IMDb > Wrath of the Titans (2012) > Reviews & Ratings - IMDb
Wrath of the Titans
Quicklinks
Top Links
trailers and videosfull cast and crewtriviaofficial sitesmemorable quotes
Overview
main detailscombined detailsfull cast and crewcompany credits
Awards & Reviews
user reviewsexternal reviewsawardsuser ratingsparents guidemessage board
Plot & Quotes
plot summarysynopsisplot keywordsmemorable quotes
Did You Know?
triviagoofssoundtrack listingcrazy creditsalternate versionsmovie connectionsFAQ
Other Info
box office/businessrelease datesfilming locationstechnical specsliterature listingsNewsDesk
Promotional
taglines trailers and videos posters photo gallery
External Links
showtimesofficial sitesmiscellaneousphotographssound clipsvideo clips

Reviews & Ratings for
Wrath of the Titans More at IMDbPro »

Filter: Hide Spoilers:
Page 2 of 25:[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [Next]
Index 246 reviews in total 

52 out of 86 people found the following review useful:

Another Potential Epic is Yet Another Epic Failure

3/10
Author: DJRMewzique from Canada
30 March 2012

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

Two years ago, I eagerly anticipated the release of the remake of one of my favourite films of all time, "Clash of the Titans." What I was given was a mess of a film in bad post-production 3D which needlessly messed with the original story of Perseus and his defeat of the Kraken...and turned my beloved Pegasus black.

When a follow-up was announced, being a huge fan of all Mythology, even if it is tweaked for Hollywood's sake, I felt they could only improve on a second attempt after the epic failure of the first go-around.

I was wrong.

"Wrath of the Titans" picks up a decade later with Perseus raising his only son alone after dismissing Zeus' offer of riches and power after his heroic defeat of the Kraken and the unexplained death of his wife (who I would have thought would have been Io but should really be Andromeda…but remained unaddressed). As mortals lose their faith in the gods, the gods in turn lose more and more of their power and, consequently, the walls which imprison the Titans in Tartarus are weakening and the end of days is imminent.

Zeus turns to his son to warn him of the threat and ask his help, but Persues declines.

That is until he learns from Poseidon that Zeus' other son, Ares, turned against him and led him into a trap in Tartarus and Zeus is imprisoned by Hades , transferring all Zeus' power to Kronos, the leader of the Titans and Zeus' father, in exchange for immortality.

And thus, Perseus learns that in order to save humanity, he must rescue his father and defeat Kronos and teams with Poseidon's demi-god son Agenor and Queen Andromeda who, as I mentioned, by all accounts and purposes, should already be his wife.

The story itself has much potential, but sadly, the execution just falls flat. With far too many convenient twists and escapes, even by Mythology's standards, I found the events extremely difficult to swallow, the narrative being even too ridiculous for the likes of me. The whole film just sort of stumbles along like an adventure in special effects, with the actual storytelling as somewhat of a secondary element. Something which is becoming far too common these days.

Even though it has just been a couple of years since Sam Worthington was thrust into the spotlight in "Avatar" and the last Titan film, he looks like he has aged two decades, having lost all of the sexy, hard-bodied spunk that is befitting a demi-god. He was a relatively unconvincing Perseus the first time around, and the sequel just confirms the notion.

Everyone else's performance, including the return of Liam Neeson as Zeus, Danny Huston as Poseidon and Ralph Fiennes as Hades, are just fine, but acceptable performances in a mediocre film hardly lessen the disappointment.

After having been so mortified by the disrespect "Clash of the Titans" showed the original production, one wouldn't think it could get worse. But at least that film aroused some sort of emotional reaction in me. The sequel didn't even manage to do that. It simply disappointed. No doubt I may be first in line for the third installment, already currently in pre-production, as hope always prevails...but that may be tentative while what will most assuredly be mediocre box office could throw a spanner in the works.

But hey, at least the 3D was better.

Was the above review useful to you?

39 out of 65 people found the following review useful:

Uggghhh....

1/10
Author: ivo_shandor from United States
30 March 2012

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

I have never in my life seen a sequel that destroyed itself before it even opened in theaters. That's the sign of one of the worst film sequels ever made to a film that was terrible to begin with. First of all, it is said that in the remake, the titans were killed by the Kraken. As stupid as that was to begin with, why are the titans in this film then? Oh right, because the writers can't write. Clearly no one in this film knew what continuity was. Why is it called wrath of the titans, when there are no titans in it, only one? Wow, you even got your title wrong, Wrath of the one Titan, and the others we couldn't afford. How bad is your film when you can't even get the title right. That thing called the Chimaera is not the chimaera, you know how I know? I studied something called, oh what was it....Oh that's right, Greek mythology. I have no clue why Andromeda is in this at all, she didn't do anything of any significance whatsoever in the first film. Why is she here? Why is she played by an even worse actress? Isn't it sad when the only true film to Greek mythology is Disney's Hercules? Granted some flaws, but nonetheless. Why does Perseus go to Andromeda at the end, they never had a previous relationship? I have never seen a film fail so miserably, never....Why is it now I am witnessing the worst, the dumbest films in the history of cinema? Apparently gods can die in this series, really? Then why are they IMMORTAL....I think someone needs to look that up in the dictionary. And why is it that gods can't do anything with their powers? In the remake, Hades said, "I must regain my powers." When did you lose them, you idiot? Why doesn't zues just strike down everybody? I don;t know why the gods keep dying when they're supposed to be immortal? How bad is your film if you destroy your own mythos? Last, but certainly not least, Sam Worthington is one of the worst actors today...anyone can see it. Stop acting, Sam....it does you no good.

Was the above review useful to you?

16 out of 21 people found the following review useful:

Turn off your brain and you might enjoy

3/10
Author: wee-steeve93 from United Kingdom
5 April 2012

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

Not a good movie. Here's what happens:

Zeus asks Perseus for help yet again and Perseus says something along the lines of "Noooo, I'll never leave my son". So five minutes later after a random demon attacks his village, what does he do? Yeah, you guessed it. After he leaves his son, he rides his trusty steed, Pegasus (who appears out of nowhere, for no reason) to a military camp. Meanwhile, Zeus, Poseidon and Hades are meeting in the underworld, along with Zeus's son, Ares. Surprise, surprise, evil Hades betrays his brothers and teams up with Ares, who is jealous of Perseus for having his father's admiration. Zeus is captured and his powers are sapped, to allow his father Cronos to escape imprisonment in Tartarus.

Anyway Poseidon escapes and dies shortly after giving Perseus his trident and his next epic quest: to save Zeus.

An irrelevant quest follows, with the introduction of some pretty undeveloped and pointless characters. They head out on a boat, with the son of Poseidon to find the person who forged the Gods weapons, and also Tartarus. Pegasus is apparently left with the other horses in the military camp, his only purpose: to have Perseus fly to the camp instead of walking, because walking a long distance is not interesting.

The crew reach an island and after walking a pretty long distance through a forest, run in to a Cyclops. Confusion ensues as he seems to be doing two things at once... turns out there's two of them. Perseus does what he does best: survives when he would clearly die, and they all become the best of friends.

The Cyclopes lead them to Bill Nighy, he tells them all about the prison Tartarus. It's so intricate and complex to stop Cronos escaping! Remember that at the end when he gets out no problem. The squad make there way to the prison and are attacked and outmatched by Ares; Bill Nighy and Sam Worthington couldn't care less.

They travel through the labyrinth, entrance to Tartarus, we've been told it messes with your mind. This is shown through the friends being angry at each other like schoolchildren for a short while. Perseus is separated from the group and encounters the most pathetic Minotaur, which of course throws him around for a while instead of killing him. It charges and gets it's horns stuck in the wall. Instead of killing the Minotaur while stuck, he breaks off its horns... Our hero defeats the monster of course and is somehow reunited with his friends, even though he fell pretty far away from them and it's a huge labyrinth.

Zeus talks his brother Hades in to being good, with two sentences, even though he's pretty evil. The gang turn up for the rescue.

The only way to defeat Cronos, it seems, is to join Zeus' lightning bolt, Hades' pitchfork and Poseiden's trident (all powerful, which would have came in handy in the first film) in to some super weapon. Ares should probably be aware of this, since it involves his close family, but decides to throw the pitchfork at Zeus, now Percy has the trident and pitchfork. He might have thought to throw it in to the surrounding lava, and they could never beat Cronos, but oh well.

Now something happened which completely broke the movie: dying Zeus is taken to the military camp and left alone. If only Zeus' power relied on prayer and there was thousands of soldiers around, Zeus would be pretty darn powerful. Nope. Nobody thought of this. Not even Zeus. Hades shows up though and gives most of his power to revive Zeus. Didn't the first film show us that Hades gets his power from peoples fear? Hades should be pretty powerful if everyone knew Cronos was coming to get them. Nope. Either everyone is pretty fearless or Hades is on a diet.

Anyway, while this is happening, random monsters (Lord knows where they came from) attack the soldiers, who die in the hundreds. They could have just said a few prayers for Zeus and they'd be fine, he dispatches the monsters easily after being revived, with a few prayers the soldiers might as well have gone for a lay down.

Perseus rides Pegasus to meet Ares for a fight. Even though he has Perseus' son hostage, he doesn't even make him drop his weapons, just starts fighting. Just the kind of fight you would expect, Perceus is thrown around instead of just killed, and of course ends up winning because of the bad guys overconfidence. Ares of course brought the final piece of the super weapon puzzle for Percy to use. He could have left it literally anywhere else and the weapon couldn't be finished.

Zeus and his new BFF, Hades team up to kill the demons, apparently they're all killed within two minutes. Cronos emerges. Apparently the labyrinth was no use for restraining him, only there because somebody wanted a Minotaur in the movie. So Cronos kills people, in as boring a fashion as any massive volcano man. We're supposed to be impressed. Perseus flies in on Pegasus with the finished weapon. flying through fire and lava but not being harmed, not even acquiring black ash on the face like you would expect. he flies in Cronos' mouth for some reason and drops the weapon. Before it explodes to kill Cronos, he seems to blow Zeus against a rock which is apparently fatal.

Percy rides back and Zeus stands up, he looks fine but for some reason he's going to die, Percy could say a prayer and he wouldn't, but whatever. Zeus dies, Worthington shows no emotion.

Movie ends with an awkward father-son chat. Looks to be setting up a sequel about the kid. I can hardly wait.

The one lesson this film teaches, is that you should pray to Zeus and you wont have to get yourself killed.

Was the above review useful to you?

31 out of 52 people found the following review useful:

Being a Demigod Ain't That Fun

7/10
Author: Prince AJB
29 March 2012

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

Perseus is back in this sequel to the 2010 poorly received remake of the 1984 classic, "Clash of the Titans". A decade has passed since his heroic defeat of the Kraken and things have changed a bit for Perseus and friends. However, just when he was about to have a good life, evil calls him back again to fight once more in an attempt alongside the gods to defeat the evil Titan lord, Kronos, from devouring the gods and obliterating all of mankind.

"Wrath of the Titans" takes place a decade after the conclusion of the 2010 remake, so there's a slight change in life. Perseus is now a father and due to the death of his wife Io, a lone parent of 10-year-old-soon-to-be-hero Helius. After refusing the offer to given a rank between the gods of Olympus, he lives a quiet life as a fisherman with his son. Besides Perseus, Princess Andromeda is now Queen Andromeda and a fighter.

Meanwhile, the gods are facing a crisis. Hades (god of the underworld) and Ares (god of war) have teamed up with Kronos, leader of the Titans. They had made a deal with him and to release him from Tartarus. To power up Kronos, they captured Zeus and drained him of his energy to feed Kronos, thus awakening him. If they successfully awaken Kronos, Kronos would then proceed to kill Zeus and his friends, and obliterate all of mankind in an attempt to rule the world once more.

Just like its predecessor, this movie offers a lot of intense action sequences. This is one improvement from its predecessor, having more intense fighting scenes. There are many fights here, conducted between Perseus and many different creatures from the Greek myths. There's a fight between Perseus and the Minotaur in the labyrinth, a battle with a gigantic Cyclops, and many more battles with two-headed winged creatures, two-body-in-one monsters, and of course, the lava-fueled gigantic debris-coated Kronos for the climax. And add in the outstanding visual effects to enhance the action sequences. Anyone who's looking forward to violence will be pleased with this perfect blend of exciting action scenes and sophisticated visual effects.

Talking about effects, let's talk about the 3D. The first film, being heavily marketed as a must- see 3D event, had dreadful 3D effects. Added as an afterthought, the 3D is just painful and does nothing to the film except charge the viewer some extra bucks. I was skeptical of watching it in 3D for this movie, but it seems the producers and crew have spent more time and paid more attention to the 3D effects of the film. The 3D here is a vast, massive improvement from the dreadful 3D effects of the first film. Occasionally, some of the items shown pop out of the screen. If you hated the 3D of the first film, reconsider before deciding to watch this film whether in 3D or not because the 3D here is just excellent.

When it gets to story, this movie lacks at it. It has a simple plot that the movie rarely hangs on to. But that's not a problem, the movie does not aim to be a film with an intriguing, complex, sophisticated, mind-boggling plot, it aims to be a spectacular, eclectic mix of special effects and action scenes. The dialog is fairly simple, the acting was fair, and the plot was just not complicated.

Nevertheless, "Wrath of the Titans" is a considerable improvement from the horrible 2010 remake of the 1984 classic. It has plenty of action sequences accompanied with dazzling visual effects for teenage boys to enjoy, excellent 3D effects for enhanced excitement, and a little bit of focus on the storyline to get things going. If you're anyone of the people who want to have some fun watching countless violent scenes and dazzling visual effects, have this movie a go. But if you're anyone who's more interested in seeing a movie with an intriguing plot and some more focus on the storyline, give this film a miss.

Rating: 7/10

Final Verdict: "Wrath of the Titans" is a vast improvement from the poor remake of the 1984 fantasy that offers plenty of action sequences, dazzling visual effects, satisfying 3D effects, and a little bit of storyline to get things going.

Was the above review useful to you?

25 out of 41 people found the following review useful:

When the Sequel is Better and Better

7/10
Author: Claudio Carvalho from Rio de Janeiro, Brazil
17 June 2012

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

Perseus (Sam Worthington) and his son Helius live as fishermen in a small village. One night, Zeus (Liam Neeson) visits Perseus and tells that the gods are weaker since the humans do not pray for them anymore. He tells that the walls of Tartarus are falling down in the underworld and all the demons will be released on Earth and Kronos will escape from his imprisonment.

Zeus goes to the underworld with Poseidon (Danny Huston) to join forces with Ares (Édgar Ramírez) and Hades (Ralph Fiennes) but they are betrayed and Zeus is captured. Poseidon escapes deadly wounded and encounters Perseus in the Zeus' Temple. He gives his trident to Perseus and advises him to meet his son and also demigod Agenor (Toby Kebbell) in the kingdom of Andromeda (Rosamund Pike) and ask him to guide Perseus to find the fallen one. Together with Andromeda, they begin their saga to release Zeus and avoid that Ares and Hades unleash the ancient Titan Kronos.

"Wrath of the Titans" is a sequel of "Clash of Titans" that is better and better than the first film. The story is engaging and full of action, with a great cast and magnificent CGI. "Wrath of the Titans" is not a masterpiece but fans of the genre will certainly not be disappointed. My vote is seven.

Title (Brazil): "Fúria de Titãs 2" ("Wrath of Titans 2")

Was the above review useful to you?

19 out of 30 people found the following review useful:

a pleasant surprise

8/10
Author: destroyah25 from United States
30 March 2012

Just finished watching wrath of the titans, and have to say it was better than expected. I was expecting a somewhat average film after the disappointing remake of the original. All the characters played their roles very well especially Zeus and Hades. The version I saw was 3d, and the use of it was much better this time around scenes with falling rocks, Pegasus flying, and other scenes had a strong presence with the 3d. A couple weaknesses I saw in my opinion were the character representations of Hephestus and Hades toward the end. Hephestus was seemed to be way scrawnier, too good looking, not serious enough, and too weak for a god. He was a solid character just wish they made him more represented to how he was in myth. Also without spoiling the character change of Hades toward the end was a little interesting, but felt it shouldn't have been done. The effects were in this movie were awesome especially for Cronus. It also has some great fight scenes that really get you blood pumping. All in all though it was a great action film, with some solid comedy relief, and just a great overall film especially for those looking for flashy effects 8/10

Was the above review useful to you?

10 out of 15 people found the following review useful:

Leave it to Liebesman

1/10
Author: tieman64 from United Kingdom
9 April 2012

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

Watching a Jonathan Liebesman film is like watching a screensaver for fifty years whilst a five year old incorrectly recites the alphabet dressed in diamonds, gold and covered in tuna. He's representative of a new breed of cinematic ultra hack, third generation Steven Spielbergs and James Camerons who, unlike their predecessors - who were typically uninterested in everything but FX and action - are simply uninterested in everything. In this regard, Liebesman's films have a special, all encompassing ineptness, barely serviceable plot and dialogue existing only to lead up to barely serviceable CGI and action scenes which only exist to lead up to barely serviceable plot and dialogue.

What's staggering is the massive budgets, and the huge amounts of FX work, that typically goes into Liebesman's films. All this money, all this time, all this production work, and yet his films are staggeringly bland and artless. He's one of those artists who came of artistic age in that awkward gap pre-video game but post Spielberg/Lucas/Cameron idolatry. What he thinks is cool is immediately outdated to 5 year olds who multi-player maul monsters morning to midnight on flat-screens and laptops.

"Wrath of the Titans" is a sequel to "Clash of the Titans". It's a popcorn movie which pulls from Greek mythology. As this mythology relied on oration, imagination, the inconceivable and the abstract, it is impossible for anyone other than a genius to translate it to cinema and not produce a goofy film.

Still, Liebesman's film has two mildly interesting shots: a top down view of three warriors being squashed by a wall, and one brief visual in which giant cyclops walk along a hilltop as humans scurry at their feet. That's about 2 seconds of art in a feature length film. Thankfully the film stars Rosamund Pike, who I suppose is also some kind of genetic work of art, with exotically high cheekbones and a nose like a peanut. Aussie actor Sam Worthington is our action hero; he does his usual shtick, his real life confusion as to how he ended up a mega-action star mimicking the befuddlement of all his characters.

The film is a sequel to "Clash of the Titans", a bad film which actually moved well, had some self-depreciation about it, thanks to European action director Louis Leterrier. Perhaps the best of this new wave of sword-and-sandals action-mythology films are "The Eagle", "Beowulf" and "Immortals", by Tartem Singh.

0/10 - Rewatch "Conan The Barbarian" instead. Worth no viewings.

Was the above review useful to you?

11 out of 17 people found the following review useful:

Just a horrible, lame film

1/10
Author: Pantelis Andreou from United States
18 May 2012

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

One!!! Yes one.I put it one because I can't put it below zero.once you reach a point where you say "enough", pulling a red line and no longer tolerate the slightest. the «Wrath of the Titans» do NOT qualify to cross the path you! There are "bad" movies that were betrayed by a lack of budget or technical resources, other than lack of talent in front and back from the camera, others so miserable that they became cult or simply must-see and shoot the other doomed simply because the outer error messages contained. Yes, there are many ways to "bent" and a movie, and most can be understood and respected. But in the case of «Wrath» there are no mitigating.The authors built a stupid, pointless, ridiculous, insulting, annoying, unsightly, historically ignorant, rambling, anencephaly, childish, slipshod, awful and deadly dull movie.There is absolutely nothing positive I can suggest (and I after a quiet my conscience).Perhaps the only thing I can credit to authors of this sad sequel is that they managed what seemed impossible until recently: To make it worse than The clash!!! 0/10

Was the above review useful to you?

7 out of 10 people found the following review useful:

You look ten thousand years younger.....

3/10
Author: FlashCallahan from Leicester, United Kingdom
5 April 2012

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

Perseus is attempting to live a quieter life as a fisherman and parent to his son, Helius.

Dangerously weakened by humanity's lack of devotion, the gods are losing control of the imprisoned Titans and their ferocious leader, Kronos, father of the long-ruling brothers Zeus, Hades and Poseidon.

The trio had overthrown their father long ago, leaving him to rot. Perseus cannot ignore his true calling when Hades make a deal with Kronos to capture Zeus.

Enlisting the help of the warrior Queen Andromeda and Poseidon's son, Perseus bravely embarks on a treacherous quest into the underworld to rescue Zeus, and save mankind.....

Like he did last year, Liebbesmann or however you spell his name, starts the blockbuster year off with an almighty whimper. Battle: Los Angeles was awful, and this is just as bad.

The cast are mostly back, but some just look embarrassed, and the main character is played by someone who is devoid of any talent, but has starred in some of the biggest films in the last three years.

The man cannot carry a movie, and whenever he isn't on screen with Neeson, Fiennes or Kebbel, the film just falters and becomes boring.

I was hoping for a film that would just consist of walking, fighting monsters, walking, fighting monsters and so on, but nothing could prepare me for the awful script and the lack of plot.

People should know now that no , matter how good the effects are, or what seasoned British actors are in it (Nighy does an excellent Davy Jones again), it doesn't make up for the lack of interest the story or narrative has.

On the plus side, the 3D is better than the first.....

And you just know that wooden sword will be included in the finale.

A waste of time.

Was the above review useful to you?

31 out of 58 people found the following review useful:

A Nutshell Review: Wrath of the Titans

7/10
Author: DICK STEEL from Singapore
29 March 2012

Once bitten, twice shy. I suppose the really bad 3D effects in the Clash of the Titans remake two years ago made me steer really clear of yet another post-production 3D conversion effort in this follow up sequel, and going by the looks of it, there isn't really much to provide that depth of field, nor effort in the way it's shot to exploit the 3D format, other than to rake in extra dollars since the 2010 version did so to have green lit this total imaginary Greek mythology scribed by Greg Berlanti, David Johnson and Dan Mazeau, who between them have written stuff like Green Lantern, Orphan, and Red Riding Hood. But one thing's for sure, gone is the direction and focus on pure action, and in comes a semblance of a stronger storyline.

The theme about fathers and sons cannot be more pronounced in Wrath of the Titans, set 10 years after the first film, that harks back to the Greek mythology origins of the splitting of powers between Zeus (Liam Neeson), Hades (Ralph Fiennes) and Poseidon (Danny Huston) when they condemn their father Cronos into the depths of Hell, and Zeus having to play Hades out by making the latter lord of the underworld. So the balance of power has remained as such, until Zeus walks into a trap as planned by Hades and Zeus' son Ares (Edgar Ramirez) the god of War because of his jealousy of Perseus (Sam Worthington), the new favoured son of Zeus. With Zeus entrapped to sap his life force and powers for Cronos, the plan is to release Cronos back into the world to destroy everything in the known universe.

The saviour is of course demi god Perseus, who now is a father to Helius (John Bell), his son with now deceased wife Io, conveniently written out because of Gemma Arterton's non participation, and to steer the romance in this fable back to between Perseus and Queen Andromeda, who's now Warrior Queen and played by Rosamund PIke. And Perseus can't save the world alone because he's only a half-god up against the might of Ares, Hades and Cronos, so he has to team up with another demi god, the son of Poseidon, Agenor (Toby Kebbell), who will lead them to Hephaestus (Bill Nighy), who holds the key to safe passage to the Underworld where Zeus is imprisoned. The quest this time, as you can see, is kept quite linear and straightforward, which makes it extremely easy to follow as the dots get connected in the most simplest of fashion, keeping in constant reminder of the theme that deals with the squabbles between family members, and fights between envious siblings.

And not only is the story kept simple, the battle scenes here were also cleanly designed without complication, unleashing new beasts yet to be seen in the Clash of the Titans film, involving ugly two-headed hounds from hell, battles with one eyed cyclops, and of course, big daddy himself who seemed more smoke and mirrors, especially since the strategy involves something that's very close to Star Wars' destruction of the Death Star. I can't fathom why there are so many complaints about the big minotaur fight unless you're watching the film really close to the screen. Some easter eggs continue from the first film, such as the presence of mechanical owl Bubo, and Pegasus having a little bit more personality though still sidelined as being nothing more than air transportation.

Sam Worthington looked like he's enjoying much of the adventures of Perseus this time round, playing the man who walked away from his new found fame as the Kraken slayer, to return once again from his life of being a simple fisherman, and taking up arms and fight to save the world against the titans in the film (collectively inclusive of the other monsters in the film). With the gods severely weakened because nobody prays to them, the role of Perseus and Agenor, for slight comic relief, may pave the door to follow up films that deal more with demi gods than those residing in Mount Olympus. Liam Neeson and Ralph Fiennes had a lot more to do here also in expanded roles, with the final act providing the opportunity for one last hurrah that is surprisingly moving.

Perhaps the miscast here would be Rosamund Pike's Andromeda, with the idea of a Warrior Queen being a departure from Andromeda's usual role of the damsel in distress, but this film still being more testosterone suited instead. She doesn't get to do much given her very human abilities, and is there as token romantic interest with a romance that isn't strong to begin with, coupled with a sagging mid-section that involves hallucination en route to the Underworld that got abandoned before it even begun for her character. Her troopers too in the final battle scene didn't get to do much despite much posturing for nothing, and were relegated to mere cheer leaders for the most part, grateful that someone else had stepped up to the plate and did their fighting for them instead.

Still, if compared to the rather disastrous Clash of the Titans 2 years ago, Wrath of the Titans is a leg up in terms of storytelling, and didn't have an albatross of the superbly nostalgic 1981 version hanging around its neck to be compared to. The fights also didn't get obsessed with wanting to be bigger, faster and more CG-laden, and the combination of a more focused plot and theme, with better designed battles that adhered to the mantra of keeping it simple, proved to be a winner for this follow up. Recommended for being that far out, imaginary modern take on Greek mythology that played on the what-if scenario.

Was the above review useful to you?


Page 2 of 25:[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [Next]

Add another review


Related Links

Plot summary Plot synopsis Ratings
Awards External reviews Parents Guide
Official site Plot keywords Main details
Your user reviews Your vote history