Clash of the Titans (2010) User Reviews

Just your basic, run of the mill, average action movie........at best.

[blackmambamark · 6/10 · 2 April 2010]

Is it wrong to remake a movie just so you can update its special effects? Hollywood doesn't seem to think so. The classic claymation and stop motion sequences of old are some of the first things we think about when bringing up the subject of mythology movies. But one still cannot help but think how totally awesome it would look if it were updated.

Anyone who has ever read mythology knows that every single tale is of epic preportions. And by epic, i don't just mean the battle sequences......im looking more towards the actual time line. Each individual book always tells a story of one mans struggle against countless odds that stretch over a long period of time. So normally about halfway through, you begin to say to yourself "How much more can this guy take?". And in saying that, i think that is where this movie failed. I didn't feel hatred towards these gods. I didn't feel the need to have my thirst for revenge quenched. I didn't feel sorry for the main character Perseus.......because i didn't feel any depth to his character or the plot. This movie focused way to much on the action scenes, as opposed to the story.........which is suppose to be epic, right? But yes, the action sequences are really great, and the scenes with Medusa and the Kraken are awesome. But thats all i can really give to this film. It just felt empty.

The transitions between each action scene were really poor. You can tell that the director was trying his hardest to make you feel for these characters by adding one or two lines of pathetic dialogue. And since we are on the subject of dialogue......man it was bad. There was no emotionality, all the little tid bits of humor fell flat at every turn. It was like Michael Bay wrote the dialogue.

Bottom Line, this is just your basic, run of the mill, average action movie........at best. This is certainly not one of those movies that you will be telling your friends about the next day. Its action is really good, its story is bland, its dialogue is weak........all things that i really wouldn't consider epic. Also, and this is important for you people who are tight on money. This is the first time i have ever said this, but please, do not see this movie in 3-D. It is a giant waste of money. You will get the same satisfaction seeing it in regular 2-D........trust me. There really was no point in making this movie in 3-D at all, other than to squeeze every dollar they can out of a average action flick.

Mishmash of the Titans...

[Chalice_Of_Evil · 7/10 · 31 March 2010]

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.

Oh how the mighty titans have fallen

[scott-tomasso · 5/10 · 6 April 2010]

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."

An entertaining and action-packed movie, but don't study for your Classical Lit exam with this

[rooprect · 15 May 2016]

"Clash of the Titans" (2010) provided everything its cover image and trailer promise, except for the part about authentic Greek Mythology, but if you can get past that you'll have a good time. The draw of the film is fast paced, adrenaline pumping action, a lot of tough guys & gals who never smile, and really cool monsters and special effects for 2010.

It's rated PG-13 for some violence and gore, and there is no sexuality, nudity or profanity (except 1 awesome use of the word b*tch). The "violence and gore" is shot very fast, so even though it depicts people being ripped in half & such, it's not quite as disturbing as, say, a Quentin Tarantino film where you watch a guy slowly bleed to death for 15 mins. In other words, this is good stuff to watch with your teenage kids or puritanical parents, either way.

There are some big names on the cast, and all performances were solid, but nothing really stood out as remarkable. That is to be expected in a fast paced film. But I would have preferred a powerful monologue or two just to use the talent to its full potential. I will say Ralph Fiennes did a chillingly original portrayal of "Hades", making him to be a twisted, limping, bitter wretch who still possessed terrifying power and fury. He is definitely my favorite part of the production.

Now on to the bad, which others have covered in detail so I'll just graze over. If you think you can study for your Classical Literature exam by watching this, you're going to get flunked all the way back to James Whale's 1931 "Frankenstein" (the most successful yet inaccurate adaptation of literature ever). Different characters in mythology seem to have been transposed, juxtaposed and just plain posed for the sake of this 2010 story. The biggest liberty is that here our hero Perseus is fighting against the gods when the original literature shows that he was tremendously helped by the gods by being given special weapons and gifts. In this film he is given those same gifts which he indignantly refuses but then later sheepishly accepts them because they'll save his life. I'm not sure if that was meant to be hypocritical, ironic, or just a sloppy oversight in the screenplay, but it's worth noting. Just what exactly is this film saying below the surface? That humans have outgrown gods? Or that we ultimately still need gods?

But for the most part, this gives us a decent taste of Greek Mythology which was truly the origin of the timeless scifi/fantasy/horror genre thousands of years ago. Chances are, most people will simply enjoy this movie for its action, fantasy and special effects. For that, yes, it delivers. But for literary accuracy... well I would be terrified to approach any literature teacher with the mere mention of this movie. That teacher would kick my Assaracus out of school and I'd be crying all the way Homer.

Fun, but not enough Titans

[JimD73 · 6/10 · 3 April 2010]

Clash of the Titans, from the title alone, made many promises. We expect to see many monsters of Ancient Greece, and we expect them to do battle, alongside humans and the Gods. We expect many many epic battles, lots and lots of CGI and appropriately over the top performances to go with them, but mostly, we want the monsters. While Clash delivers on some level for each of these promises, it surprisingly really lacks in the monsters department.

It must be said as fair warning, you do not get to see Kraken VS Hydra or anything like that in Clash of the Titans. The action is centered squarely around demigod Perseus, who for our purposes is basically a man secreting badass. After Hades threatens to unleash the Kraken on the city of Argos, Perseus and a group of soldiers go in search of a way to kill the Kraken, encountering many perils along the way.

The problem is its always Perseus and the soldiers who end up fighting the monsters. I'm sure I'm not the only one who expected the beasts to fight one another at some, mythology be damned (not like its particularly close to the myths anyways). Only four real combat beasts emerge anyways: the Kraken, Medusa, a mutated Acrisius and some random giant scorpions. Not even the Gods get to fight much, despite the much-hinted battle between Zeus and Hades.

The Kraken in particular really should've had a battle with another beast thrown in, and its use seems like a wasted opportunity. The scorpion battle is quite exciting, though is broken up as its really four fights with different scorpions simultaneously. The Medusa sequence is easily the best of the film, as although we know from a plot perspective Perseus can't die, the fate of the group of soldiers is considerably less clear. It all makes for a very tense and rewarding sequence, somewhat hindered by the surprisingly poor CG on the Medusa character model. Shame, as the rest of the monsters are quite good looking.

The cast is quite good on paper, but it doesn't work as well as expected. Worthington is a suitable lead, but I see him heading to Stallone-esquire B-movies quickly if he doesn't find more interesting characters. Liam Neeson is fairly underused, and aside from the "Release the Kraken" line, never gets any moments. Ralph Fiennes is the biggest disappointment as Hades, spending far too much of the time whispering like a bad Sith impersonation than being actually menacing. The standout is easily Mad Mikkelson as the leader of the soldiers. While not a terribly meaty role, he has more than enough charisma to be much more interesting than Perseus himself.

Clash is definitely not a waste of a matinée ticket, and I felt I got almost what I expected. But I know it could've been more, and it seemed to be purposely saving certain creatures for a sequel. Its solid fun, but hardly the must-see some might think from the trailers.

Entertaining enough but not memorable. Slightly disappointing

[mrcibubur · 6/10 · 11 April 2010]

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.

Occasionally entertaining, yet ultimately hollow

[Apemangalore · 4/10 · 2 April 2010]

Ah, the pre-summer action movie. Admittedly, due to word of mouth from those who had attended earlier screenings of the film, my expectations for Clash of the Titans were fairly low. On top of that, many of the initial casting choices appeared to be somewhat suspect. So, what's my verdict? Well, I didn't hate it…

The plot of Titans is extremely straightforward – practically to a fault. Often, the film acts as though it's in a hurry, attempting to get from one action sequence to the next as quickly as possible. The scenes that occur in between each of these battles ultimately amount to nothing more than brief segments of exposition delivered by Perseus' "guardian angel" of sorts, Io (Gemma Arterton). So, while the film never really drags, it feels very soulless.

And while we're on the subject of these action sequences, none of them end up being particularly memorable. About half of them are so frenetic to the point where they're almost disorienting - honestly, I'm glad that the 3D screenings were sold out this time 'round. On top of that, there's virtually no character development outside of Worthington's character (and even he isn't all that likable), so I never really cared about the outcome of these action sequences either. Also, as I mentioned earlier, my biggest fear with Titans was in regards to the acting, and thankfully, most of the cast do what's expected of them. Neeson's Zeus aside, none of the performances truly stand out, but they're nothing cringe-worthy either.

Ultimately, Clash of the Titans ends up being a forgettable piece of entertainment with a couple of gaping plot holes, hit-or-miss action sequences, and performances that fail to leave much of an impression. It's not horrible – just hollow.

~Great CGI effects, very enjoyable, worth your money~

[The_Fifth_Echo · 7/10 · 27 March 2010]

I saw Clash of the Titans in an early screening, and I didn't expect the film to be good. I thought it was just another ripoff. But at the end of the film I was really liked it. The creatures looked great, the acting was good. And I thought it would be corny, but the majority of it wasn't at all. I am actually really glad that I saw this film. I really think Sam Worthington did an okay job as an actor, it was certainly believable. If he keeps doing films like Avatar and Clash of the Titans, he could have a long career in his life.

The special effects and the CGI was okay. However there was some disappointments, the Kraken scene felt very rushed and it wasn't as epic as I wanted it to. There should've been more fighting scenes to make up for the poor story.

An overall fun, good CGI film that is recommended. 7/10

Garbage from beginning to end

[bryanchristopher11 · 2/10 · 2 April 2010]

There are SPOILERS here, so beware....

I remember years ago, a friend and I discussing how awesome a remake of Clash of the Titans would be. 10 years later this comes along. The remake deviates way too much from the original. I get the attempt to make a stand alone movie, but this remake is pointless. In the original, the whole journey is for one reason only: Love. Perseus is attempting to save Andromeda from the wrath of the Gods. The remake makes it a journey based only on revenge. Perseus in the original was a young, naive boy who discovers his inner hero. The remake shows Perseus as a defiant muscle-bound idiot who automatically has the kind of skill the warriors he travels with have devoted their lives to attaining. in the original, Perseus had to tame and gain the trust of Pegasus. Not here.... he just shows up. Convenient. Bubo, the golden owl (as cheesy as he was) is nothing more than a sight gag in the remake. Calibos poses no threat here. He was such an integral part of the original. The addition of the character Io is just annoying. Her presence is completely unnecessary. The Medusa training/seduction scene...ridiculous. The Medusa scene was easily the best part of the original... here it is anti-climatic. The Kraken? Besides the creature being way too big, the whole movie hinges on what a threat this monster is. Yeah, it looks cool (I'll give it that)... but for being such a threatening monster, he sure is dispatched easily. Perseus spends more time chasing a blurry harpy around than actually dealing with the Kraken. Perseus's relationship to Andromeda is nothing more than casual, the 3-D and slow motion are pointless and there is no giant vulture. Sam Worthington should not be allowed to work again until he can do so without his accent. The director, Louis Leterrier is just the wrong person for this job. Transporter 2...sure. This? No. Liam Neeson, Pete Postlethwait and Ralph Fiennes are truly slumming it on this one. I'm sure no matter what is said, people are going to line up for this one. I'm aware of how I sound here. But this movie truly is a let down on every level. While they had the chance to make a fun popcorn movie in the vein of Jurassic Park, Iron Man or even Star Trek (2009), they really missed the mark here. The film is terribly cast, acted and directed. A true waste of the title... but, hey... it sure looks pretty, doesn't it?

Little to take away; good or bad

[Simon_Says_Movies · 7/10 · 16 April 2010]

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

It made me sad watching this ...

[dimitris-tripakis · 3/10 · 6 April 2010]

The myth of Perseus is based on deep philosophy and tragic elements, which have been popular throughout the centuries. You may want to Google it and read the original. You might discover a few things that didn't know, for example that there is no Cracken, no scorpions, and that Medusa's head ended up decorating goddess Athena's shield, just as real shields had often Medusa painted, to scare the opponents.

The Cracken and the scorpions were "invented" by Ray Harryhausen in 1981, because this was his job: to display fantastic creatures on the screen. In doing so, he based the stories on existing myths, respecting the characters and plots as best as he could. Great work.

Now, why in 2010 they had to copy the copier, and not the original, it is a mystery for me. Scorpions AGAIN ? Cracken AGAIN ? I mean if you're going to deviate from the myth, why not deviate in an ORIGINAL manner ?

Mythology is the legacy of the centuries gone by. Film makers should respect it and learn from it. It's funny how they think they can do better :)

It's what it promised to be.

[ailexq · 8/10 · 4 April 2010]

People who went in to this movie expecting an accurate depiction of Greek mythology and/or an accurate remake of the original Clash should have paid more attention to the previews. First off, the original movie wasn't even correct with regards to the mythology. Yes, it was much closer than this rendition, but given that the whole story of Perseus and Medusa were never really quite "on" in either case, I don't see how deviation from the original Greek myths is a fair argument against this movie.

Clash 2010 promised to be an action/adventure set in the world of the Greek myths - and it delivered. It was fun, fresh, and to be honest, I thought Sam Worthington did just fine as Perseus. Let's face it - the guy (Perseus) was never a "deep" character to begin with, and Worthington did a hell of a lot more with his character than Hamlin ever did.

The "new" stories they created with these characters, while not to be taken seriously or as a replacement of their correct myths, were still enjoyable. In fact, I really rather liked it - some differences were so far off that they don't even count as "inconsistencies," but rather complete rewrites. And given that, the rewrites were okay - I preferred the love interest in this scenario over the first movie, even though correct Greek mythology says "WHAT?" to it. Kind of a big obvious sign that one should not be taking this movie as a serious depiction. Anyway, it was fun to squint and be like, "that's... not.... okay, I'm hitting Wikipedia when I get home." Because then I got to refresh my memory on why I loved Greek mythology so much as a child in the first place.

I didn't feel the 3D experience was really necessary, although I'd have to see it in 2D to tell for certain if it added much. The effect itself wasn't huge, but maybe it added to the overall visual crispness of the movie. But really you could probably get away with seeing it in 2D and not miss much, whereas Avatar and Alice In Wonderland really made lovely use of the medium and "should be" seen in 3D.

Overall, while I wouldn't call it a masterpiece, as a big fan of the original movie I wasn't at all offended or disappointed, mainly because I wasn't expecting a perfect remake. Sure, when the trailers first came out I was hopeful, but after seeing enough previews it became clear it was going to be a bit different. Oh well, now we have two fun Clash of the Titans movies.

All in all, "It didn't suck," and it should be seen on the big screen.

Trash of the Titans did release the Crap end! I meant the Kraken!

[ironhorse_iv · 6/10 · 21 May 2013]

Don't get me wrong, I like the whole movie start to finish, but it's so disappointing. It's not like the original 1983 Clash of the Titans was any better. I'm usually fairly easy going when it comes to popcorn flicks that serve no real purpose except to exist as silly fun. Still, there is a little bit of drawbacks in this film. If you follow real Greek mythology, you will be disappointed. If you follow the original movie, then you will be disappointed, too. This film takes this myth to a new direction, while keeping the basis close to mind. The movie by director Louis Leterrier was still interesting. Surprising a movie that has a title "Clash of the Titans" and titans are only once briefly mentioned, that if you say a word, you lose it. Who the hell made the decision of placing an monster named Kraken in the Ancient Greece? Isn't that Norse mythology? Then you got Djinns in this? Isn't that Arabic mythology? The biggest change from the original 1983 movie and this was the love story between the hero Perseus (Sam Worthington) and the princess Andromeda (Alexa Davalos). They change it, to love between the hero and the immortal nymph Io (Gemma Arterton). It was rather a better love story than the original in my opinion, but still the princess made more sense since it's in the Greek mythology, and Io wasn't in this story. Anyways, Perseus is a demi-God who must rescue the princess from a sea monster sent by the Gods. By doing this, he has to kill the Gorgon monster known as Medusa who can turn any onlookers into stone and use her head as a weapon. All in all, this movie was just another visual CGI feast. The CGI is breath taking, but the way they conversion the film 2D to 3D made the movie look horrible. There are blurry scenes, and examples of with people's hair flowing beyond their heads without anything holding it. The hero is hardly likable as he doesn't talk much, the two hunters really served no role and kind of left the group before they did anything useful, the Medusa battle killed nearly everyone within minutes, including all the soldiers I actually cared about. The only actual scene I enjoyed was the Medusa fight, the combination of stealth, fighting an enemy you can't see, and arrows was pretty cool. But what on Earth were they trying to make Medusa look beautiful? The original 1983's Medusa was scary. This one makes her look like a super model with snakes on her. With all the hype behind the Kraken, you'd think it would be an epic battle but it only in screen time for a short period of time. Way disappointing. I got confused, I thought it was the Cloverfield monster or a Rancor from Star Wars: Return of the Jedi. I have to say the flute scene was a bit funny. Who knew bitch was a word in ancient time as well. About the acting. It was mediocre. Sam Worthington plays the exact same character he played in every other film he has been in. Gemma Arterton's performance was boring and emotionless as usual and even though Liam Neeson tried his best to fit in with the role as Zeus, his talent was utterly wasted. Ralphs Fiennes does his Voldemort voice for Hades which was kinda annoying. Overall: Effects looked pretty but the story was half assed and character development was non-existent. It's just mindless eye candy. Probably good for a rental or a free watch on television one day.

Release The Crappen!

[fwomp · 1/10 · 11 April 2010]

And once again Hollywood proves it has run out of original ideas. Why else would they remake this movie? Back in 1981, when special effects were beginning to take serious root in films, we had the original CLASH OF THE TITANS. It had some cheesy claymation mixed with some less cheesy special effects. But it did have a story. A damn good one. Sure there were action sequences, especially when Perseus (Harry Hamlin) met up with Medusa. But these action scenes were barely a few minutes long. The story of the gods, how they felt about humanity (and how humanity felt about them) dominated the storyline. Yes, there was an ACTUAL story.

Fast forward to 2010 and you get this ...this ...this mess-of-a-remake that relies almost solely on CGI and, well, basically nothing else.

The brief understanding of the god/human relationship is thrust aside in favor of action scenes galore which have squat to do with the story. There are so many throwaway characters as to be laughable. And 3-D? For marketing purposes only. Save yourself some cash and see it in 2-D ...if at all.

My son went with me to see it (he's as much of a movie junky as I am) and we both nearly fell asleep for lack of anything approaching a viable understanding of who was carrying the storyline. We still ask each other, "What was the point, again?" Sam Worthington seems to be a hot commodity in today's movie market. TERMINATOR SALVATION and AVATAR are two of his more recent accomplishment. And although I found those two to be lukewarm in terms of story, they at least kept me engaged enough not to yawn. And Liam Neeson has also been splattered all over film posters (from TAKEN to KINGDOM OF HEAVEN). But a god? And Zeus for that matter? Not the best casting choice. He just didn't have the presence I was expecting. Perhaps the story (or lack thereof) stifled his performance. Probably.

I also MUST caution women against seeing this if they enjoyed the strong roles in the 1981 original. You'll find no such comparisons here. There's really no good female character to be found. The closest was Alexa Davalos (DEFIANCE) as Perseus' love interest, Andromeda. But her role is so laughably short and misunderstood that you won't care what happens to her (and things do happen).

My final word of caution comes to those of us (all of us) struggling in today's economy. We need our escapism, and sometimes (occasionally) Hollywood allows us to have it. But not here. You might as well sit on the toilet and release the crappen!

Not as good as the classic Clash of the Titans

[0U · 23 February 2020]

The Clash of the Titans remade is more like a brute version of it. It's fun but its a mess. It's more of a spectacle rather than telling a story bout the whole mythology epic with its characters though I'm seeing a lot of CGI extravaganza with over the top results which my eyes are bleeding like hell . This is one of those films where there are a lot of super good casts in a bad production.

When the original is better the critics get harsh - but it could be worse

[pascaloetterli · 7/10 · 18 April 2010]

Yes, we all loved the original movie and it is interesting that it is still so intriguing. This film as a remake has failed, but standing alone it is worth seeing it.

It is better not to argue about the original Greek mythology, when it comes to that, even the old clash would be a disappointment. No, modern movies are defiant of what is classical Greek, but every era has it's own version of the ancient beliefs. A new Clash of the Titans had to be somewhat faster, more cruel and have more action to get any crowd in the theatre. Times change and so does the audience. And hey, what do we have here? A fine cast consisting of two of the best actors in the business: Liam Neeson and Ralph Fiennes. Harry Hamlin was the better Perseus than Sam Worthington, because he reflected the naïveté, fear and male beauty better. Without having seen Hamlin, Worthington is also fine enough as main cast.

The original had the mechanical owl Bubo, the remake has beautiful Gemma Arterton as newbie helper. Bubo brought a bit of humour in the old story, while semi goddess Io is too important up to the point that the characters of Andromeda, Cassiopeia and the Olympian goddesses get forgotten. The attraction between Perseus and Io should have been better embedded in the story or -at best- not be there at all. Also the "Djinn" race has too much of a "Alien"/"Autobots" style and doesn't belong here neither. On the good side we have a much better view on the accompanying soldiers - one must love Mads Mikkelson, doesn't?

The action is fine, the images were great, especially landscapes the Underworld and the city of Argo. Yes the new techniques can work wonders, and if you despise digital imagery don't go watch a movie like this. The old filmmakers would have loved the possibility to create worlds like that.

You will get entertained if you don't insist on the remake being a real remake or being a better version of the original. You have to go there and enjoy the newest version of a Greek classic with a fine cast, appropriate portions of action and state of the art imagery. If you are a lover of deep emotions, intriguing plots and dialogues you can pass on this Clash.

Juvenile adventure-fantasy about the valiant Perseo who undergoes a perilous journey to free Andromeda from monstrous Kraken

[ma-cortes · 6/10 · 8 May 2011]

Imaginative spectacle based on mythological Greek legends spectacularly realized by Louis Leterrier and formerly adapted (1981) by Desmond Davis and Ray Harryhausen. Exciting fantasy derived from Greek mythology about a valiant and handsome hero (Sam Worthington as Perseo , role formerly played by Harry Hamlin ), the mortal son of God Zeus (Liam Neeson whose character was interpreted by Laurence Olivier) who must face a variety of extraordinary challenges in pursuit threatening Medusa and kill Kraken. Winsome Perseus, the son of Zeus , must save the gorgeous Princess Andromeda (Alexa Davalos in the role previously acted by Judi Bowker) who is daughter of Cassiopea ( Polly Walker) . As the son of Zeus embarks on a risked voyage along with a brave group (Mads Mikkelsen , Vincent Regan, Luke Evans and Gemma Arterton), all of them go to stop the underworld ruled by Hades and its minions from spreading their evil to heavens as well as the earth. Trouble appears in the shape of monstrous Calibos (Jason Flemyng in double role also as Acrisius) and the God Hades (Ralph Fiennes). In order that the horrible Kraken not be released, virginal Andromeda has to be sacrificed . Then Perseus fights giant scorpions , gargolas , monsters and searches for the three Stygian witches , confronts the snake-haired Gorgon and slays her ; her head is the only mean that can defeat the sea giant called Kraken . Perseus attempts to rescue the beautiful maid from the terrifying massive monster freed by Poseidon .

Overwhelming fantasy based on Greek legends with breathtaking special effects in computer generator and 3D . However I miss the primitive creatures made by the pioneer and maestro of great illusion Ray Harryhausen and his assistant Jim Danforth in the first and classic version directed by Desmond Davies . Extraordinary support cast playing the Mount Olympus Gods as Zeus -Liam Neeson- , Hades -Ralph Fiennes- and many others . However , everyone are overshadowed pretty much by the spectacular but excessive special effects . The FX technicians bring to life mythological monsters as the ferryman , Pegasus , giant scorpions , Medusa , the Kraken and several others . Well filmed in Llanddwyn Island, Anglesey, Wales, Longcross Studios, Chobham Lane, Longcross, Surrey, Newborough, Anglesey, Wales, Pinewood Studios, Iver Heath, Buckinghamshire, England,Shepperton, Surrey, England, UK ,Snowdonia National Park, Snowdonia, Gwynedd, Wales, UK and Spain : Lanzarote , Gran Canaria, Teide National Park, Tenerife, Tenerife, Canary Islands and in co-operation with Mediterranean film facilities . Mind-numbing musical score by Ramin Djawadi and colorful cinematography by Peter Menzies. The motion picture is professionally directed by Louis Leterrier who directed successes as The incredible Hulk 2, Danny the dog and Transporter . Rating : Good , well worth watching .

One of the worst directions I ever witnessed

[limgauci · 1/10 · 21 April 2010]

Yesterday I watched Clash of the Titans at a local theatre and I have to be sincere, the direction of the movie was so bad that I was speechless for a few minutes for all the wrong reasons. I'm still trying to understand how someone could leave such a rich tale so undeveloped on every front with 106 mins of running time at his disposal.

It's one of those movies which offer you over 1.5 hours of nothingness. The introduction is insanely rushed as you see the main character go through different stages in his life within 3-4 minutes giving you just enough of each for the director to squeeze in a couple of supposedly memorable quotes regarding the character's destiny (which you forget in about a minute).

Now I have to mention this because my friends seemed to notice this issue too: Worthington stood out like a sore thumb in this movie. He just looked too modern. We agreed that it was due to his look being too 'clean'. His head is shaved (the same exact look he's had in both Terminator Salvation and Avatar, which is just lazy) and his look never changes during his supposedly long (epic?) voyage. No scars, barely a hint of a beard after days of travelling and the occasional fight. I like the actor and I don't think he was miscast but he was not used well imo.

The characters in general were left TOTALLY undeveloped. People walked in, walked out and died throughout the story and you never care about any of them. Important characters go from looking invincible to dying all of a sudden. I'm serious. WHAM! They're dead. Some 'important' characters die so quickly that you're not even sure you understood how they were actually killed.

As I said before, this movie lacked all direction. Some supposedly comic situations begged to be re-shot. The delivery was terrible and the director simply seemed in a rush to wrap things up. Not even the accepted clichés worked well in this movie. One ends up looking at the people sitting next to him to see whether he was supposed to laugh or whether they were sharing his same agony as this mess unfolded. The cuts from one character to another also seemed very odd. You cut from a character,then to another and then back to the first one and each time the character is looking in a completely different direction! It was so surreal, like a low budget 70s movie.

Anyways, this movie has so many problems I can't relate all of them or this review would end up being more epic than the movie itself. I won't even go into how cheap and useless most of the dialogue was or the shocking LACK of action meaning that the first battle, which is supposed to be against minor enemies, ends up being the most noteworthy 'CLASH' in the whole movie!

Bottom line: this movie was a complete mess. The direction was terrible and the story was incredibly boring, leaving some moviegoers asleep as the end credits rolled.

Remake the Kraken!

[gregyolen · 6/10 · 1 April 2010]

This CLASH OF THE TITANS, it turns out, is a marked improvement over its original version, at least for someone (me) who has no nostalgia for the original. That it's almost an hour less than AVATAR is one of the best things about the film; whereas AVATAR was predictable and long, CLASH is predictable, but brief. The plotting is brisk and action-packed, eye-roll dialogue is kept minimal, and, it's good, stupid fun watching Liam Neeson and Ralph Fiennes partake in the time-honored tradition of great British actors slumming it for blockbusters. As divine brothers Zeus and Hades, these guys are clearly havin' a laugh, just as Sir Laurence Olivier and Maggie Smith did in '81 when they screwed around Mount Olympus for a hot shilling.

Read more at STEVENSPIELBLOG.COM ...

My least favorite movie of all time!

[zabullock · 1/10 · 12 July 2011]

I just want to start out saying this movie sucks. Rarely does a movie make me mad, but this movie made me furious. The action sucked, the acting sucked, the comic relief sucked and the 3D was so bad I took of the glasses off to make it more interesting. The only thing that could have saved this movie was Leam Neson yelling "release the Crakin", but i could have just stayed home and saved 12 dollars. Maybe I'm so mad,

because I paid extra money for a pair of glasses, because there was no 3d whatsoever. Whoever made this movie stole my money and they should never make another movie again. Please do not see this movie, do not buy this movie, do not rent this movie, don't ever speak of this movie ever.

Good Story but Presentation Failure

[vanishtrail · 6/10 · 9 April 2010]

The change of story is a definitely fresh choice which is great. The emphasis on more action is definitely fresh as supported by great Visuals.The Plot being switch to Perseus revenge is a great move also. (You cannot follow the same old story) However the movie failed to present itself properly throughout the end with loopholes and unexplained being noticed everywhere.

Still the lack of different type of monsters (e.g the two headed dog, Calibos with his tail, the great Vulture) is the biggest disappointment though the CGI for the scorpions and the Kraken looks great. The flying Cyclops is really wasted the budget efforts as I cannot see their face at all.I really expected more to come from this highly budget movie over the original stop motion movie which makes me begging for more.

There are also not enough invention and ideas to make the plot look meaningful such as the riddle from the original, special powers such as the helmets and the shields.

The appearance of Hades on the mortal world looks silly. (No Gods will appear in their true self before man), Statuttes or material forming his face will be a better choice.

The addition of Io is hampering the direction in the movie because she only knows how to talk. The loss of Bubo role as a sidekick to Perseus also contributes to the unliveliness in the movie. The soldiers accompanying Perseus on the quests still appears feasible and helped to make the quest more interesting.

The witches scene was also unimpressed as I found that the witches had foreseen Perseus is ready to visit them. For the battle of monsters, the action on the scorpion looks great though there presents many loopholes. It is contradicting on what the hunters gives the scorpion's armour as a protective shield while Draco could pierce the top of the scorpion with a spear.

It is strange that Perseus could survive inside the scorpion after there is a great impact when the scorpion rams through the cement structures.

Medusa looks unreal in her face and her secondary appearance which have sharp teeth put her even more unconvincing. Furthermore she does not even look scary at all and it is ridiculous as she moves so fast as though she is riding on a bike.The original with her scary and fearsome appearance create more buzz in such way.

There are many loopholes in her scene however I found that the most important why the charcoal man is ahead of Perseus and ambush Medusa at a certain place where he is not running at all.

The final scene with the Kraken is better than the original though the flying Cyclops is uninteresting themselves is getting on my nerves.

Conclusion the more invention of special powers,more monster, more interesting scenes and less loopholes on the original gives a better edge over this.

Clash of the Plot Holes!!!

[jlcdrama · 2/10 · 2 April 2010]

I would like to start off by apologizing to all of the people who I assumed were giving this movie poor reviews out of loyalty for the original. Honestly, they weren't harsh enough.

This movie was awful, I couldn't believe how terrible it was. This has nothing to do with the fact that the movie was not at all faithful to the actual myth of Perseus. As you will recall, the original Clash of the Titans resembled very little of the myth. However, the original movie had deeply involved characters, an interesting plot that was well written and some decent action and special effects.

What did this remake have? I'll tell you. It had plot holes big enough for a barge to fit through, worthless characters who did nothing to help what little plot was there and a rather disappointing ending.

The movie starts off with baby Perseus being found by a fisherman after he and his mother Danae were thrown into the sea. Danae died, but Perseus survived. The fisherman raised Perseus with his wife and later his daughter. When Perseus is grown, Hades attacks his family (for no real reason than just because he could) while at the same time the kingdom of Argos is declaring war on the gods (once again for no real reason than because they could). Perseus is saved and is told by Hades that Zeus is his father. (Why Hades would do that, I have no idea.) Up on Olympus, Zeus is apparently finding out for himself that he has a demigod son which makes no sense because Zeus is the creator of Men, he would HAVE to be aware that he has a son.

Because of Argos's sudden desire to attack Zeus, Hades declares that he will release the Kraken on them in ten days. They will only be spared by letting Andromeda be sacrificed to the Kraken. Again, this didn't make sense. If Hades was mad at Argos, he wouldn't give them a way out, he would just destroy the kingdom. In the original story the sacrifice of Andromeda was brought on because of Cassiopeia's vanity and the insult it delivered Thetis. Here, it was just like Hades thought it would be fun to see Andromeda chained to rock.

Perseus agrees to help Argos not because of love for Andromeda, but because he wants revenge against the gods. At this point, Io shows up and talks a lot. That is pretty much all Io does throughout the movie is talk. My guess is that the writers wanted to introduce a strong woman to the plot, instead what they introduced was a wasted character who actually had no business being in the myth.

Hades meets up with Calibos and reveals his master plot to take over Olympus. Huh, where have I seen this before? Oh yeah, that's right in Hercules. It's a sad day when an action movie has to steal the plot of a Disney movie because they can't come up with anything on their own.

What follows is a lot of action scenes which aren't half bad, but are pretty worthless because they slow down the story. To be fair, there isn't much of a story to slow down. They kill off several characters who mattered to nothing during the fight with Medusa. After Medusa is killed, Calibos kills Io. I know that her death was supposed to be meaningful to Perseus, but it just seemed odd. Their interactions before were not very intimate, in fact there was only one scene that could be construed as some what romantic.

Pegasus appears from no where and takes Perseus to Argos where the Kraken is being released. The battle between the Kraken and Perseus consists of the Kraken ripping down some buildings for about two minutes then Perseus turns him into stone with the head of Medusa. Then he sends Hades back to the Underworld, my what marvelous revenge. You did a bad thing Hades, now you go home. Yawn.

Perseus saves Andromeda and then leaves her on a beach to go to some worthless rock in the ocean. Unlike in the original, Perseus does not fall in love with Andromeda. It wasn't a shock since Andromeda did basically nothing useful except for give bread to children and dangle a hundred feet over the ocean.

Perseus then meets Zeus who suddenly seems pleased with his son though Mankind still hates the gods. He then brings Io back to life so she and Perseus can be worthless forever.

I gave this movie two stars because there were only two things good about it: the CGI and the music. I'll stick to the original movie because while the graphics aren't as good as the remake, at least I actually care for the characters and the storyline makes sense.

Unpredictable--not your typical story

[jose_mar69 · 10/10 · 23 April 2010]

I absolutely loved that this was not the typical hero-gets-the-princess movie. The original movie had its charm, but I always thought it was a bit too cheesy that Perseus got mostly into all that trouble just to get his beloved Andromeda.

I really enjoyed this remake and appreciated that the script was updated. The story no longer follows the fairytale formula. The hero wasn't fighting because he had fell in love with the princess. Nope. He had deeper motives for fighting. He was in deep pain and wanted revenge. Not because he couldn't resist Andromeda's beauty. Plus, it was a great twist for the story that there was different love interest for Perseus.

Pretty decent action movie

[drpainters · 6/10 · 9 April 2021]

A pretty decent action movie, better then the sequel wrath by a decent amount. Good 3d , moves along at a decent pace though feels a little sluggish in the middle. Worth a look if you enjoy this type of movie.

3D ripoff

[nkaronis1 · 3/10 · 2 April 2010]

This film would have been in line with Louis Leterrier's previous work: highly enjoyable high octane action movies that even adults can appreciate. Then somewhere along the lines, the greedy and short sighted producers decided to cash-in a meager few extra bucks by "converting" into 3D a movie shot in 2D. The result is fake at best with fuzzy, dark and double edged images. For most of the movie you'll feel the urge to remove your glasses. Too bad for the decent cast (special kudos to Mads Mikkelsen as usual), nice photography and music by a promising newcomer Ramin Djawadi. Bottom line: Recommended 2D, Disaster in 3D Not everybody is James Cameron.