time around, we've got lots of Beowulf ranting, merged with lots of blood and death. Well, what looks like animated blood that is. With this trailer, we get to see some of Grendel's victims, plus some slow-mo, blood-filled action during a Grendel attack. At the very least, you can expect this to be completely over the top.

Stylistically, I think I prefer it's predecessor, Sturla Gunnarsson's Beowulf & Grendel, which came out last year. It's far from flashy, but it's got the fighting and the drama -- just in a less-sensational package. That being said, it's pretty hard to resist the names attached to this sucker. Beyond Zemeckis, there's Neil Gaiman and Roger Avary responsible for the screenplay, and then there's the cast. Angelina Jolie has seemed to make the biggest splash so far seeing that she's pretty nude as Grendel's Mother, but there's also Beowulf -- Ray Winstone from my loved Proposition, Anthony Hopkins as King Hrothgar, Robin Wright Penn as Queen Wealtheow, Alison Lohman as Ursula, John Malkovich as Unferth, and of course, Crispin Glover as Grendel. We'll finally get to see the whole package on November 16, but if you want some epic adaptations before then, check out Gunnarsson's version.

I watched Who Framed Roger Rabbit again the other night (loved every minute of it for the hundredth time), and now that I'm older I'm able to appreciate the greatness of Bob Hoskins as Eddie Valiant. Essentially playing with himself in every scene, he completely commits, never winks at the audience, and totally convinces the viewer that man and cartoon walk side by side. In a sense, he's the movie's finest special effect. In addition to being a terrific actor, a new piece on Hoskins over at The Guardian reveals him to be a humble, hilarious and brutally honest interview. He talks about growing up in north London ("You don't end up with a face like this if you're hard, do ya? This comes from having too much mouth and nothing to back it up with. The nose has been broken so many times."), about getting his start in the business ("When I told my relations I'm gonna be an actor, they said: 'Don't be f**king daft. Forget it! You've got to be kidding, aintcha?') and scoffs at "Method Acting" ("Nah! Nah, that's Lee Strasberg, that's bollocks! Like how to look busy. It's just looking busy, impressing the boss. That's bollocks, going through all this cobblers. Living it out and all that. Bollocks. Total cobblers!")

It's Hoskins' frank discussion of his work that amused me the most, particularly his not-so-fond remembrance of the film that single-handedly destroyed my youthful innocence: "The worst thing I ever did? Super Mario Brothers. It was a f**kin' nightmare. The whole experience was a nightmare. It had a husband-and-wife team directing, whose arrogance had been mistaken for talent. After so many weeks their own agent told them to get off the set! F**kin' nightmare. F**kin' idiots." Seems like ol' Bob might be right, that married couple -- Annabel Jankel and Rocky Morton -- haven't directed a feature film since. Hoskins is 64 years old, but blows off the idea of retirement. He's got loads of projects lined up, and he mentions in the interview that he is into smaller roles now. I told you he was asked to play Fezziwig in Robert Zemeckis' planned re-re-re-re-make of A Christmas Carol, and he's got a supporting role in this month's Sparkle. Says Hoskins, "You reach a point where the cameo is the governor. You go in there for a couple of weeks, you're paid a lot of money, everybody treats you like the crown jewels, you're in and out, and if the film's a load of shit, nobody blames you, y'knowwhadimean. It's wonderful." Great actor, entertaining dude, and I'm definitely going to start working "Total cobblers!" into my everyday conversation.