RvReview: Clash of the Titans
Can Leterrier’s Attempt Surpass Harryhausen’s Old Favourite? Three-D Happenin’ Effects, Top Io Totty,…… And No Stop-motion?
I was super-psyched about seeing this. The original Clash of the Titans is one of my all time favourites, and one that bizarrely enough always seems to be on TV around Easter, so I was due my annual hit of mythological monsters anyway. So is it as good as its predecessor? No.
Don’t get me wrong, it is thoroughly enjoyable and immense fun. It reminded me a lot of Avatar, but not just because of the 3-D effects or big Sam Worthington leading the way. Like the big blue machine, it is visually stunning, boasts a gorgeous catalogue of creatures to ogle at and some great action scenes, but the storyline is as basic as you can get. A to B without so much as a sidewards glance at C. There are as many surprises as there are actual Titans (that’s none, by the way). The cast do what is required of them, Liam Neeson and Ralph Fiennes look like they’re having great fun as brothers Zeus and Hades, while About a Boy’s Nicholas Hoult looks to have developed into a strapping specimen. Plus it took me until the credits to figure out Deep Space Nine’s Dr Bashir Alexander Siddig was behind the beard of Hermes (who, incidentally, is not the messenger of the gods – I don’t get this, why don’t they just give him a regular name?). But the film itself is far from memorable.
As a huge Ray Harryhausen (visual effects creator) fan, I’m probably a little biased. I still find all his stop motion monstrosities terrifying, so maybe that is why the original is more memorable for me. Leterrier pays some respectful nods to the 1981 version, retaining the likes of Zeus’s constant shininess, while that inexplicable Jar Jar Binks forerunner/mechanical owl Bubo even makes a hilarious cameo.
Overall a hugely enjoyable watch, but I don’t think it will win any Oscars next year
And by the way, I thought Medusa was supposed to be so hideous no man could look at her? I definitely would…
Score: 7/10
Ross v Ross 
April 4, 2010 at 2:04 pm
Yeah, I’m a little bummed these studios are being cheap and shooting in 2D and converting 3D. I know it costs a little more, but as seen in Avatar, it definitely pays off, at least for the viewer.
April 5, 2010 at 2:15 am
Clash of the Titans definitely seems like the perfect case of post-production 3D gone wrong. However by the box office numbers this weekend, seems like it will fall on deaf ears among major movie studios.
April 5, 2010 at 9:23 am
Let me get this straight McD.. the film itself is ‘far from memorable’ yet still gets 7 out of 10?
your generosity will be your undoing…
April 5, 2010 at 12:10 pm
Every film can’t be Citizen Kane.
Films should be rated on how much you enjoy them while you are watching them, not the effect they will have on the world 20 years from now.
And it is lots of fun.
In fact I’d say 7/10ths of my enjoyment receptors were firing
April 5, 2010 at 1:43 pm
Seven out of ten, Ross, you have been spending too much time with McG, the movie is rubbish, the 3D is rubbish the plot would be rubbish if there was one.
April 5, 2010 at 3:44 pm
It was a bit of Craic-en
April 5, 2010 at 10:35 pm
I keep hearing lackluster crap about this flick and it bums me out. The old one was so huge in my childhood. And the story is so rich for a remake. Nothing can top the stop motion Medusa though!
April 6, 2010 at 7:49 am
7 out of 10 is more a pretty solid rating – it rounds up to four out of five or three out of four, depending on which system you use. I’m not sure it’s in “far from memorable” territory. Maybe just inside the outer outposts of the grand province of memorable. Okay, I’ll stop with the navigational and geographical metaphor.
Then again, all things are relative and subjective (and I don’t even give ratings, so it’s hardly fair of me to comment).
April 6, 2010 at 1:54 pm
Like I said, I really enjoyed watching it, but when I think ‘Clash of the Titans’, my mind still shoots back to Godzilla Kraken, a white Pegasus, a helmet of invisibilty, and a proper ugly gorgon.
April 6, 2010 at 5:12 pm
I thought it was highly entertaining too. It was so bad, that it was good:)
I didn’t see it in 3D, as having read other reviews, it seemed best to leave it in 2D. You’re right the script/storyline is about as cardboard as you get. But, the dodgy storyline actually worked in its favour. Was happy that they didn’t take themselves too seriously!
April 6, 2010 at 10:30 pm
“I didn’t see it in 3D” are you sure? The 3D is so bad the chances of anyone spotting the difference is slim.
April 6, 2010 at 10:34 pm
Anyone wonder if Worthington will do anything but blockbusters?
April 6, 2010 at 10:42 pm
That’s the funny thing, for all the blockbusters Somersault is probably still his and Abbie Cornish’s best movie.
April 8, 2010 at 12:00 pm
@ Fitz: It’s funny you should mention that, I remember reading an article on io9 suggesting Worthington was the most successful actor who hadn’t yet become a movie star (if you get what they mean). Even Avatar didn’t boost him enough to get his name on most of the billboards for Clash of the Titans and he’s probably the least famous most successful actor in Hollywood. My family would scratch their heads if I mentioned his name.
April 14, 2010 at 8:35 pm
I’m trying hard to like Sam Worthington, but he’s too … “I’m an Action Star”-y for me. Maybe I should see “Somersault.”
April 15, 2010 at 6:30 pm
I got some questions regarding the new Clash.
Where’s Aphrodite?
Where’s Herra?
Where’s Poseidon?
Have the makers of this movie even studdied Greek Mythology?(There could’ve been potential cast more actors as Gods (Not Cameos) playing more pivotal roles, there were more Gods in pivotal roles in the original.)
Why was Calibos (Not be confused with Caliban) Perseuses stepfather?
Why was Pegasus black?
Why did Medusa look like a supermodel?
Why was Persseus an asshole?
And Finaly.
If a Demegod procreated with another Demegod, would their child then be a God?