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 13 of 25: [Prev][8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] [18] [19] [20] [21] [22] [23] [Next]
Index 244 reviews in total 

Wrath of the Titans (2012) - 99 Minutes of Boredom!

5/10
Author: nickmesafilms (nickmesafilms@yahoo.com) from United States
5 July 2012

Set as a sequel to the remake of "Clash of the Titans", which was really quite unnecessary, "Wrath of the Titans" continues the story of Perseus and his everlasting battle with the Titans. I honestly feel like there's no use into talking about the plot, because honestly, there is no plot to talk about it. But I will say that Liam Neeson's Zeus has been kidnapped by Ralph Fiennes' Hades, and now Sam Worthington's Perseus has to team up with an army to go rescue him. Oh God, I just said the plot! Now, during the first 20 minutes, I started to become impressed with this movie. The effects were cool to look at, and the story started at an interesting point. But afterward, the story just plummeted after those enjoyable first 20 minutes. The rest of the movie is just uninteresting, slowly paced, and incredibly boring. Not even the giant "special effect" action scenes could save the film. Sam Worthington is still pretty likable, but still needs a little more help in the "line delivery" department. Liam Neeson and Ralph Fiennes are pretty well-suited for their performances, but they look embarrassed to be here. As for Rosamund Pike, no way! I don't really think she can actually act, then she can kick butt! So, the acting is average, the writing is ridiculous, the pacing is slow, and the overall action is not that memorable. Now, I only saw pieces of the first movie, so I can't really try to compare one movie between the other. But here's what I can say, "Wrath of the Titans" is not an awful movie to be exact, because I enjoyed some scenes, and the first half was pretty entertaining. But everything else was too boring, too slow, too uninteresting, and not that much my speed. In the end, "Wrath of the Titans" is quite a forgettable movie. "Wrath of the Titans", in my review, "boring development, and forgettable action".

Was the above review useful to you?

A lot better than Clash!

6/10
Author: nobre2 from Portugal
5 July 2012

I was not a fan of Clash of the Titans, the remake. I found it to be extremely boring and poorly paced.

That being said, i was extremely surprised by Wrath of the Titans. This movie has bigger and better action scenes, better characters and a slightly better script. More importantly i was never bored during this one.

The actors also do a better job on this one: Liam Neeson, Ralph Fiennes and Sam Worthington portray characters who feel more real and are instantly more likable this time around.

As a summer blockbuster, this movie can be really entertaining and more enjoyable than the first one. It also has amazing visuals and better 3D. I give it 6/10 stars. Above Average.

Was the above review useful to you?

Again the same disappointment as the previous one.

5/10
Author: manendra-lodhi (manendra.lodhi@gmail.com) from India
21 June 2012

Again the same factor that made me to watch the film. I had seen the first part. And I have this thing to watch the second part if they come. I even dared to watch the second part of ghost rider. So this film like its predecessor falls in the concept of character development. They were just rushing towards the final scene. Things like these make me sick. I already knew that the film is bad and I will regret my time after watching. But on the positive side the action sequences like the previous one are again good to watch at least once. It's like you should just scroll the film just to see the action sequences and you will never feel like you are missing anything special from the film i.e you will get the story even if you see the action scenes only. Well there are a lot of things that we can identify are bad in the film. The first ones are the dialogs which were, believe me irritating. Now I think the story development was far better in the first part.

"Watch only if you are a huge action fan and have watched the first part. Otherwise waste of time."

Was the above review useful to you?

God of war where are you

2/10
Author: yannickmessaoud from Canada
15 June 2012

I have watch half of this movie before leaving the theater, all the time i was there i kept thinking about God Of War 3, Kratos and how amazing a movie based on the video game would have been, instead of that awful movie, where sam worthington bad haircut, and all the worthless stuff happening on screen.

Plain bad and boring movie, that should be avoided. I enjoyed the first movie, it was not better then the first original movie which had a much better story, but not worst either. But the first movie was very well made and they should have kept it at this. This second movie was useless and made for the money.

Was the above review useful to you?

Hands-down better than the previous one

6/10
Author: KineticSeoul from United States
4 June 2012

When I first saw "Clash of the Titans" I thought "man Hollywood is running out of ideas" although that though crossed my mind multiple times before. But this sequel is somewhat fresh and a bit innovative, at least compared to the 2010 version of "Clash of the Titans". Which for some may not being saying much but to put it simply this is what the first one should have been, especially with the hype and all. It's not a amazing movie or a very epic one but it's still watchable and at least entertaining and not boring all the way through like the previous movie in this franchise. The CGI is better this time around as well even if the previous movie was alright but had some crappy CGI parts as well, the scorpion scene for one. This time around Zeus actually sides with Perseus and his cause and for good reason for Zeus though. The scene with the combining of opposites is just really cool to watch. The plot in this is basically Hades and Ares team up to release Kronos because of what happened in the previous movie the mythological gods are very weak and is capable of dying. What really stood out to me about this movie is the unpredictable nature of the characters and even the ending was unpredictable. Overall this is a worthy sequel that is better than the previous one.

6.8/10

Was the above review useful to you?

Wrath of Mythology

Author: drnrg35 from Mexico
21 May 2012

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

I have always been a big fan of the mythology movies. I grew up with Jason & The Argonauts and all the Sinbad entries with. Here is where I compare this latest Clash Entries with those movies. One one the particularly comes to mind is Sinbad & The Eye Of The Tiger. I get a strange sensation that Wrath.. got half of it's idea from the movie. Especially with it's monsters. Granted they were presented ion different fashion ,but basically the same ones. "Wrath" features the Cyclops on Chaos Island. "Eye Of The Tiger" features on Troglodytes; who resemble Cyclops in every way, except the one- eye feature, but one also decides to journey with Sinad and his crew to the Magic temple of sorts. here Our hero, Sinbad, encounters a towering golden mechanical Minataur called;aptly, Minoton. This is much like the Minotaur monster Persius encounters in the labyrinth. That in fact is actually part of the Thesus mythology tale; not Persius. Anway I see a lot of resemblances to that particular Sinbad entry throughout the Wrath sequel. Another movie , which I think inspires some ideas for Wrath is the 2011 firm "Inmortals". Not a particularly great film, but the comic resemblances are very obvious. Take for instance Micky Rourk's; King Hyperion character. Now try to follow me here. Micky Rourk starred in the Keira Knightly film; "Domino" and now he has a pert in a mythology film and he plays the villain. Another actor from "Domino" is Edgar Ramirez, who now plays Ares in the new Wrath film. Coincedene? Furthermore the plot of "Inmortals" actually revolves around the real story of Thesus and the Minotaur. I don't ,but when I pinpoint little things like these ; it just makes "Wrath" all the more silly. BTW, you also have fallen GODs in WRath, just like Inmortals. Asiad from one episode of Xena Warriour princess; I have never seen GODS die; now it seems they are falling like flies in every movie.

My final comparison of "Wrath" to "Inmortals" would be the scene in "Inmortals" where Zeus slays Ares for defying his command. It's almost as if Ares comes back to life in "Wrath" and takes his revenge in Zeus for killing him off in "Inmortals". Add to the fact that It's also an all out war between GODS and Titans in "Inmortals" and you basically have the same premise for "Wrath" except with a much juicer budget.

I like "Wrath", but feel a bit ripped of story wise after having watched "Inmortals"

Just a few things I did enjoy were the monsters. CGI or not , they were pretty fierce looking. I only wish they had milked the Minotaur-Persues fight a bit longer. I've yet to see a really spectacular fight scene with a demi-GOD and Minotaur.

As far as acting goes; the actors did a great job. The GODs; Neeson,Fiennes, and Nighy all had the right feel for their parts, but the mortals left much to be desired. . I still think Worthington isn't worthy of the Persius role and Rosamund Pike was really out of place. The rest were just extras: Even Kebell; who plays Posidon's long lost son, is misplayed, because his importance just fizzles out halfway through the film.

Anyway, I would recommend the movie to die hard mythology buffs to come up with their own conclusions. A one time watch wouldn't hurt, but somehow, all these CGI effects don't come up against the older stop motion techniques. Not without a good strong storyline and these new entries fail miserably in the story lines.

7 stars for action and cgi monsters, but only 3 stars for the way the story is executed.

Was the above review useful to you?

A very unepic epic movie...

5/10
Author: Gareth Johns from South Africa
14 May 2012

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

When I saw the trailer to this movie, I thought I would be going to watch a movie on par with Dark Of The Moon. I expected a movie full of great action scenes and epic battles against epic monsters. But, just like in Clash of the Titans, I was left disappointed... With Perseus fighting gods, monsters and titans alike, the epic monsters were there, but every fight failed to live up to expectations with Perseus defeating the Titan Kronos by flying around him and then throwing a glowing spear down his throat... The story-line was never going to be great (and it wasn't) and many people go to watch films like this for the action, and Wrath of the Titans failed to deliver.

Was the above review useful to you?

Crash Bang Whallop (Wrath?) of the titans

4/10
Author: Scott Emery from Bath, England
2 May 2012

Before I begin let me say I enjoyed the first film (6/10), I thought the action was pretty decent, the plot was wobbly of course, the acting was bad, but unlike most I liked the use of 3D in the film and thought it added something to it unlike most of the other 3D rubbish that year.

This film really did what I expected it do though. The scriptwriters/100,000 monkeys with typewriters obviously used all there decent(if that) ideas in the first and now the sequel kinda feels like its outta ideas. I'll try not to spoil the plot here for you, though it is irrelevant to the course of the film, but there's a part where all the power gets sucked out of Zeus REAALLY SLOWLY so to allow Perseus to have time to beat up all the rubbish demons and traverse his way through the deadly labyrinth (which takes up about 5 minutes of screen time cause the writers can't really think of any ideas other than "oh there trapped again for a bit") so it's kinda like they can't come up with a decent way to thicken the plot.

The main actor (Sam Worthington) annoys me a lot in this film as he can't even be bothered to get rid of his Australian accent for the film, which really kinda shows how much effort he actually put into it. Another thing is that there's about 3 characters in the film which are just there to thin things out, literally there's one guy who Perseus has to spend 10 minutes of screen time to get to it and then take him some where else. In the end this makes the film boring, that's the main difference between this and the last because of the three things I have just mentioned you just end up bored by the end because there was so much filler.

Not to be to much of a stab in the gut to the this film the three British actors (Neeson, Fiennes, Nighy) add something to the film in terms of screen presence or comedy and the action scenes are pretty decent with some OK use of 3D (NOT enough to make the film worth watching in 3D may I add). Also the massive fight off at the end was pretty damn good, though look out for the final battle as my friend Adam did notice that it has a similar feel to a gaviscon advert

4/10. Some decent shots, not nearly enough to make up for a bad film though

Was the above review useful to you?

Not a great film but better than one would expect given the original

6/10
Author: Sergio Campanale from United Kingdom
25 April 2012

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

My first thought when I saw the trailer was surprise: Surprise that this film had been made at all! Unlike the 2010 remake, this does not carry the baggage of either the 1981 original nor even of actual events from Greek Mythology. It stands and falls on its own merits. While not a great movie, it is however an entertaining one, with some excellent use of 3D that had us all ducking from rocks and lava and feeling breathless on roller-coaster rides down tunnels and caverns. Plot-wise it follows on from the 2010 films universe rather than actual Greek mythology, so we still have the silly "Gods will die without prayers" idea fuelling the narrative. The most interesting thing I found about this film is how it attempts to repair some of the worst errors of the 2010 film, and in that it reminded me a lot of "The Mummy Returns", the 2001 sequel to the 1999 "The Mummy". That movie also took an established narrative, mythology and characters and played fast and loose with them often in a way that made any fan of them uncomfortable. The sequel then took that films worst mistakes as a starting off point, and reworked a new narrative that made them look like parts of a larger, more sensible story slowly unfolding rather than script gaffs. So too does "Wrath". Sam Worthington, who in the original was a meat-headed, stubborn idiot motivated only by hate and anger who has to effectively be carried by every other friendly character in the movie, here seems older, wiser, and calmer, a more mature Perseus who seems to be painfully aware of just what an asshole he used to be. His main antagonist, Ares god of war (a very good Edgar Ramirez) is made in the image of the "Clash" Perseus, a stubborn angry fool blindly motivated by petty hate, jealousy and rage, so in a way he is fighting the shadow of his former self, repeating his own tragedy, which is an interesting way to put a little drama into the story. Andromeda is also better served here. Perseus' great love of legend and 1981 movie, she was relegated to plot point in the 2010 film as newly created Io took her place. Gemma Arterton, flavour of the month in 2010, didn't come back for second helpings, so her character is killed off-screen, a quickly glimpsed grave all the reverence she is given, which allows Andromeda to now retake her rightful place at Perseus's side. Many have complained at Rosamund Pike's casting, but it's spot on. Being set 10-12 years after the first film, it would make sense to have an older actress play her, and she also bears a reasonable resemblance to Alexandra Davalos (2010 Andromeda). Her role as tough warrior and capable military commander actually fits in well with what we saw of her in the 2010 film, a smart and intelligent woman in a court full of idiots who is dumped by Perseus on a beach to become the great future hope of Joppa. The Andromeda we see here IS that hope become reality. Director John Liebsman also realises he has Liam Neeson and Ralph Fiennes to hand, and rather than using them as stunt casting actually makes them act, no great strain but enough to infuse the Zeus-Hades relationship with some actual feeling and pathos and again add a little sorely needed dramatic weight to the proceedings. Bill Nighy is also excellent as the half-mad recluse God Hephaestus, avoiding his usual stately menace and snobbish sneer for an Earthy "working man" heavenly metal-smith. Toby Kebell is the comic relief, played in Russell Brand mould, and brings a little humour to the film. The monsters are also a step up from the 2010 film. A Chimera (one of a whole force of them apparently) tears apart Perseus village effectively. The trio of Cyclops on Hephaestus island are well made, going back to the "big fat man with one eye" look rather than the scaly reptilian-bull style of the classic Harryhausen creation, and their fight with the heroes is exciting and well-shot. The Minotaur (or maybe it's just A Minotaur, one of a production line like the Chimeras) however looks awful, and its fight with Perseus is impossible to follow or understand. The "double soldiers" at the end are excellent, hacking and slicing their way through Andromeda's army like giant buzz-saws, and the big-bad, Kronos himself, is excellently realised, moving with real menace and power, dripping in scalding hot lava, pumping out black smoke and uttering fearsome cries in its ancient tongue. OK. So he doesn't last long, but he makes more of an impression that the Kraken did at the end of "Clash". All in all "Wrath" is an enjoyable little mythological B-film in the old "Peplum" traditions of European cinema, bearing little resemblance to actual Greek mythology and having a very simple "get the mystical weapon – kill the bad guys – save the world" storyline. The acting is good for this kind of film with a little drama and comedy as well. The effects are good (especially fiery Kronos) and it goes a long way to repairing the many ills of its disastrous predecessor. For a film which never needed to exist in the first place and for which there were no expectations whatever, these aspects alone make it a small but pleasant surprise.

Was the above review useful to you?

Wrath incomplete

6/10
Author: kdorsey321 from United States
19 April 2012

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

This movie review is on the movie: "Wrath of The Titans," starring Sam Worthington(Perseus), Liam Neeson(Zeus), and Ralph Fiennes(Hades). This movie came out on March 30, 2012. I actually was able to watch this movie in the movie theater. When I saw the previews to this movie I was a little skeptical. I was skeptical because the first movie of its kind ("Clash of The Titans 2010") also looked great when it came to the previews, but it ended up being a little disappointing (my opinion). The previews to "Wrath of The Titans" look great! Despite my doubts due to the first of it kind, I still decided to give this movie a honest fair shot to be great and rated fairly.

To my misfortune, this movie ended up basically giving me the same feeling the first of its kind gave me. This movie was a little confusing to me. I thought they could have done a better job of clearing up what was going on in the movie. At times I wasn't even sure who Perseus was fighting. I'm not a genius, but this movie shouldn't have been to complicated for me to figure out. There were times were I just wasn't sure what exactly was going on. I also felt like the story/plot could have been better. After I read the description of the movie, I was finally able to piece everything together. I felt like I shouldn't have had to do that to know what was going on in this type of movie. Usually, when there is a second coming of a movie that involves action like this series, there is more action in the second movie. I look for that. I felt as though the action level was pretty much on the same level as the first movie (Clash of The Titans). I wanted more action. When that big lava creature came out at the climax of the movie, I was just praying it wasn't going to go down as easy as the "Kraken" did. My prayers was answered....but only just a little. This big lava creature lasted about five seconds longer than the Kraken. What's the point of having a creature that huge if its not going to last long?? I also thought the acting was average at best. This movie was a subpar action/fantasy movie all the way around to me.

There were some things that I did like about the movie. I thought some of the action scene that we received wasn't too bad. I really like the creatures in the film. I thought the creatures were pretty cool! The big one eyed monster that was in the forest was interesting to look at and two headed beast seemed like a creative monster to be induced in the movie series. The two head monster (Chrimera) had a horn on one of its heads, wings, and an incredibly long, for no reason tail and it was cool!

Overall, I'm not going to say it was the most horrible action/fantasy movie I've seen, but wasn't good enough to get pass a 6 on my radar. I'm giving this movie a 6 out of 10. I wouldn't see this movie in the movie theater. Its still in the movie theater and I'm telling you not to see it! I wouldn't buy this on DVD unless you are a huge fan of the series. I would say its worth a shot to see this when it comes out on Netflix if you have Netflix. If you have Netflix, wait for it to come out on Netflix. If you don't have it on Netflix and your really curious to see for yourself if it was good or not, wait for it to come out on Redbox for a dollar.

Was the above review useful to you?


Page 13 of 25: [Prev][8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] [18] [19] [20] [21] [22] [23] [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