I'm not sureI've watched it twice. It is what it is - impressive CGI, a good story, but I can't help thinking it may as well have been live action/CGI rather than pure computer nonsense.*
*and that's got nothing to do with Jolie's part(s)
(*and that's got nothing to do with Jolie's part(s)
unstableOvine has not aged well,
Fri 21 Nov 2008, 21:39,
archived)
Because the actor that played Beowulf was a fat bastard?Apparently at least. Too lazy to google yet again.
(
Hokerou,
Fri 21 Nov 2008, 21:41,
archived)
To be honest, that was the bit that grated the mostWhat? Beowulf a Cockney?!
Twas Ray Winston I believe.
Actually, if it had been live action it would have been far too risqué and would have had to have an 18 rating. But it's cartoons so it's OK innit?
(Twas Ray Winston I believe.
Actually, if it had been live action it would have been far too risqué and would have had to have an 18 rating. But it's cartoons so it's OK innit?
unstableOvine has not aged well,
Fri 21 Nov 2008, 21:44,
archived)
Crazy censor people.All films should just be left to the parent's discretion, the certificates being just a guideline.
( Hokerou,
Fri 21 Nov 2008, 21:48,
archived)
I agree entirely.In order for this to work though, the cinemas need to allow free re-entry to paying adults, so they can watch it once to vet it but then don't have to pay when they take the kids (subject to suitability).
( unstableOvine has not aged well,
Fri 21 Nov 2008, 21:56,
archived)