Hail, Midnite.
But I deeply regret watching with my daughter, who will eventually be reading it as (I think) a Senior, but in my defense, I expected some resemblance to the themes in the poem.
Actually, even though they were pretty consistent in their disregard for the real relationships between characters, this adaptation showed more familiarity with some of the themes of the poem than most of the other film versions.
I'm still trying to figure out why they decided that Hrothgar's wife should be named Onela, especially since Onela was a man. I guess it's easier to pronounce than Wealhtheow, and they were definitely tripping over a lot of the pronunciations. There's absolutely no indication of madness on Wealhtheow's part in the poem, but she doesn't have a whole lot of dialogue, so they probably felt they needed to make her more interesting. Most of the film adaptations are pretty consistent about introducing new female characters and inserting some sort of love story that doesn't exists in the poem.
I did like that this version understood the importance of storytelling and of Beowulf as a storyteller, though it's hard to dwell on that for too long in a film without boring people to tears. I also liked that there was some emphasis on the tension when Beowulf arrives among the Danes and has to identify himself. They seemed to be making a concerted effort to demonstrate that heroism is achieved through both words and deeds.
I could've played along with it up until the point when
[spoiler]they reveal that Hrothgar has been sacrificing the children. There is a part of the poem that refers to some type of sacrifices taking place to try to get rid of Grendel, but there's no indication that children were involved or that the sacrifices were being made to the monster rather than to some sort of deity. It's been a while since I took a look at that passage, but I'm not sure it even explicitly states that human sacrifice is involved. Hrothgar may be somewhat of a failure as a king at this point, but he's never paralleled to the monster(s). In the language of the poem, that parallel is actually drawn between Beowulf and Grendel.[/spoiler]
After that, they seem to get pretty far away from the poem.
As for deliciously bad, I'd have to say that the introduction of the crossbow was deliciously bad. I liked how the arrows flamed without ever being lit, and it apparently never had to be reloaded. The architecture was also deliciously bad and all wrong. At times, I thought I was watching
Clash of the Titans, especially at the beginning when
[spoiler]Beowulf uses the serpent's reflection in his sword to behead him.[/spoiler]
Can't really complain about the acting. Cross did what he had to do with what he was given.
