Genres

Visitors Review

abhitej velore 2013-05-24 15:52:00

Clash of the TITANS !!!

heard a lot about the movie before getting to watch it, and yeah, ihaven't watched the original version. The initial moments of the filmare a bit cheesy , but as the movie progresses, it gets better andbetter, well, the movie has its flaws, well, the flaws firstthe characters have little or no development whatsoever,no real scope acting either,and well, some stuff just happen for no real big reason ( the scorpionfight * not that it bothered :p *well looked like the editors and the directors decided the drama wasn'treally all that important,so the drama is all sappy, too cheesy andclichéd ! i mean just cos the fisherman doesn't get some fish (Perseus's dad ) the gods be damned. and well there isn't a LOT ofdevelopment as to why the clash should even occur, well this why themovie was a bit flimsy, but digest these and your in for a treat. theaction sequences are very well done, and unlike some recent movies ( *gasp ! transformers * ) the action can be seen , the handy cam effectwasn't overdone, well, the graphics don't feel as good as avatars, butother wise, the sheer scale of things is enough ! another thing is, inspite of all the action, its just so good that you would be leftwanting a lil more, ( *especially with the kraken* ) but never the lessthis is pretty good entertainment.! and lemme tell you the KRAKEN IS ACGI TITAN !!! really cool stuff there !!! just get in there withfamily/ friends and get ready to have a nice time !!! p.s avoid the 3dif the fact that ur not watching 3d doesn't bother you a lot !

2013-05-24 02:09:43

Just relax, this movie is great

I do not contend to be a movie critic but I thoroughly enjoyed this remake of "Clash of the Titans" while keeping in mind that I have not seen the original which may distort my view from other reviewers. But I have been a long time fan of myths/fantasy/swordsmanship and I have seen many sword flicks in my day and I was very entertained by this movie.Yes there are inconsistencies, but if you pick apart every production piece by piece you can't enjoy it for what it is, after all this is entertainment. If you want a Greek Mythology reference for a university/college paper this is probably not for you, but if you are looking for a visually stunning, entertaining movie and are prepared to enjoy I recommend this for you.

ramin99 2013-05-21 23:26:10

Great entertainment, better than the original version

I recently watched the original again after almost three decadesbecause, as a child, it captured my imagination. Seeing it a few monthsago it seemed very cheesy and dated with a low budget, in short a trueB-movie. And it was so boring I couldn't watch it all, but had to fastforward to the battle scenes. This one on the other hand had fantasticCGI, the battles were nicely done, acting was OK, story was straightforward, in short it was an entertaining movie, for it delivered whatit promised. The only thing I didn't like was the main hero who seemedout of place -he looked and acted like a jock or a street gang memberin the 21st century. The actor in the original did a much better job. Iwrote this review because many people negatively compare this to the1981 version, which was a true cheese festival. This one had biggerbudget and it showed in the final product.

MovieMagicCollections 2013-05-21 10:25:11

Not Worth my money

I was quite excited about the film, mainly because its a 3D film.Avatar was very good, Alice was also good, but unfortunately clash is ahuge letdown specially on the technical ground. this movie was not shotwith a 3D camera like avatar or Alice but was later transferred into 3Dto cash in the 3D wave. this i think was the biggest mistake. i paidextra money to watch it in 3D but the results are really bad.Specil effects were good but very amateurish in some places. the makeof some of the evil characters were very untidy and not at allbelievable. the first action sequence with the huge crabs were thoughvery very good. acting was good but the supporting cast was notutilized enough as their characters were not well sketched out. Sam though did a very good job, He is now specializing in big specialeffects films, Terminator, Avatar and now Clash.Expected more may be thats why more disappointed. Go watch the 2Dversion and save some money.

2013-05-21 01:54:19

A Terrible Remake!

I am not one of those movie fans who is against remakes. I judge them on an individual basis. However the Clash of the Titans remake is awful. The story departs majorly from the myth of Perseus. However not in an entertaining way as the original does. The character of IO is ridiculous. The idea of Perseus hating the Gods falls flat. The riding of the giant scorpions like horses, the use of Hades as the villian - I could go on. The plot is drivel and the acting uninspired. The original was much more epic and mysterious. I have loved Greek Mythology since the fourth grade. I also have a literature degree with an emphasis in Greek Mythology, so I really pay attention to the quality of "Sword and Sandal" films! I wish that Hollywood would stick as closely as posssible to the actual Greek Myths. They are already fantastic!

Max_cinefilo89 2013-05-20 11:05:38

Dumb fun, but not enough

On paper, Clash of the Titans was a good idea for a remake, since theoriginal, while fondly remembered, hardly qualifies as a classic, withits uneven acting (notably male lead Harry Hamlin) and dated - thoughstill quite impressive - visual effects. Throw in a director who knowshow to do action (Louis Leterrier), some classy supporting actors forthe divine parts (Liam Neeson and Ralph Fiennes, last seen together ina totally different film, Schindler's List), and the new superstar ofthe decade (Sam Worthington), and you've got all the right ingredientsfor a fun romp. Unfortunately, the new version, while good in parts,fails to deliver as an overall viewing experience.Surprisingly enough for a remake, the script sticks quite close to theoriginal: Perseus (Worthington), a demigod, has to face numerous perilsin order to save princess Andromeda (Alexa Davalos) and prevent anall-out war between gods and men. What's new is a more epic approach tothe story, with a focus on the rivalry between Zeus (Neeson) and Hades(Fiennes), and a bizarre "romantic" twist, with the mysterious Io(Gemma Arterton) replacing Perseus' elderly mentor (Burgess Meredith)from the first film.In theory, there would be no need to bicker about the plot: Clash ofthe Titans is meant to be nothing more than sheer, dumb fun, and anyonewith a true passion for Greek mythology might want to look away fromblatant alterations to the myths (see the whole story about Perseus'birth) and borrowings from other cultures (the Djinn and, of course,the Kraken, recently brought back by the Pirates of the Caribbeanfranchise). However, whereas Desmond Davis' 1981 take on the storytruly opted for sheer fun, the 2010 update stumbles into a few logicalpratfalls (Zeus' behavior is a bit schizophrenic in the last act),chunks of appalling "contemporary" dialogue (the protagonist's warningabout Medusa: "Don't look this b*tch in the eye!"), a pointless cameoby the infamous mechanical owl Bubo and a plain ridiculous epiloguethat - rumor has it - was added at the last minute to leave the roadopen for potential sequels (what a surprise...).Another major problem is the "big" new contribution: 3D. Having seenboth versions, it is safe to say the three-dimensional Clash is arather unappealing sight. This is because, unlike Avatar or Coraline,which were conceived and filmed in 3D from the start, and made anintelligent use of the technology, Clash of the Titans was shot in 2Dand subsequently "converted" to the new format in the wake of Avatar'shuge business (the fact that Worthington stars in both pictures mayalso have been a factor). The result is a movie whose action scenes,which are edited very quickly, become unintelligible in 3D, which takesmost of the fun out of it (also, slow motion looks awful with the addeddimension). With the exception of a couple of scenes, namely those thatwere fixed in post-production to begin with, the experience is a prettynegative one.However, there are still a few things to enjoy: with the 3D out of theequation, Leterrier deserves credit for nailing all the huge sequences- Scorpioks, Medusa, Kraken - with a subtle use of CGI that sort ofpays tribute to Ray Harryhausen's original work. Additionally, the castdoes a more than passable job, although the wide array of accents ondisplay (Australian for Perseus, Irish for Zeus, unspecified for Dracoand English for everyone else) is a bit baffling at times. As expected,Neeson and Fiennes are the best of the bunch, with the kind of gravitasonly British actors seem to possess in this kind of production, whileWorthington delivers a committed but not entirely charismaticperformance, occasionally coming off as a bad Russell Crowe clone. Itis also worth wondering why the filmmakers bothered to cast relativelyfamous actors for throwaway parts: Danny Huston (Poseidon) and PollyWalker (in a role reminiscent of her Rome character) are wasted, whileAlexander Siddig's appearance is so brief even die-hard Star Trek fanscould have trouble spotting him (that's what happened to me, anyway).Overall, the new, "improved" Clash of the Titans provides someexcitement but generally disappoints, compared to other blockbusters ofrecent memory. Best stick with the original: it may have aged a bit,but the fun factor remains unaltered.

theknewmans 2013-05-15 00:54:06

quite a good film if you just want to be entertained

To begin with I cant believe that nobody has brought this up, but beingtoo young to have seen the original when it came out, this is the onlyversion of this film I have seen and although it went along quitenicely if you know anything about Greek mythology then it will have youcringing in your seat as you watch. The number of mistakes they makeare ridiculous and entirely unnecessary. The list could probably go onforever, so I won't try , but I will give a few examples of where itwas entirely unnecessary for them to make such mistakes. 1. There is noneed to call the fates witches, just call them the fates its what theyare. 2. The fates not only had one eye, but also one tooth between them3. They also live in a cave, not a mountain and weave a tapestry 4. Thekraken is a VIKING myth, not a Greek one – but they did have their ownsea monsters, so why not use one of those 5. Pereus was not put in abox with his mother by his mothers husband, but her father because hewas destined to kill him 6. Perseus also marries Andromeda 7. Io wasnot given the gift of eternal youth, but turned into a cow These arejust a few of the things in this film which i found annoyed me to suchan extent that my enjoyment of this film was seriously damaged becauseof it. Although this is quite a good film if you just want to beentertained for a couple of hours, if you know anything about Greekmyths, don't go and torture yourself. Its just not worth it.

2013-05-14 06:40:34

Releasing The Kraken of Greek Mythology Awesomeness

If there was ever a film that needed to be remade, then this was it. Sure, the original was good for whoever watched it growing up as a kid in the 80s, but by today's standard the movie is little more than a joke. Fortunately, this film will be relevant for much longer than the original, and Sam Worthington does a much better job than Harry Hamlin.The story follows the same basic premise of the original, with a few tweaks, so it's still an ancient road-trip movie to save the local princess, except this time the film adds a heavy amount of more motivation for Perceus. This time, he's driven by revenge, and his desire to be more man than God. And in this sense, while the story take a little bit too much of the screen time, and there are lulls, the story does a serviceable job creating a cohesive narrative that moves from setpiece to setpiece. The characters are a bit less serviced, and by the time the movie is finished you only really get to know Perseus. Thus when a character dies, you're a lot less inclined to care, since there's a great disconnect between the emotion of the film and its audience. Thus, for me at least, it was simply about the action.And the action is pretty good. Since the larger creatures are just so fantastical it was hard for me to get into those scenes as much, but anytime Sam Worthington has a sword I'm happy. But still, the Medusa scene is one of the film's highlights, and apart from the fact that he looks like a sea monster version of Godzilla, the Kraken does provide a lot of great destruction. Plus, it gives the line that will forever live in the annals of film history in, "RELEASE THE KRAKEN!"Overall, Clash of the Titans is a mostly satisfying B-movie action matinee, and a great way to kill an afternoon. It may have its problems apart from the action, and I'm not exactly thrilled at a possible sequel, it was a mostly enjoyable two hours, and that's all I can ask from a movie nowadays.

2013-05-07 09:03:59

Needed a Makeover, but the stylist never finished.

'Clash of The Titans' was one of those movies that came out in the zany 80s. Like most of those movies they were fun to watch, but if you wanted them to be these great epics you had to turn to very crude special effects. With where we are right now in film making we can do almost anything from Dinosaurs, to transforming robots. So, naturally why not take some of these old honky-tonk 80s epics and turn them into something amazing?!Clash of the Titans was a good choice to give one of these modern day makeovers to. The epic battles with mythical Greek monsters in this day and age would look incredible...and they did. Still, the guys who gave this movie a makeover sort of forgot to finish the job. The movie was lacking extremely of acting talent, character development and story. Now I went to see this movie in the theaters because the action sequences looked great and yes they were. During the softer points in the movie I was flat out bored. The acting was bland, and even though Liam Neason and Ralph Finnes brought all they could to the table and they did a decent job, it still just didn't seem to work. Also the movie while it paced quite well, it just went a little too fast. I thought that the battles with the giant scorpions and Medusa just went way too quickly I completely didn't know there was a fight going on. Don't even get me started on the Kraken battle...I don't even know if there was a battle with the Kraken because I think the movie ended right when it finally showed up on the screen. A great deal of film appreciators feel that re-making films is a bad idea, I say yes and no, because let's face it do you really think that a kid born after 1990 is going to ask his/her mom or dad to rent the 1981 'Clash of the Titans'? Odds are no, so why not bring some of these movies to the modern day, clean them up add some great effects and there you have it. Still, when you decide that this is a movie you want to re-do make you actually make it better than the original! Not the same and definitely not worse. 'Clash of Titans' is nothing but an epic of failure. Still, I am glad that I did see it and I am glad that the things I expected in the film to be good were and that's why I gave it 2 stars.Oh on a personal note, supposedly there is a re-make of 'The NeverEnding Story' in the works....GET GUERLLMO DelTORO ON THE PHONE....PLEASE!!!

kosmasp 2013-05-07 05:12:42

Why so serious?

It was one of the main goals and one of the main distinctions to theOriginal from the 80s, that this movie tried to be more earnest and notas camp as the other Clash. Why they choose to "update" and make it3-D, when it wasn't supposed to be (and never really looks any good in3-D), that's another question.If you didn't like the original, you might be in for a treat, becauseSam Worthington does play it as straight as possible. But was itnecessary to do that? I don't think so. The comic relief characters inthis almost never works and the level of seriousness reaches a pointwhere it get ridiculous (to me).The CG looks good, the fight scenes are nice too and everyone triestheir best. But it would have been a lot better if it knew what it is,instead of trying to be more dramatic than the story can handle.Inconstincies and plot holes, a short journey and some sudden moodchanges are the final nails in the coffin.

Movie_Muse_Reviews 2013-05-04 06:38:27

First modern movie foray into Greek mythology offers little

A good special-effects era mythology movie is bound to happen at somepoint, but we're definitely still waiting. "Clash of the Titans" ismerely a modern incarnation of the original that in the age of CGImonsters and impressive fight sequences plops lazily in the category ofstatus quo, something its 1981 cult predecessor was anything but thanksto the groundbreaking stop-motion work of Ray Harryhausen.That's where my comparison of these films nearly 30 years apart startsand ends. 2010's "Clash of the Titans" has enough faults of its own. Itserves up the meat and potatoes we come to expect of any action film,especially in a post-"300" world of modern swords-and- sandals epics,but there's a definite lack of gravy. No surprises, no unique features-- even star Sam Worthington as the hero Perseus comes off dusty afterthe true "titan" that "Avatar" was.The myth of the Greek hero/demi-god Perseus, though butcheredcompletely in this movie, is still essentially the quest to retrievethe head of Medusa. In "Titans," Perseus finds himself in the troubledcity of Argos after his adoptive family is killed by Hades, who hasuncharacteristically left his domain in the Underworld because humanshave begun acting out in defiance of the gods. Hades gets the gods ofMt. Olympus to agree to unleash his Kracken, the beast who defeated thetitans long ago, on Argos if they don't sacrifice their princess,Andromeda, in reverence of the gods.Angry at the gods himself, (and already embittered by the opinions ofhis father who not- so-subtly suggests "someone, someday will take astand"), Perseus is slightly unhappy to learn he almost is one. Heagrees to consult the Fates and learn what he can do to defeat thisfearsome beast, but he wants to do it on his terms -- as man, not as agod.Twisting mythology is small stuff, however, on the list of the script'sflaws. It's a typical hero's journey story told almost entirely bydialogue. Not narration, but using dialogue to move the scenes ratherthan let images and events speak for themselves. It's horribly amateurand as a result the lines are all throwaway. The script speaks of grandthemes such as humanity vs. godliness which don't work when you don'tcare for the humans because the beginning is scraped together and toldin this talk-heavy way.Impressed by the action work on "The Incredible Hulk," I had reasonablyhigh expectations for director Louis Leterrier, but the action scenesare aimless and ill-conceived. I once again fault the trio ofinexperienced and low-quality writers, however, because they gave thesescenes no shape and which prodded Leterrier toward milking them forwhatever they did have, using too many slow-mo shots and the like. Hedoes some great flying camera takes and the Medusa scene turned outfairly exciting -- even though the gorgon was kinda awkwardly sexy,which you can interpret however you like.The art direction renders mixed results. Medusa's lair waswell-conceived and I did like the vision of Charon the Styx ferryman,but the weird shiny armor of the gods was corny and the horrific makeupused to disfigure venerable actors Neeson as Zeus and Fiennes as theoddly asthmatic Hades was below true blockbuster quality. The cgieffects were pretty good, particularly Hades turning into puffs ofsmoke and such.Finally -- and no spoilers here -- yes, the Kracken is released, justin case you didn't catch Neeson saying that in every TV spot. WhyWarner Bros. wanted to release the Kracken in ads and completely spoilthe biggest reveal/tool to shock the audience the movie has is aquestion is beyond me and says a lot about their confidence in thisgeneric adventure film.~Steven CVisit my site at http://moviemusereviews.com

dunmore_ego 2013-05-03 17:55:33

Hash of the Titans.

Liam Neeson and Sam Worthington try to out-act special effects. Fail.16-year-old boys rejoice. Mankind tries to live without deities. Fail.Churches rejoice.CLASH OF THE TITANS is written for 16-year-old boys, to be enjoyedexclusively by 16-year-old boys. Hell, I loved the 1981 original film.When I was 16. The 2010 remake obviously has better special effects andmuch better-realized and refined supernatural creatures, but the actingand the story have not graduated past the level of acceptance requiredby 16-year-old boys.Perseus (Aussie Sam Worthington, who just can't seem to shake thataccent as his ancestors Mel Gibson and Guy Pearce did), a demi-god inancient Greece, must battle against the gods themselves when the cityof Argos is forced to sacrifice its princess Andromeda (Alexa Davalos)to the Kraken.Like any story that involves religion, everything happens forirrational reasons and without motivation and without any point.Perseus's very birth is laden with irrational backstory, as mortal KingAcrisius (Jason Flemyng) feuds with Olympian god Zeus (Liam Neeson),causing Zeus to rape Acrisius's wife.Let's backtrack for a moment: How exactly do you feud with a god? Howdoes one "raid Olympus"? Isn't it on another dimensional plane? Andeven if Olympus IS just a physical abode resting on the lowest clouds,how do the ancient Greek soldiery (possessing no flying machines)actually ATTACK Olympus?...Onward...Acrisius's wife births Perseus, who is half-god, half-Australian.Acrisius, in a fit of rage, uh, waits nine months until baby Perseus isborn, to entomb both baby and mother in a coffin and hurl it into thesea "to destroy Zeus's seed." Guess his "fit of rage" didn't take intoaccount it might have been easier to just stab the mother while she waspregnant...Long story short: Perseus lives, becomes a fisherman, in a world whichhas started to defy the gods who created them. Soldiers destroy a giantZeus statue and broham Hades, ruler of the underworld, immediatelyappears as a giant black winged entity (with smaller bat-winged demonsreminiscent of JASON AND THE ARGONAUTS) and wipes the floor with thesoldiers. So what kind of cretin would continue insulting gods? Yetthey do. Queen Cassiopeia of Argos boasts that her daughter Andromedais more beautiful than the goddess Aphrodite, at which point Hades(Ralph Fiennes, doing his best Gary Oldman), appears again and callsfor Andromeda's sacrifice - or he will release the Kraken (which wepresume is a Very Bad Thing because he pronounces the name so terriblyfeyly).After Hades lays down his curse, Perseus unwittingly gets roped intothe quest to stop the Kraken, which involves visiting Stygian witches,taming a Pegasus flying horse, lopping off the head of the gorgonMedusa and using it to turn the Kraken to stone. While Hans Zimmer'smusic makes it epic on toast. All in a day's work for a demi-god. ButPerseus spends half his skirt-wearing, sword-wielding time bitchingabout wanting to be a man not a god.Perseus maintains to Zeus, "We live, we fight and we die for each other- not for you," which again, is spoken like a man living in a worldWITHOUT gods, or in a world with imaginary gods, i.e. ours. If the godsshowed themselves and performed magical, physics-bending havoc when youdefied them, I'm betting you would learn quicksmart how to live, fightand die for them.Blaming director Louis Leterrier and writers Travis Beacham, Phil Hay,Matt Manfredi for these discrepancies would be like blaming PeterJackson for the illogical happenings in THE LORD OF THE RINGS. TheGreek mythology is already written - if the movie writers stuck toevery detail and inserted every ulterior motivation of the complexcharacters, we would need a trilogy of movies. As a movie version ofCLASH OF THE TITANS had already been written in 1981 by Beverly Cross,these remake writers simply took that script - and dumbed it down evenfurther.As illustrated by the box office, no one cares. In modern parlance,"going Greek" doesn't involve mythological classicism.The visualization of the creatures - from Flemyng's Calibos makeup tothe ferryman Charon, to Medusa, the Pegasus and the Kraken - ismonstrously good, although I will say that Medusa should have beentopless. She's a snake-like monster who lives amongst ruins and turnspeople to stone with her stare; can you really see her adjusting herornate bra for maximum push-up effect? I'm just sayin.' Movie makes aninfantile decision to paint Hades as a "villain," as if synonymous withthe Christian devil, but Hades was not a simple polar opposite to Zeus;Zeus ruled Olympus, Poseidon ruled the oceans and Hades ruled theunderworld, which was called either Tartarus, Elysium or Erebus, andwas a region ALL human souls passed through, not just "bad" ones. AndOlympus was NOT the equivalent of Christian heaven, it was theexclusive abode of the gods - NO human was allowed there.Would that any human cast his unworthy gaze on Liam Neeson's fakepirate's beard and absolutely fabulous outfit; gadding about in ashimmering silvery ballroom gown made of chromium wings that is evengayer than his costume as Qui-Gon Jin.The grandest misnomer of all: the twelve Titans of Ancient Greece wereCronus, Oceanus, Tethys, Mnemosyne, Hyperion, Themis, Thea, Iapetus,Phoebe, Rhea, Coeus and Crius. None of whom appear in the movie.(Though Zeus and Hades are erroneously regarded as Titans by sometexts, they are merely offspring of Titans, Cronus and Rhea.) So... amovie called CLASH OF THE TITANS which features not one actual Titan.The movie makers are just bending us over and going Greek on us.

Hollywoodrulez 2013-04-29 15:30:14

A rather successful remake

I normally don't do the whole fantasy film genre however Samworthington is an exceptional Australian talent in the industry today.So once I found out he was playing the lead I had to check it out. Iwasn't disappointed either. The performances were strong and the visualeffects were terrific the only thing that holds it from reaching fullmarks was the fact that the kragan didn't put up the fight theaudieance expected it to. It was killed way way to quickly and acharacter mentioned throughout the story as much as the kragan wasshould have done a bit more then it did. Other then that I loved thisfilm. Props to the editor as well for a fine job with the cuts thatwere chosen and the sound crew did some really good work as well. Thisfilm is enjoyable and it did create just the right amount of hype ithink.

2013-04-29 01:27:17

The worst remake ever made

This movie brings to life one of the many greek mythology stories. I hated the fact that they did not keep up with the events that were told regarding the storie behind Clash of the Titans. This version took many liberties and as I always say why mess with the classics. If you want the real story as passed down from generation to generation watch Clash of the Titans made in the late 1980's. Schniggles

joben-525-633946 2013-04-23 14:52:31

Far from a classic however an occasionally enjoyable mythological romp nonetheless.

Louis Leterrier's rebooted version of the 1981 cult film 'Clash of theTitans' is one dimensional, inconsistently acted and it's story plodsalong in comparison to an enormous boulder attached to the end of atruck via a rope, travelling across a rickety road. On the other hand, for the majority of average citizens, 'Clash of theTitans' is cemented full of stunning CGI imagery and cinematography.The action sequences are on a rapid convener belt which is continuousthroughout the duration and there is little time to breath.As you may have guessed from the above, 'Clash of the Titans' has manypositives which are balanced out with an equal amount of negatives. Thebudget of $125 million certainly polishes the films visual contentwhich cannot be faulted. Nor can the well cast Sam Worthington, RalphFiennes and Liam Neeson who are each solid in their respected roles.However, there is too much of a video-game feel to the film with apaper thin plot, an action overload and a lack of characterisation. When Perseus (Worthington) realises he is a demi-god, son of Greek GodZeus (Liam Neeson), he is called upon to protect Princess Andromeda(Alexa Davalos) from Hades' (Fiennes) monstrous Kraken.Following on from the brief synopsis above is an onslaught of actionscenarios involving huge, desert scorpions and more of Hades'devastating creatures.To conclude, 'Clash of the Titans' should fill the gap left on a Fridaynight/weekend night though I wouldn't expect much more than a dumb butreasonably fun 106 minutes.

2013-04-23 02:02:41

Doesn't disappoint!!

What can you say about a classic? Appreciate it!! This is such a good film. Even the giant scorpions are great!! Add this to your collection of classic films...

2013-04-22 19:52:53

Clash Of The Titans 3D

This review is from: Clash of the Titans [Blu-ray 3D] (Blu-ray) This is an enjoyable title, lots of action & a good cast, the 3D effects are average & better than the 2D version.A good purchase for your 3D collection (Note for UK customers, this title WILL play on UK 3D Blu-ray players)

2013-04-22 15:01:35

Clash Of The Titans 3D

This review is from: Clash of the Titans (Three Disc: Blu-ray 3D / Blu-ray / DVD / Digital Copy) (Blu-ray) This is an enjoyable title, lots of action & a good cast, the 3D effects are average & better than the 2D version.A good purchase for your 3D collection (Note for UK customers, this title WILL play on UK 3D Blu-ray players)

jhusak 2013-04-09 12:29:28

very good movie

Not seen such good one for some long time. very nice...! good effects,and exciting plot. I give it a straight 10 of course. Movies are meantto be like these.Liked the underworld and god / devil visualisations. Incredibly done onthe special effects, landscapes, casting and plot. The story tells alot about humankind and basics in our lives.Don't understand underestimated preceding reviews, i cannot agree withthem. Then again i'm not Zeus. HaHaExcited from begin till end and want to watch it again soon.Not going to tell the plot just see for yourself!!

2013-04-08 19:10:37

Meanders around and never lands

Everybody I knew that saw "Clash of the Titans" in the theater said that the problem was the bad 3D. Having just watched it on home video, I think that it has a lot more problems than that. I thought Sam Worthington was cardboard, that the plot didn't make that much sense and that it just never got that interesting. At the end of the day, Perseus has to quest all over to find a way to defeat the Kraken because the gods have given the humans an ultimatum, but it's just a weapon of Hades, who he didn't defeat. Even worse, I was pretty sure throughout the movie that Zeus was a bad guy, but at the end I think the filmmakers want us to think he's good. It doesn't work. Two stars.