Clash of the Titans

This is one of those movies of which I had high expectations as a blockbuster. sorry folks, this is no blockbuster, it is nowhere as good as 300 and the recent Percy Jackson and Lightning Thief scores for me a whole lot better in terms of interpretation of Greeks mythology.

Sam Worthington as Perseus is likable but thats about it. He is no Sean Bean and doesn't deliver a strong enough character performance for me for a 'demi God' and the women throughout are models rather than actresses delivering good lines.

The opening boat scene is intriguing enough but the first let down is seeing the haircut of Perseus on the beach as a child, trying to connect where he was and what he was doing, it didn't wash for me. His taking to the Argos King and Queen and the confrontation inside the Palace was bizarre.

I agree with comments about the Krakken and the Medusa, they could have made more of Medusa and exploited more the real myth of Perseus and Medusa. My 11 year old son liked the film and things like Zeus giving Perseus the coin to enter the Hades underworld (same as in Percy Jackson) was interesting.

I don't say the film wasn't interesting or entertaining and there were some great scenes but I didn't go to see a mix of King Kong meets Lord of the Rings. Too much wizardry for me and the logic of Greek mythology became lost. Too many corny lines, poor lines, too much emphasis on the action without really connecting it to the story.

Certainly not a film to see in 3D.

Clash of the Titans reminds me much of my feelings towards last year's blockbuster Wolverine; satisfied, but far from enamoured. During the running time we are roused by the numerous action sequences, the special effects are well done and the plethora of A-list stars keep the story grounded (at least to some effect). Yet after the screen last grown dark there is little to remember; bad or good. You know you had a fun time no more, no less.

You will not find me clamouring for the DVD upon the films home release date but I would not be above having another look if I came across it on TV. Mostly, I am torn (As you can surmise by this pseudo- recommendation). I went in expecting dumb fun and hammy acting and I got just that but to that same effect, Clash is nothing to write home about so to what standard should this film be held? Pondering aside, I will move forth and let you make your own final ruling.

The 1981 original of the same name (which I admit I have not yet seen) has those devout followers in equal part to those who find it a dated clunker. With 2010's Clash I can by no means foresee this following any trajectory other than that of a by-the-numbers blockbuster; cult status is not in this movie's stars. But as I alluded to it is entertaining popcorn fluff, bogged down however by an overabundance of mish-mashed lore and mythology. Clash does not play by any sort of rules but seems to make them up as it goes along. Whenever our heroes find themselves in peril a character or creature pops up with a unique skill to save the day. There is never a sense of tension or danger as you can tell that a hidden gift or plot contrivance will appear to vanquish all foes along with narrative coherence.

Clash of the Titans is at its best during the action set pieces and I suppose that is the only real reason to venture out anyways. Whether it be giant scorpions, the monstrous Kraken, the cackling Medusa or the gods themselves the battles are first rate. Amidst these, dare I say clashes, our half man half god Perseus (Sam Worthington, who was proved himself to be a charismatic leading man) sets out on a quest spurred by the deaths of his mortal parents. Prophecy has foretold he will be the one to defeat the mammoth see creature called the Kraken and weaken its master Hades for good (or something like that). Despite the aforementioned oodles of mythology, plot takes a back seat and truthfully would you expect anything more?

As the immortal brothers we have Ralph Fiennes as Hades and Liam Neeson as Zeus and both are the real stars of the movie in my opinion. Neeson brings the appropriate level of pomposity and empathy to the character while never playing it too straight; he knows what movie he's in. Nobody can play evil like Fiennes and his Hades apart from being realized skilfully in a visual sense, is very menacing portrayed in a forced whisper. Kudos should also be given to Mads Mikkelsen as Draco (a gritty companion or Perseus) who strikes a delightful balance between humour and badassery.

It often annoys me when people affirm that people should take a movie 'for what it is', especially for outwardly awful cinematic blunders. Clash of the Titans is neither one of these blunders (at least not entirely) and frankly in this case, it is what it is.

6.5 / 10.0

Read all my reviews at simonsaysmovies.blogspot.com

I've never seen the 1981 original version of Clash of the Titans. I wasn't originally planning on seeing this new updated version either. Going by the previews, this looked like nothing more than a CGI-fest...which is what it pretty much ended up being. To quote Sam Worthington from various interviews, it's basically him "in a skirt with a rubber sword, killing monsters". If you're expecting anything more than that, then yes, you will probably be disappointed.

Some of the cast manage to make the most of what they're given to work with. Having not seen Sam Worthington in anything prior to this film (except Terminator Salvation), I don't really have anything to compare his acting to. He was good in Terminator Salvation and he's good in this as well (despite the occasional slip-up of his accent). He serves his purpose as Perseus, playing the action hero well enough. His interaction with the humans who accompany him on his journey is probably the most entertaining part of the film. Mads Mikkelsen, who was a memorable villain in Casino Royale, actually gets to play a fairly decent good guy in this film (Draco). Sure, it's the role of the typical grumpy guy (who's reluctant to follow the "saviour" and is a bit of a bully) teaching the hero how to fight and who eventually comes around to respecting the hero and ending up on good terms with him...but Mads manages to make his role a bit more than a cardboard cutout, thankfully. The other men who accompany Perseus aren't too bad either (they do provide a bit of humour), but they're not given much character development at all. Actually, there's very little development for any of the characters.

As far as the gods are concerned, they're basically just a bunch of folk who stand around in Cloud City (I mean Olympus) and talk. Liam Neeson isn't given a whole lot to work with as Zeus (shining in his silver armour as brightly as Marlon Brando did in the original Superman movie wearing his tinfoil costume). Ralph Fiennes, while good, is kind of irritating with his raspy voice as Hades (though, thankfully, that goes away by the end). The rest of the gods have jack squat to do or say.

I really didn't like Jason Flemyng's satyr character. Alexa Davalos pretty much just plays the damsel in distress in the movie and leaves very little impression as Andromeda. Gemma Arterton (as Io), however, proves to be the most successful female character in the movie. As a sort of angel on Perseus's shoulder, she guides him, teaches him and actually proves *useful*. Her and Worthington work well together/have good chemistry and I enjoyed watching the two of them share scenes. I was happy with how they ended up in the film.

As for the FX, the previews basically give it all away (Clash of the CGI might have been more befitting a title for the film). Perseus fights giant scorpions, Perseus fights the Kraken and Perseus fights Medusa. As large-scale as the Kraken was, I personally enjoyed Medusa more. The fight with her proved to be the most interesting of the many fights in the film. I liked the 'look'/design for her and I also really enjoyed Pegasus, the flying horse.

I'll just come right out and say it: the movie has many a flaw. The story isn't great, the pace is off, the writing is slapdash and most of the dialogue is sketchy at best. While the movie does try to get across a message, it comes through in a somewhat haphazard sort of way. Having said that, if you go into this film not expecting much more than a Monster Mash of the Titans...then hopefully it should prove to be entertaining enough.

Crap of the Titans? Not quite. But at the same time, it's kind of forgettable. As Worthington describes it, it's a "popcorn flick". Take from that what you will.

I, being a huge fan of the original, was probably more excited to see this movie than anyone. And in 3-D no less. So...I walk into the theater with my 3-D glasses on my head, holding my $5 popcorn and get ready to watch my favorite childhood movie and...and...and...oh no. Oh no. This is awful. I sat through the movie wondering why I don't care about any of these characters. On top of that, I'm wondering why I spent the extra money to see it in 3-D. The best 3-D effects came during the opening credits. Other than that, I could have thrown the glasses away. Now I know why James Cameron is not a big fan of making films 3-D after the fact. To make a long story short, I was incredibly disappointed. I would not recommend this movie to anyone. Go see the original "Clash of the Titans" if you want to lose yourself in a good movie. After seeing this one all I could think of was "oh how the mighty titans have fallen."

3D is not perfect. Avatar may have shown its full potential whilst Alice in Wonderland and How to Train Your Dragon have continued to prove it can be utilised successful, but if not given the time and effort it requires, the third dimension on screen can actually detract from the movie. Unfortunately this is the case here. The last-minute decision by the filmmakers to add the extra dimension feels tacky and lazy. The objects in the foreground don't seamlessly meld with those in the background and a lot of the action is blurry and unfocused. The desert-brown palate is dimmed even more by the glasses – something the aforementioned movies could cope with due to their vibrant colours – and all of the wide shots are blotchy at best.

It's a shame really as some of the action scenes are quite impressive and boast fairly decent special effects. The various creatures we encounter aren't quite always photo-real, although the sheer size of them – especially the tentacular Kraken – are impressive enough to wash away any glaring flaws. However seeing as this blockbuster lives and dies by its amped up, large-scaled sequences – the screenplay is utter tripe and doesn't even bother to try to make the links between the action interesting or reasonable – it regrettably falls on its own sword, thanks once again to the indolent 3D. Take that away and you might actually be able to enjoy the CGI and the ridiculously big set-pieces with the picture clarity they deserve.

New Aussie on the block, Worthington, takes a misstep in his recently flourishing career; his acting is wooden and unconvincing. It doesn't help that Perseus is a massively underwritten role and only requires Worthington to look good and occasionally mutter something heroic. Neeson and Fiennes come across as cheesy in their roles of Zeus and Hades respectively, their experienced acting chops can't save them from atrocious wigs and laughable costumes. Standing out – which isn't overly hard to be honest – is Arterton and Mikkelsen, they give decent performances as the heavenly Io and the disgruntled Draco.

If you must see this on the big screen then do yourself a favour and see it in normal 2D. Or, even better, just wait to rent it on Blu-Ray.

2.5 out of 5 (1 - Rubbish, 2 - Ordinary, 3 - Good, 4 - Excellent, 5 - Classic)