IMDb > Wrath of the Titans (2012) > Reviews & Ratings - IMDb
Wrath of the Titans
Top Links
trailers and videosfull cast and crewtriviaofficial sitesmemorable quotes
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
taglines trailers and videos posters photo gallery
External Links
showtimesofficial sitesmiscellaneousphotographssound clipsvideo clips

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

Write review
Filter: Hide Spoilers:
Page 20 of 26: [Prev][15] [16] [17] [18] [19] [20] [21] [22] [23] [24] [25] [26] [Next]
Index 253 reviews in total 

0 out of 1 people found the following review useful:

Better than its rating

Author: jmberkland from United States
1 July 2012

I went to rent this from and its overall score was 2/5 stars. I almost didn't rent it because of the poor review, and then remembered how the Denzel Washington starring John Q fared so poorly at its initial release in terms of how it was reviewed by critics and how it ended up being a tremendously inspiring movie.

We went ahead and rented "WRATH" and within 20 minutes we all agreed it was already faring better than a 2/5 type of movie.

The enemies were visually perfection-like, the action was continuous, and there were some "spoilers" i don't want to name but the climax has some team-ups that just make the movie epic and memorable.

If you liked "CLASH" I think "WRATH" can pass your expectations

Was the above review useful to you?

0 out of 1 people found the following review useful:

'Wrath of the Titans' surpasses its predecessor and offers a fresh story

Author: ersinkdotcom from United States
30 June 2012

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

After my utter disappointment in the "Clash of the Titans" remake, I didn't know what to think of its sequel. I felt like I could be a bit more forgiving of "Wrath of the Titans" because it was a sort of fresh start unlike the senseless retooling that was its predecessor.

Thankfully, "Wrath of the Titans" did provide haters of the remake a jumping-on point to give this new tale of Perseus a chance. I choose to think of this movie as a sequel to the original 1981 movie. I know it seems ridiculous, but it's what I have to do to come to grips with this follow-up.

"Wrath of the Titans" Blu-ray is perfect for fans of Greek mythology and fantasy films. The movie itself is a step above the "Clash of the Titans" remake. It's full of action and the special effects are effective.

Was the above review useful to you?

0 out of 1 people found the following review useful:

Return of the Titans

Author: Sean Jump from United States
28 June 2012

Wrath of the Titans, which of course is a sequel to 2010's Clash of the Titans, is one of those rare examples of a follow-up which is superior to the original. The plot is still very much secondary to the action and special effects, but the screenwriters at least take the basic ideas from Clash in some novel directions, while likewise bringing certain aspects of the Perseus myth back into line with the classic story both movies are based upon.

As Wrath of the Titans opens, the god Zeus (Liam Neeson) visits his half-human son Perseus (Sam Worthington) to seek his help. It seems that people have turned away from the gods, denying them the worship that feeds their immortality. Given the fickle nature of the Greek gods, this may not sound like such a bad thing, but there is a catch: as the gods lose their power, so too do the walls of Tarterus, the underworld prison where the most powerful of the titans, Kronos, is chained. If Kronos escapes, the entire world could be destroyed by his vengeance.

It's an epic plot, and one the film more often than not manages to live up to. The special effects are incredible, and the various mythological creatures that the script calls for are brilliantly realized in all their glory: fire-breathing chimeras, multi-armed demons that mow through ranks of human soldiers like buzzsaws, giant one-eyed Cyclopes, the beautiful flying horse Pegasus, and of course the massive Kronos, a walking maelstrom of volcanic wrath.

The cast isn't half bad, either. Worthington is given a much more sympathetic version of Perseus to play this time, as opposed to the sometimes annoying, self-righteous youth he portrayed in Clash of the Titans. Perseus is a bit more mature now, as is only befitting since he is now a father. Young John Bell acquits himself honorably as Helius, Persus's son, while Ralph Fiennes reprises his role of Hades, Zeus's scheming brother, with obvious relish. Bill Nighy and Edgar Ramirez join the cast as Hephaestus and Ares, respectively, with Rosamund Pike replacing Alexa Devalos as Andromeda, whose relationship with Perseus hints at turning full circle despite the platonic friendship established in the previous film. It's a surprisingly well-acted film, and the script takes advantage of Perseus's own paternal love for Helius to explore his strained relationship with Zeus to good dramatic effect.

Generally better written, acted, and plotted than Clash of the Titans, Wrath of the Titans takes the formula from its predecessor and improves upon it in most respects. Though not as good as last year's Immortals (for my money the best movie derived from Greek mythology yet produced), Wrath of the Titans is a highly entertaining fantasy showcase.

Was the above review useful to you?

0 out of 1 people found the following review useful:

This movie was spectacular...

Author: Paul Magne Haakonsen from Denmark
16 June 2012

I found the 2010 "Clash of the Titans" to be adequate, but this 2012 "Wrath of the Titans" far outshines the first movie. So chances are if you enjoyed "Clash of the Titans", then you will definitely love "Wrath of the Titans".

The story was more thought through in "Wrath of the Titans" compared to "Clash of the Titans", and there was a profound more depth to the storyline and the events that was portrayed. It is not really a story that requires much thinking from us as viewers, it is basically just sit back and enjoy the ride. Perseus (played by Sam Worthington) is living with his son Helius (played by John Bell) after his wife died. Mankind have stopped praying to the gods and that is about to bring about a cataclysmic event, as the deities are trying to awaken the father of gods, Kronos. It is up to Perseus, Agenor (played by Toby Kebbell) and Andromeda (played by Rosamund Pike) to stop the end of days. Along the way they get help from the eccentric Hephaestus (played by Bill Nighy).

Something did puzzle me, was why people in ancient Greece spoke with a very distinct British accent, well most of them did anyway. That was just a little bit odd. But of course, this being a massive Hollywood production, they had to speak English and not Greek. Just saying that Greek would have added much more authenticity to the movie.

The CGI effects in "Wrath of the Titans" were off the charts. I enjoyed this movie from start till end, especially because of the CGI effects. But also the details and touches the production staff had added into almost every single scene. Lots of really nice details to be seen here and there. The cyclops were really awesome, and they were brutal and savage, but also had a gentler side to them, which was interesting to see. The chimera that ravaged Perseus's village was also really nicely made; very aggressive and destructive, and once you got to see the creature up close and personal, there was a lot of great touches in details on it. Then speaking of Kronos, well his manifestation was amazing, as a huge molten lava/rock elemental, that looked just amazing.

In my opinion, then the acting was really nice as well, and they had put together a great cast of well-talented actors and actresses. However, the ones that put on the most memorable performances and carried most of the movie (acting-wise) was Liam Neeson (playing Zeus) and Ralph Fiennes (playing Hades); they were just spectacular in their roles.

"Wrath of the Titans" is a great action movie from start to end, and all the amazing CGI really helps the movie along quite nicely. This movie is just pure testosterone and clearly aimed for a guy audience.

If you enjoyed "Clash of the Titans" then you owe it to yourself to sit down and watch "Wrath of the Titans", because it just that much better.

Was the above review useful to you?

0 out of 1 people found the following review useful:

What you expect from a high-budget action movie with lots to prove

Author: habib_khodadad from Toronto, Canada
9 June 2012

This movie is amongst the greatest movies ever created in the Action/Adventure genre. As soon as the movie starts, you begin to notice how exciting and exhilarating the movie truly is. The characters are very well created, and I like the plot of the movie a lot because it makes the viewers engage in the movie throughout. The action scenes are particularly great because the characters are so rich and so unique in their own ways. The plot is take straight out of Greek mythology folklore but it doesn't fabricate the characters in the slightest sense of the imagination. Empirically, the movie is great for those who enjoy titles like Thor and Clash of the Titans.

Was the above review useful to you?

0 out of 1 people found the following review useful:

Wrath of the audience

Author: kosmasp
31 May 2012

Actually this is far removed from the mess that was called Clash of the Titans. 3D mess, story mess, no real comedy in sight and quite a lot of other things that went wrong in the first one. Although as I have stated before elsewhere, the first one would have worked a lot better without the 3D (still wouldn't have been a much better movie though). 3D isn't a problem with this one

A more straight movie, that works better but still has some issues. Technically this seems really good. Maybe the story could have done with some tweaking. But then again it came only 2 years after the original (read remake), so what could you expect from it? Exactly!

Was the above review useful to you?

0 out of 1 people found the following review useful:

No decent plot, ill conceived special effects and disappointing acting...

Author: gigione80 from Kyiv, Ukraine
9 May 2012

I was not expecting a great plot, wonderful acting, but at least someone approaching a movie like this would expect awesome effects...Nothing like this, so I would not suggest to go watch this, it's simply not worthy it. The story is loosely based on ancient Greek Mythology, but with lots of discrepancies. It's very disappointing that so much money has been spent on a such useless movie. This film will not impress you at all, it will simply be forgotten and it's the only good thing that can happen to you after watching it! I am shocked by the fact that an excellent actor like Liam Neeson would get involved in such a bad movie! Stay far from it!

Was the above review useful to you?

0 out of 1 people found the following review useful:

The Wrath of the Boring Filmmaker!

Author: Hellmant from United States
1 May 2012

'WRATH OF THE TITANS': Two and a Half Stars (Out of Five)

Sequel to the 2010 hit remake of the 1981 cult classic fantasy film based on the myth of Perseus and his battles with Medusa and the Kraken monster. This film is set ten years after the original and once again pits Perseus against evil gods and monsters. Sam Worthington returns as Perseus and Liam Neeson, Ralph Fiennes and Danny Huston all reprise their roles as gods. This one was written by Dan Mazeau and David Johnson and directed by Jonathan Liebesman (who also directed such B Sci-Fi and horror films as 'BATTLE LOS ANGELES', 'THE Texas CHAINSAW MASSACRE: THE BEGINNING' and 'DARKNESS FALLS'). The movie looks great but other than that it's a bore.

The movie is set a decade after the original when demigod Perseus is trying to raise his son alone, after losing his wife (but it's never explained how). When Perseus's father Zeus (Neeson) is imprisoned by his other son Ares (Edgar Ramirez) and brother Hades (Ralph Fiennes) it's once again up to Perseus to save the world. The two plot to unleash the evil Titans and due to lack of faith the powers of the good gods are once again weakened. Zeus must of course go on an epic journey in to the underworld and do battle with the evil gods again.

The movie is excruciatingly slow paced and devoid of any emotion or involving plot points. The characters are developed to the bare minimum and I could have cared less what happened to any of them (I found my attention drifting often). Still it looked great. Mostly a waste though.

Watch our movie review show 'MOVIE TALK' at:

Was the above review useful to you?

0 out of 1 people found the following review useful:

Only good giant

Author: rrr303 from Japan
1 May 2012

This movie was not too many enemies and fight great big pounding. There was no climax and final boss battle in the giant squid in the middle like a lump of lava at the peak. But you who have come out well each time accompanied by fellow like Ropure, mediocre members. Me and my sister and young Mochoi. There is not much different from John Carter does well. Feeling disappointed and easily on par with previous work involving a half-hearted even in the end It thinks God Why VS last with the military. Whiff of shame is gone conservative and stupid rather than armor or ~Tsu awfully Teka has changed since you also director of the gods. What family trouble that would not have been messy, but it was also softening early deployment story? Sequel will no longer die, but in this movie is so main characters pounding What a simple story. Could not expect too much just because at the time of hit sequel What I mean little in the remake. I had thought of a sequel (3D does not pop out either choice) Air Ne and vendors this is not needed. Hollywood movies that kids do not die after as usual. What is it about recent contagion. Is a decent movie was good because the place of the giants, but only like a great bad movie.

Was the above review useful to you?

0 out of 1 people found the following review useful:

Should have been another movie

Author: mmcca286
21 April 2012

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

After watching the movie I had to tell myself why did I watch this? I'm not saying the movie was bad but they did the most of what they was dealt. In my opinion the first movie was average at best considering who's the main actor. for a movie to have some of the best actors they sure did ruin their rep. and Sam Worthington is about the worst actor i ever seen. if it wasn't for Liam Neeson and Ralph Fiennes surrounding Sam it would have been a bigger disaster than it was to begin with. and to kill off Gemma Arterton as Io was a big mistake, if you do that get a better replacement than Rosamund Pike, this movie is by far the worst of the two. the plot of the movie was bad, the 3D effects was the only thing that kept my attention other than that the movie was a bust.

Was the above review useful to you?

Page 20 of 26: [Prev][15] [16] [17] [18] [19] [20] [21] [22] [23] [24] [25] [26] [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