Movies: 18470 | TV Series: 3282 | Added today: 0 | Storage: 65898 GB

Genres: FantasyDramaSci

Starring: Ben Cross, Marina Sirtis, Raicho Vasilev, Harry Anichkin, Atanas Srebrev, Chris Bruno, Assen Blatechki

Director(s): Nick Lyon

Available Quality: Hi Def

Country: USA

Year: 2007

Available Quality: Hi Def, iPod, Hi Def, Hi Def

IMDB Rating: 4 out of 10 (496 votes)

King Higlack of the Gauths entrusts prince Finn and a fire ball weapon to his champion, slayer Beowulf. They lead twelve men on a mission to help king Hrothgar of the Danes, whose once glorious realm is terrorized by undefeated the Biblical monster Grendel. In fact the task is even harder, as Hrothgar kept gruesome secrets.

Grendel (iPod)	Resolution: 480x272 px	Total Size: 284 Mb
Grendel (Hi Def)	Resolution: 852x480 px	Total Size: 585 Mb
Grendel (Hi Def)	Resolution: 1920x1080 px	Total Size: 6708 Mb
Grendel (Hi Def)	Resolution: 1280x720 px	Total Size: 4471 Mb

Movie Photos:

We have taken some photos of "Grendel". They represent actual movie quality.

Visitors Review

Peter Gareis (25 May 2012)

Never Done Well

Good Folks, I stumbled on this film on evening while I was gradingpapers. My academic specialty is Anglo-Saxon literature, and I can saythat no one has ever done the genre the honor it deserves. TheIcelandic "Beowulf and Grendel" is the least offensive I have seen, andI did pay $3.00 for my copy. This Sci-Fi version ranks with theChristopher Lambert version. Yuck.What didn't I like? CGI for one. Amazingly bad. More importantly is thefaithfulness to the storyline, not to mention the stilted acting. I amused to both with all the versions I have seen.Delighted Regardless, Peter

anonymous anonymously (24 May 2012)

Let's keep things in perspective...

I don't think anyone here would expect an Oscar nod for a Sci-Fioriginal movie, so let's keep things in perspective. This productionactually had a budget of only 1.4 million, as you well know that'salmost more than they pour into one episode of BattleStar Galactica.For what it is worth (meaning taking the budget into consideration),It's pretty damn good. Sure let's all make fun of the CG monster andthe fact that it didn't bleed even when it's head got cut off. Butthere was a pretty epic setting (Bulgaria), and aside from a couple badseeds the acting was pretty good, and the Photography was much betterthan average.Let's consider the behind the scenes too... "Script", and let's pretendthe director had a bit of latitude. The direction was very good. Mostpeople say "garbage in - garbage out". I feel given what there was towork with the director made the most of it and pulled it off deservingpraise. And you don't have to even have liked the flick to approach itin a critical way like this.In my opinion this is a great forum to discuss all aspects of anyrelease. My only piece of advice is to please not react in a knee-jerkway immediately after you've condemned someone's creative work. Greatconstructive criticism takes just as much effort and introspection.It's really easy to say something sucks; people likely won't pay youmuch attention though unless you do it constructively.

lemn-peal (23 May 2012)

A crossbow? What?

I stopped five minutes in when Beowulf was given a double-shot,automatic crossbow with sights on it. Not only do crossbows not havetelescoping sights, but Beowulf beat Grendel in hand-to-hand combat.The terrible, wooden acting and eternal darkness that plagues allSci-Fi Original Movies didn't help either. Having only gotten a fewminutes in before I felt my bile rise and decided to watch I Love Lucyreruns instead, that's really about all I have to say. But, you mightas well just realize that it's a made-for-TV movie and skip it rightthere.A travesty.

dhickey-4 (23 May 2012)

They weren't Vikings, and Vikings didn't wear horned helmets anyway

After having seen the Canadian/Icelandic/British 2004 production of"Beowulf & Grendel," which I thought brilliant and stunning, Iapproached this--the first of 3 newer Beowulf movies due out thisyear--with trepidation. As soon as I heard "Viking" and saw the hornedhelmets, I groaned. These were Migration Era Swedes and Danes, notVikings (they came later). And even the Vikings never wore horns ontheir helmets (horns make it easy for your enemy to knock your helmetoff and then brain you). Then there's Hrolfgar's palace, which lookslike a set for a movie about Greece or Rome, not 6th-century Denmark.The swords and armor look like props left over from earlier films setin various historic periods. I spotted weapons that might have beenused by Crusaders in "Kingdom of Heaven," and one character was evenwielding a Windlass Steelcrafts reproduction movie sword from "Beowulf& Grendel"! Beyond the basic plot of the original epic poem, thewriting was dismal and the acting totally wooden and unconvincing. Thebiggest yuk was a secret-weapon crossbow, complete with sighting scopeand exploding projectiles, that looked like something bought from Iraqiinsurgents. The special-effects monster and his mom were so on steroidsthat Beowulf could never have torn off an arm, as he did in the poem.Thank the gods for bazooka crossbows! I could go on, but I won't.

BronwynN (22 May 2012)

Not a bad version -- But not good, either.

I first became acquainted with the story of Beowulf when, in highschool, I was forced to read the first twenty lines of it in theoriginal Anglo-Saxon (with a glossary, of course). It's an old storyabout a champion who comes to the aid of the Kingdom of the Danes whichhas been beset by a monster by the name of (Surprise!) Grendl. Ifyou've read the story already, you know how it comes out. If not, trythis film.This is a fairly accurate retelling of Beowulf, which is the reason Igave it a "5." However, certain of the characterizations are notterrific, and production values aren't very valued. Chris Bruno, in thelead role, works hard to bring dimension to a role which, at the verybest, is one-dimensional. Beowulf, after all, is a Hero, and heroesdon't have to be well-rounded -- just strong and brave. Ben Crossdoesn't seem to have his real voice, and Marina Syrtis, of Star TrekNext Generation fame, looks haggard and old. The supporting players, Ithink, were chosen more for their willingness to work for scale ratherthan for their talent.The CGI monsters, unfortunately, are poorly executed and not veryscary. If it wasn't for the fact that the original story has a strongplot, the writing, which tries very hard to be good, winds up beinglong-winded and silly. The production design and costuming is aboutwhat one might expect from a low-budget film -- Suffice it to say thatBeowulf's troop all wear horned helmets -- something that one usuallyonly sees in grandiose productions of Wagner.All in all, the movie is about what one would expect to see on a boringSaturday night. And you need to be very bored to enjoy it.

Kenneth Eagle Spirit (22 May 2012)

Well, the sets are cool.

And thats about all that is. This thing is slow. The actors haveability, they just don't seem motivated to put forth the effort. Theplot isn't that great and is hampered further by the aforementionedslowness of it all. The accents, when there are any, are British. Uh,lots of these folks are supposed to be Danes. OK, OK, accents aren'tthat important. But language is. I don't think they used words like"yeah" and "OK" in Beowulf's day. And that supposedly way cool weaponhis king gave him? Did he ever reload that thing? Did he ever sight itin? Or was Beowulf just that bad an aim? Well, his aim did at leastmatch the computer graphics used in generating the monsters. Those wererather off too. Bad special effects. Bright spot? Just one that I canthink of. Marina Sirtis has held up well over the years.

franklyhollywood (22 May 2012)

Excellent debut! Performances were outstanding!

I thought this was a job well done, especially when you look at theperformances. Personally, I get the feeling that this director is verytalented visually, and with working with actors. There were some prettyclassical horror shots that I really enjoyed in this film, and Ithought the lead actors did a great job. Also remember that for thepurposes of broadcasting to so many different stations, and differenttypes of end users, that things get adjusted, and tweaked beyondbelief, just so that people can see it on so many different styles ofTV, resolutions, and broadcast systems, formats, countries, etc... Ithink personally that's what happened with the CG creature at times.Just a production lovers two cents...

jkoster-2 (21 May 2012)

Not as bad as some think

I actually watched this movie twice and enjoyed it.Why do we read Beowulf in school? As an English teacher (grades 6-12),I tell students it's because it's one of the earliest surviving piecesof English literature. It also helps highlight elements of a story, andcan help students understand the history of the period. Okay, thismovie isn't the best adaptation, doesn't follow the line of the storyas close as some could wish, and has obvious flaws, but it could be auseful teaching tool. And I don't mean for your college Lit/Film class.In today's secondary school classrooms, there are many students whosimply won't read. They don't see the value in it, and this type offilm is one way to make literature palatable. And there really isn'tanything in it that would require me to send home permission slipsbefore showing it in the classroom. I wish this had been around when Iwas in high school--I might have enjoyed Beowulf 30 years ago, insteadof having to teach it first in order to see its merits.As for the quality problems others have mentioned: If SciFi has tocancel Stargate SG-1 because they can't afford the actors' salaries,then it's going to be pretty obvious that their own productions aren'tgoing to be big-budget forays into CGI and other such niceties.

nalders (21 May 2012)

Perhaps the Worst Movie I've Ever Seen.

99.999% pure crap. And the other .001% was a brief moment where Ithought the blond chick was going to disrobe. Nope.The dialogue was legendarily bad. The action sucked, and there was nosex (the afore mentioned blond chick is modestly dressed, alas, thewhole movie). The CGI had the dubious honor of being the worst I'veever seen on film, and the anachronisms were numerous and glaring.Acting was mediocre even from Ben Cross and Marina Sirtis, the only'names' in this movie. And Marina Sirtis looked really, really bad.I've seen high school plays more capably produced. This is the kind ofmovie that MST3K thrived on. Heads should roll at Sci-Fi for allowingthis steaming pile on the air.

garrett-62 (20 May 2012)

Public Service Announcement

I watched Grendel the other night and am compelled to put together aPublic Service Announcement.Grendel is another version of Beowulf, the thousand-year-oldAnglo-Saxon epic poem. The SciFi channel has a growing catalog ofinoffensive and uninteresting movies, and the previews promised aninauthentic low-budget mini-epic, but this one refused to let me switchchannels. It was staggeringly, overwhelmingly, bad. I watched infascination and horror at the train wreck you couldn't tear your eyesaway from. I reached for a notepad and managed to capture part of whatI was seeing. The following may contain spoilers or might just saveyour sanity. You've been warned.- Just to get it over with, Beowulf's warriors wore horned helmets.Trivial issue compared to what came after. It also appears that thehelmets were in a bin and handed to whichever actor wandered by next.Fit, appearance and function were apparently irrelevant.- Marina Sirtis had obviously been blackmailed into doing the movie bythe Ringling Brothers, Barnum and Bailey circus. She managed to avoid ared rubber nose, but the clowns had already done the rest of hermakeup.- Ben Cross pretended not to be embarrassed as the king. His character,Hrothgar, must have become king of the Danes only minutes before thefilm opened and hadn't had a chance to get the crown resized to fit himyet.- To facilitate the actors' return to their day jobs waiting tables,none were required to change their hairstyles at all. The variety ofhair included cornrows, sideburns, buzz cuts and a mullet and at leastserved to distract from the dialog. To prove it was a multi-nationalcast, all were encouraged to retain whatever accent they chose.- As is typical with this type of movie (at least since Mad Max),leather armor was a requirement. In this case it was odd-shaped,ill-fitting and brand-new.- The female love interest, Ingrid, played by Alexis Peters, followed along-standing tradition of hotties who should be watched with thevolume turned completely down.- The unintended focus of the movie was a repeating, compound crossbowwith exploding bolts. It never needed to be loaded and even had arecoil when fired. It managed to shred the laws of physics, theintegrity of the original legend, historical fact and plot suspense allby itself.- Hrothgar's palace, Heorot, rather than being a Norse long hall,apparently was designed and constructed by artisans who sank withAtlantis.- Beowulf arrived at the Danes' homeland in a two-masted stern-castledship that originally was part of a set, the other two being the SantaMaria and the Pinta.- Prince Unferth observed Beowulf's ship's approach using a telescope.Before you could recover from that astounding innovation, you got tosee the ship from his point of view. Judging from the angle, the princewas in an aircraft of some sort.- Fun fact 1: In Bulgaria, fire (as from a fireplace) creates lightwithout heat. This explains why you could see the actors' breathwhether indoors or out.- Fun fact 2: Dark Age dancing in Denmark looks like slow dances I wentto in the 8th grade.- Fun fact 3: You, too, can make a catapult with a timed-releaseair-burst explosive. But, don't expect it to actually harm anything.Incidentally, Beowulf was apparently a veteran of World War II, yelling"Incoming!" to shred any remaining suspension of disbelief.- Grendel was so upset and always in a snit because as a completely CGIcreation he couldn't leave footprints. Even in snow.- Grendel's mom ("Hag") was in a foul mood because she was a singlemother and junior hadn't inherited her wings. Recessive gene, Isuppose. By the way, we can now make an educated guess that Grendel'spop was probably Swamp Thing.- Grendel and mom chose to randomly kill, fly away with or drag awaytheir prey based only on a close reading of the next few pages of thescript.- Fun medical fact: Being slammed by a mythical beast hard enough to bethrown fifty feet against stone causes slight facial scratches thatdon't bleed much.- The sword of legend Beowulf used to dispatch the Hag was as long ashe was tall and would have contained enough steel to put a second deckon the Golden Gate Bridge. Luckily the wobbling dispelled any concernsover its weight.- Best line of the movie: Prince Unferth had just been impaled by Hagand spit a quart of blood roughly six feet. Princess Ingrid cradled himgently and said, "You're going to be okay, my prince." So much for thatjob at the triage clinic.I feel better now.

baronsambdi (16 May 2012)

Better than "Clash of the Titans (2010)"

Well, first, I'll say I haven't read Beowulf's original poem, but myapproach to the movie was watching it as a movie, not as a loyaladaptation. Actually, I was zapping the channels, then I watched anscene from what appeared a sword & sorcery movie, then I grewinterested.Well, I gotta say this being a "low-budget-movie" is despicable, sinceit really caught my attention. It has very decent costuming, locations,music, good pacing, convincing acting, good scripts, dialogues,characters are congruent and good storytelling... I don't needhead-flashing CGI effects to enjoy this movie, because I look forwardto the stories, the characters, the messages. I prefer the sensitiveand intelligent way they told this tale than stupid movies like therecent version of Clash of the Titans, that only care about specialeffects and the acting, script and dialogues are totally idiot.Well, I give this movie a good review, since I found on it good drama,great acting and realistic storytelling. Congrats to all peopleinvolved on it, you really got my respects =D

redheadmom (16 May 2012)

Great for kids! Fun, entertaining and with a lesson.

My son loved it and I wish there were more films like this for kids!Sure it's not perfect animation, but for a kid, it really opens afantastic world that helps them learn the story of Beowolf. Not 100%accurate, but still fun and it has a good message. I get the feelingthat all the people slamming this film are 50 year old historians thatcan learn from the moral of Grendel, who can't enjoy the laughter ofothers. Why write essays about something you feel is bad? Putyourselves in the eyes of a child, and then watch it. It's a greatmovie. Might not be a Harry Potter, but kids don't look at the size ofa film. And even I as an adult was well entertained and never bored. Iapplaud Sci-Fi for creating good films rather than a bunch of dark,violent crime stories. And great job to the actors! The creatures werea bit fake but still fun! I give it an 8/10 and think kids will love it.

j_cirino (16 May 2012)

Have the writers even read the poem?

Just once I'd like to see a version of Beowulf where it appears thescreenwriters have at least a passing familiarity with the originalpoem. Yet again, after watching this Sci Fi presentation, I'mdisappointed. I'm not suggesting the writers need to understand and analyze the poemin Old English, but I wish they could at least try to read atranslation in modern English and attempt to construct a story based onwhat actually transpires. The story is exciting enough; why add plotelements that are non-existent and ruin the story? What's wrong withbeing faithful to the text? Grendel is immune to weapons of any kind; why introduce somesuper-crossbow that is unbelievable and could not have possibly existedin this time period (as correctly pointed out by the previousreviewer)? The fight with Grendel was Beowulf vs. Grendel. That's it.No one else took part in the battle. The only way Beowulf could havedefeated him was by choosing specifically to engage the monster withoutany weapons, the mistake made by all previous challengers. Yet, in thisversion, Danes and Geats fight the beast and Beowulf hacks offGrendel's arm with a sword! Again, why couldn't they portray whatreally happened? Personally, I think a one-on-one grappling matchbetween the two would be much more exciting. Overall, this is a pathetic and abysmal depiction that is faithless tothe true tale. Why add in a pact with Hrothgar and Grendel's motherthat includes sacrificial offering? Why create extra characters, likeFinn, that add nothing to the story? There was no love story in thepoem. They couldn't even set the scenes in the appropriate locations (aforest instead of the swamp and no lair under the lake). They fail tonotice the metaphor that Grendel's lair signifies Â it's supposed to beunderground to represent hell. Why not instead center on the symbolisminherent in the epic poem? Even my high school students last year wereable to do immensely better when they created a short film based onBeowulf, since they focused on the themes and symbolism underlying thestory. If Hollywood could create a film that centers on these elementsand is faithful to the plot, then that would be a truly great movie.

Grann-Bach (16 May 2012)

This is not... the story of Beowulf

A hero, son of "name that sounds like sneeze" and who apparently isn'tas big as anticipated(hey, give the guy a break, it's coldÂ besides, isno one else questioning what Walker Texas Ranger is doing here?Seriously, beardo here looks like Chuck Norris lite)) travels toDenmark to defeat the titular creature(which isn't scary, it's justbig, out in the relative light and it likes to strike poses more thanmenÂ it attacks mostly by being a POV shot, and the design isludicrous, an odd mix of Beast of X-Men fame meets The Wolfman), and hebrings along someone he shouldn't. That's it. Everything unfolds asyou'd expect it to. This aired on Danish television right afterZemeckis' version, presumably as a poor attempt at comedy, on accountof accidentally putting in the wrong tape or to say "well, if youthought that was bad, look at how bad it *could* have been!" I mean,there are plenty of adaptations, why pick this bad, clearly cheap ofone? Made by the sci-fi network(presumably because they don't know whatthe word "science" means or what that genre is), this has hideous FXand worse integration of live-action elements, awful acting, and lousyhistorical accuracy(there were no horned helmets on Vikings, they weredepicted that way by ignorant Christians who wanted to demonize them).Fighting, entertainment value, anything memorable? Basically, no, notat all. It does sometimes sorta tries for them speaking in the mannerpeople did back then. And you get to gawk at Marina SirtisÂ or so youthink so until you realize she's covered up and made to lookunattractive(ÂI wasn't aware that was even possible; also, apparently,the make-up crew here think that "barking mad" equals "the illegitimateoffspring of a clown and a hooker"). This is short(around 90 minutes),but feels much longer. There is a bit of disturbing content andmoderate violence. I recommend this to anyone with insomnia or wholikes watching these. 1/10

Rydragon13 (12 May 2012)

A fair movie

While I haven't fully read Beowulf yet, I will be within the comingmonths, and I felt that this movie would give me a taste of the story.If you're looking for comments related to how the movie stacks up andcompares to the actual story, you may wish to just wait for somebodyelse's comment.All in all, I thought this was an adequate movie. It combined decentamounts of action, character building, and fantasy. The movie had itsboring parts, like almost any other movie (Except Crank, I suppose...),as well as its high points.**SPOILER** One of these high points, as I would call it, is the final battle withGrendel. Not so much the slaying of the beast, but the anticipationleading up to the fight... You know it's coming, and you knowsomeone/something is going to get killed... Probably Grendel... But youstill have the anticipation growing as you eagerly await what happensnext. I suppose that may be different if you're familiar with the storyalready, but for me it was one of the more attention-grabbing scenes inthe movie.It started off on a pretty good note as well. Too many movies thesedays are starting off very plain, and very boring; often with heavymusic and flashy scenes to catch your eye. Personally, I prefer a movieto delve right into the story and action. Grendel does just this, asBeowulf enters a cave and slays a beast almost effortlessly. Thisserves two purposes, really... It gets the viewer interested in whatelse is to come, and it shows that Beowulf is no push-over when itcomes to slaying creatures.Though, much like I said before, this movie does get boring at points,and most of the key characters become very predictable as the moviegoes on. From the moment you see Finn you know he's going to gethimself in trouble as the story progresses. You know Ingrid is going tobe a total ditz that gets herself into trouble as well... And you mostcertainly can decipher that Unferth is going to be a prick, as well asa fool.**END SPOILER** All in all, if you're looking for a decent movie to pass the time, andpossibly watch just for a rather unique movie, you probably won't bedisappointed with Grendel. That said, Grendel is unique in its ownright, since it gets away from the run-of-the-mill fantasy medievalgenre...However, if you're looking for a highly original, completelyenthralling fantasy medieval movie, you might want to look elsewhere;as Grendel still has many of the components of a rather blotched,horribly general adventure. You know, the easily-distinguishable CGIfor the monsters, ridiculous battle scenes, and the times where youfind yourself mentally yelling at the characters one minute, andlaughing at their actions the next... All because of how poorly some ofthe fighting goes. We've all seen it, but we all still watch it.Now, as far as why I gave it a 6... Personally, I feel the ratingsystem on IMDb is screwed. Not because it's unfair, but because thereare so many different opinions on movies, that you really have to knowwhich opinions to follow if you're going to find the rating systemuseful. Without getting too far off-topic, what I mean by this is thefact that some movies you may enjoy, such as Conan the Barbarian, orThe Boondock Saints, get rather low ratings, while other movies likeThe Godfather rank so high. Or better yet, how The Matrix beatsEquilibrium...But that aside, If I were to rate this movie with a totally open mind,based on what some other movies on here have gotten, I would give it a6. It's better than your usual Sci-Fi Channel garbage, but not as goodas some fantasy medieval classics, like Conan the Barbarian. Certainlydon't expect something like The 13th Warrior here. Expect a very basic,but entertaining-at-points movie that's great to watch by yourself withsome popcorn on a lonely Saturday night. Of course, if you're thinkingabout watching this with a group of friends, you might be better offjust renting a movie from the local video store...

cpage-5 (11 May 2012)

Bummer

For such a great classic tale, the setting (location), Grendel wasdisappointing. As a writer, I blame the script which completely lackeddramatic tension. The rubric of the club story is useful and would haveprovided a new take on the literary classic. For some weird reason thatrubric was dropped early on. To know this was shot in 21 days says tome, "rushed" and it unfortunately shows. Now we'll have to wait for theHollywood version on the big screen. I word on FX, I can toleratereally crappy CGI but the script has to rock and this one was just tooslow, spartan and lacking in drama. I'd blame it on the actors but...since I know writing more than acting, I'll pick on my colleague.

wong-ex (10 May 2012)

This was NOT Grendel

I was expecting the movie based on Grendel, the book written by JohnGardner in the late 1970's. It was based on the Beowulf epic, but toldfrom the perspective of the monster. Whatever you may think of Gardner's book, a movie based on the Beowulfepic should not be entitled Grendel, when it doesn't say anything moreabout the monster beyond the few pathetic scenes in which the CGmonster is shown as nothing more than a modified Predator. On top of this, the writers should also be punished for screwing up theoriginal story so badly and contributing to the continued growingignorance of mass TV audiences throughout the US.Typical Hollywood to get this so wrong. Very disappointing and a complete waste of time.

irvine-stuart (10 May 2012)

Truly Awful.

I just read a review defending this film because it had a low budget,now my take on things.The CGI monsters was reasonable well animated but was implemented inthe worst possible way. The fight scenes weren't even fights it wasjust one shot of an actor then one shot of monster with veryinteraction at all. When the monster did interact it looked like it wasdone in paintshop pro. In my opinion if you have a low budget youshould use models and puppets. They may not look as fancy but at leastthey interact, just look at Peter Jacksons early films.As for the acting Beowulf did an descent job but the rest of the castwere either not trying or they forgot where they where.The script seemed confused to me. One minute they would be talking asif it were a modern day setting the next you get drama club Shakespearespeech. I'm not say it should be all 'ye' and 'that it be' but you needto find a cohesive balance so the lines sound like they come from thesame person.I did notice one part near the start when Beowulf was quoting the oldtestament which would have been find had he not spent the rest of thefilms talking about the gods and portents.In short, this film is a very slightly polished turd, but a turn nonethe less.

caspervovve (07 May 2012)

Beowulf was a swede

Beowulf was from Sweden, not england. It's just that the poems comefrom england. that's it! Search on google if you don't believe me. Aseveryone prob knows by now, he was a viking.Why can't movie makers try and make a movie where the actuall characterspeaks in the "real" language, not just English/American. I just hopethat Mel Gibson get a grip of this (maybe not the coming 5 years, butstill) because he makes movies with the real language, i.e Apocalyptoand the passion of the Christ.But i suppose that it would be "to hard (:S)" for everyone totranslate, duh. LOL!

AnimeKingGT12 (07 May 2012)

Heresy I say!!

This movie is a farce! Names are grossly mispronounced and the plot istwisted and gnarled into something unrecognizable by any literatureenthusiast. And they have the gall to give Beowulf a ridiculouscannon/crossbow weapon. Beowulf doesn't need a weapon like that! In thepoem, he rips off Grendel's arm with his bare hands! And I can'tbelieve that the scriptwriters did such a thing. The way Grendel isportrayed is impressive however. That and the cast are the onlypositive points of the feature. My English teacher would go insane ifshe saw this abomination. Unless you are a die-hard fan of the epicpoem "Beowulf," avoid this film at all costs. And even then, I wouldn'trecommend it.

Review total: 20, showing from 1 to 20

Buy Grendel Movie. Watch online or Download