This is the worst movie I have ever seen and I have seen a lot of movies in my life.<br /><br />First off, I have to tell you I haven't read the poem and so wasn't aware of the gross changes made to the substance of the story that I found about while reading comments here. Thus, I won't talk about the awful and treacherous rendition but more of the failings of the movie as a story separate of its source.<br /><br />The main thing that was inconceivable for me was the so-called hero: Beowulf, hailed by many of his entourage (during the movie) as a savior, as a luminous figure with glorious achievements and high courage is in my eyes, as portrayed in the movie, again I repeat, a braggart, a liar and a cheater( since there is a difference between the two), a power-grabbing sell-out and a lecherous Don Juan in the worst sense of the word (no flashbacks to long-suffering Johnny Depp, please, they're in different classes). <br /><br />I have so resented the mockery made of this supposed hero that I felt nothing but relief at the end of movie and was left completely cold by his death. (I think I felt more about Grendel's death, such a pitiful creature). Now, I assume, this isn't the reaction sought by the filmmakers, but this is what they got from me and I'm not the only one who left the theatre with an acute sense of disbelief.<br /><br />The women, well what to say about them: in every scene they were present, they were seen as objects of sexual desire or were involved in romantic flirt, and moreover they seemed to revel in it, the aging Beowulf's young flame was absolutely sickening in her haste to be "approved" by the then king. Not one remote moment where they were more than just acting womanly the men around. Not even Angelina Jolie: I would have expected a knife through the heart for her child's murderer not a roll in the hay (well, mud from cave to be exact). <br /><br />Sir Anthony Hopkins: the amount of respect I have for the man risked by the filmmakers through a risqué and needless unveiling of flesh in a drunkard romp which I bet they thought it would be funny. And also poor, poor lines, that even his talent couldn't save. I hope to see him in a new movie quite soon to drive the bitterness away. I echo the sentiment for John Malkovitch whose ambiguous, confusing character traits didn't allow him to truly expand.<br /><br />Other things to nitpick at: the allusions to Christianity seemed out of place most of the time as I didn't understand what they could contribute to the plot (maybe atmosphere), the gory scenes that might look great on 3D, but just left me nauseated (a tip,less is sometimes more), but not when involving Beowulf's striptease nudity (I thought it was real cold up North, but go figure). <br /><br />The last thing that topped it off and sent me in front of my computer was Wiglaf's last scene, where they finished it in true horror movie style, with the continuity of the evil character that will come back for revenge. It's not the sequel-wanting that troubles me, but what it implies of humankind: this man has been the witness of not one but two falls caused by the same mistake and he's seriously thinking that he should want a repeat of it and get a different result: that's the definition of madness. For me that was the last straw, for the cheap effect, they had forsaken the lesson and its consequences and offer no hope.<br /><br />As for the animation, I'm not an expert but the friend I went to the movie with who is one says to tell you the animals weren't veridical, the humans' hands looked weird and some often the movements were real awkward, though the dragon was awesome.<br /><br />That's it, ramble over,hope it helps.