Well, I just finished reading the poem...

Well the story of beowulf was told for hundreds of years before written down. There were differences between the original poem and the written one. The differences between the written poem and the film is a continuation of that tradition.

"I shall go and tell the indestructible man that someone plans to murder him."

[deleted]

If the movie was historically accurate to the likes of the poem, there would be no movie. There should not be a crossover from ancient literature written in words most people can't understand in modern society...and movies. Old poems were not meant to have flashy effects and keep 21st century people amused and entertained. You arrogant snob get the hell off these boards.

its called hollywood bud, calm down

*sigh*

All right, let's go over this again, and hopefully for the last time. This is not a movie about the poem "Beowulf". It's not that "Hollywood" needed to do anything or parses a different tongue or any of that crap. This is a piece about what could have been the Idea Behind. The story behind the story.

Let's say someone does as you plead and puts a shot-for-verse version of "Beowulf" on the screen. I'd probably check it out, but it would not stand well with critics. Why not? The movie would be flat and the characters lifeless. Throughout the epic poem, does Beowulf's motivation change? How does his character grow? What internal conflicts lead to revelation?

Instead, what Gaiman and Avary did is make Beowulf a more complex character by having him be an unreliable narrator. How much of what he says is true? This idea of complexity allows for amendments to the storyline, but also to mirror our own moments of falsehood. Ever stretch the truth to gain a little more renown? Does it sit well in the pit of your stomach, knowing the truth is not what people have been told?

Introduction of character flaws is a classic method of enriching a character. Flaws are the method by which we humanize and sympathize.

But onto your questions:

1. Grendel's parentage. We are told in the poem that Grendel is a descendant of Cain, that is half-man, half-demon. Grendel's mother is outright called a demon. How does a demon beget an offspring that is half-man? By sleeping with a man. Mention is made that Grendel will not harm Hrothgar. It is not a difficult leap to make.

2. The ending. You misunderstood what caused the death of Beowulf. Pride and greed and an inability to act is what made him stagnate as king, sliding from warrior-hero to skirt-chasing monarch. When his sins are exposed (that is, when the dragon comes) he realizes that he alone must stone for his inaction and inability. When a hero strays from his course (as Beowulf has done in not slaying the Mother) he enters a sort of catatonia; only upon atonement and return to course (here, monster-slaying) can the hero achieve final victory. Which he does. You read it in class a few months ago.

Mother survives because she is a representation of temptation. She is succubus, the creature of conception. She exists to tempt heroes from their paths. As an external representation of an internal conflict, she cannot truly be defeated.

3. The changes. There were some changes to the plot that done for the sake of simplicity -- those surrounding Wiglaf being Beowulf's companion, for example, or keeping the story based around Heorot instead of switching to Meduseld for the third act. Other changes were added to create a sense of character depth via inclusion of flaws and foibles.

4. Christianity. The poem "Beowulf" dates to a time of transition from Pagan belief in the Nordic gods to the much newer Christianity. Within the time frame of the story, Christianity is something of a anachronism, but by the time the story is committed to paper, it has become far more reaching. The movie's references to Odin remind us that this is supposed to be the story behind the poem, not the poem itself.

These were not arbitrary changes, but had been given serious thought by very adept storytellers. It was, unfortunately, lost on the masses.

*****
When I am king you will be first against the wall.

You probably hated LOTR as well, *beep* wow-skinny-ass-nerd. I don't care if it's 100% faithful or not, as long as the characters become's alive like they did in this movie and LOTR trilogy, that's all that I matters.

All in all, someone needs to make Beowulf again and DO IT RIGHT so that we forget all about this movie. Because to me, this movie is just one big mistake like almost every other book-to-movie adaption Hollywood does these days...

I agree with the original poster, except that Beowulf in the movie did not bear Grendel's Mother a son, he sired one on her.

Beowulf bearing Grendel's Mother's dragon son is something I'd rather not think about. Even the movie didn't go that far.

Watching this movie i can clearly say that this isnt the typical action movie. It has a deep story very simular to scandinavian lore of that time although it might have been tilted a little bit more to the action, the story is still there and there are alot of scenes that would tire the typical action seeking fan. Also regarding the OP mistake list, just makes the movie and the story alot more powerfull and in your face although it might sadden someone pretending to be very cultural having just read the story. Its funny you mentioned you liked the movie before reading the poem (ironic that you called someone that liked it an uncultured idiot). Also when movies are based on books means they dont have to follow the storyline to perfection (remember "based"). Judge a movie based on the movie itself dont start comparing it to something the movie was based on.