Buy Clash of the Titans (2010) Movie. Watch online or Download
Genres: ActionAdventureFant
Starring: Liam Neeson, Polly Walker, Pete Postlethwaite, Danny Huston, Jason Flemyng, Alexa Davalos, Tamer Hassan
Director(s): Louis Leterrier
Available Quality: Hi Def
Country: USA, UK
Year: 2010
Available Quality: DVD, Hi Def, iPod, Hi Def, Hi Def
IMDB Rating: 5.8 out of 10 (89626 votes)
Release the Kraken! Ah, it could only be Clash of the Titans, the 2010 remake that retains the instruction to unleash the great beastie from the sea. The 1981 original boasted Ray Harryhausens legendary stop-motion technique of animating various mythological creatures--it was his final feature project--and given the cornball approach of the movie in general, that was the main draw. The remake supplies new state-of-the-art special effects (released in 3-D) and a nicely muscular sense of momentum. Sam Worthington (the Avatar guy) plays Perseus, a demigod who doesnt know that Zeus (Liam Neeson) is his father. Perseus is selected to lead an expedition to find and slay the Medusa, lest Zeuss evil brother Hades (Ralph Fiennes, in fine slinking mode) rain down misery upon a seaport--and you just know that means the Kraken is coming. Ye gods, its a mess, and we havent even mentioned the witches and the harpies and the giant scorpions. But if we did, it would be clear that Clash of the Titans is a perfectly dandy popcorn epic, unpretentious and punchy. Director Louis Leterrier (Transporter 2) gets a fine rhythm going during Perseuss trek, and you can even forgive the hokey shafts-of-light-through-clouds look of Olympus. Leterrier also had the good sense to import the marvelous Danish star Mads Mikkelsen to provide mentoring duties to Perseus Gemma Arterton and Alexa Davalos fulfill the eye-candy roles. Its up to individual viewers to choose which they prefer--Harryhausens magically hand-wrought creations (his Medusa sequence is an absolute killer) or the 21st centurys slick computer-generated variations. But nostalgia aside, it would be hard to deny that this is one case where the remake tops the original.
 |
Clash of the Titans (2010) (iPod) | Resolution: 480x208 px | Total Size: 360 Mb |
|
|
 |
Clash of the Titans (2010) (Hi Def) | Resolution: 852x352 px | Total Size: 831 Mb |
|
|
 |
Clash of the Titans (2010) (Hi Def) | Resolution: 1920x800 px | Total Size: 8130 Mb |
|
|
 |
Clash of the Titans (2010) (Hi Def) | Resolution: 1280x536 px | Total Size: 4473 Mb |
|
|
 |
Clash of the Titans (2010) (DVD) | Resolution: 720x304 px | Total Size: 1494 Mb |
|
Movie Photos:
We have taken some photos of "Clash of the Titans (2010)". They represent actual movie quality.
Visitors Review
samkay1 (25 May 2012)
Shallow, Hokey, kind of fun (not quite enough though)
The year is young, but Clash of the Titans qualifies as the hokeysemi-epic of 2010, the same way Forbidden Kingdom was to 2007, or 10000 b.c. was to 2008. From a lobotomized point of view, I suppose theaction scenes make up for the total lack of story and the frustrationgenerated by the pointless use of characters and bad acting. So Iguess, the film is superior to the 1981 version, but it's got a longway to gothe story is a retelling of the Perseus myth, and the screenplay doesit no justice. It feels rushed and cheesy, with not a moment of timespent on intelligent dialogue. Director Louis Leterier likes to stagehis fights in martial arts cinema tradition, and although he takes it abit over-the-top with too many slow-mo shots, I suppose it's fun stuff.Of course, it has nothing on his last movie, The Incredible HuIk. Also,would've liked to see a little more from the climax, which is far tooshort, and presents a pretty big plot hole (which for obvious reasons Iwont describe)The geology of the movie is fascinating, but half of it is not Greek.(I know I've been to Greece). It's pretty easy to recognize thevolcanic ash fields of Argentina, used in numerous movies before, orthe lush green wet forests from the Pacific coast. Not like any of thisis a real problem. I also like the make-up jobs on peoples faces,although to be honest Ralph Finnes and Liam Neeson look more Vikingthan Greek, and ironically Zeus's beard 'clashes' with the color of hisarmour. Sam Worthington is hot stuff, but he cannot act. He's the new JasonStathum. It's not like he has much to do or say though. Clash of theTitans is just another case of poor script = mediocre movie. Thespecial effects do make a difference next to Ray Harryhausen, but themovies intention to honor him, is inept, and I think it could'vedelivered more.
nama chakravorty (24 May 2012)
A disappointment...
A remake of the 1981 film of the same name, itself loosely based on theGreek myth of Perseus, 'Clash Of The Titans' is a dull fare. 3-D hasnever been so pointless before! 'Clash Of The Titans' has a tepidstart, a fair second, but a bland end spoils the fun. Louis Leterrier'sdirection relies on CGI completely. Cinematography by Peter Menzies,Jr. is the mainstay of the film, he's done a mind-blowing job.In the acting department, Sam Worthington is okay. Liam Neeson iswasted. Ralph Fiennes is the only actor who pitches in superb act. Hestands out. Gemma Arterton is passable. Others are passable.'Clash Of The Titans' is not good stuff, according to me. Watch it ifyou must!
Brooks (23 May 2012)
ummm...seriously?
Hollywood....get a freaking clue!!! Quit remaking classics with horrible story lines for a quick buck. It sucks because the movie had such potential to be one of the greats.....pitty.
(23 May 2012)
Clash of the Titans Blue Ray
This review is from: Clash of the Titans [Blu-ray] (Blu-ray) It's a great movie that stand on its own. Unlike other so called "remakes" this is one is different enough from the original to be considered its own Movie. So if you're expecting the same sappy Love story from the original, this version will have surprises waiting for you.
(18 May 2012)
Not very Titanic
"Clash of the Titans" is a truly amazing film -- never before have I seen a movie that is so BUSY, and yet so staggeringly DULL.This stupid movie was apparently made to cash in on the wild success of 300, but it pretty much missed everything that made that movie enjoyable. Instead, this remake of the classic cult film is full of everything and nothing -- Louis Leterrier crams it with horrible acting, endless CGI, and an obnoxiously preachy plot that ends up being brain-bleedingly boring.A fisherman finds a floating coffin, which holds a dead princess and a still-living baby. He adopts the child, Perseus (Sam Worthington), and raises him as well -- until the god Hades (Ralph Fiennes) destroys Perseus' family and fishing boat. He's marched to the city of Argos, where he sees the king and queen declare war on the gods... ... only to have Hades proclaim that if Princess Andromeda (Alexa Davalos) is not sacrificed within ten days, the kraken will destroy Argos. A mysterious woman named Io (Gemma Arterton) tells Perseus that he is actually the son of Zeus (Liam Neeson), and is the only hope of slaying the kraken and saving Argos. Honestly, the story of Perseus is one of the awesomest, most movieworthy stories in Greek mythology -- you've got a demigod hero, a sea monster, a flying horse, and a snake-headed creature that turns people to stone. But apparently, THAT story isn't good enough for the people in Hollywood. They even mock the original movie in one scene involving the mechanical owl Bubo.Instead director Leterrier crams all sorts of weird random stuff into the movie -- it's a constant onslaught of giant scorpions, CGI monsters, djinni, and witches who look like Guillermo del Toro discards. The plot feels skeletal and bloated at the same time, with horribly silly dialogue ("It is death who should be afraid of us!") and dozeworthy action scenes.Even worse, the screenwriters seem hell-bent on pushing their own theological philosophy on us ("God sucks and ruins everything, so don't worship him") NON-STOP. There's scene after scene of "We hate the gods! Gods are awful! Let's stupidly anger them even though they're incredibly powerful!"... only for them to undermine their own message in the last reel. And really, how can you go wrong when you have Liam Neeson and Ralph Fiennes in your movie, playing GODS? Well, you can cast the bland lump that is Sam Worthington as your lead, a pouting prettyboy who brings no charisma to his role, giving Neeson nothing to do except throw divine tantrums and Fiennes nothing to do except slink around being vaguely sinister (since a god of death HAS to be evil, right? WRONG!). As for Gemma Arterton, she just sort of wanders in and out of the story, serving as a source of convenient information."Clash of the Titans" would be better titled "Flush of the Titans" -- a reeking lump of brainless cinema that stupefies even as it preaches. The original is flawed, but infinitely superior to this one.
Bloomer (18 May 2012)
Pretty joyless...
This remake of the starry-eyed 1981 Greek mythological fantasyadventure has a grungy, ugly look and a completely joyless openingquarter of an hour. Sam Worthington's blokey performance as Perseusturns out to be roughly interchangeable with the performances he gavein both Avatar and the last Terminator film, though Clash has next tono character development on the cards for Sam or any of its otheractors. What little humour there is comes in the form of cynicalone-liners from one of Perseus's bearded mates. The film is mostly aseries of grunty fight scenes involving sandaled humans versus giantCGI monsters  giant scorpions, giant medusa, giant kraken, etc.One of the heroes of the original Clash was a cute clockwork golden owlnamed Bubo. When trailers for the new Clash were screening, my friendand I joked about whether Bubo would make the remake. I said, "there'sno way they're going to have a cute robot owl. This film looks way toogrungy and they're playing heavy metal music on the trailer."To all our surprises, Bubo did appear, albeit for ten seconds. Justbefore Perseus sets out on his adventure, he is digging around in asupply chest when he pulls out... Bubo, looking and sounding exactlylike the little blighter did in 1981. This caused me to cry aloud: "Ohmy God!"Perseus considers the owl briefly and says something like, "What thehell is this?" His bearded one-linery friend responds with, "Don'tworry about it, just leave it here." Then they shove the owl back inthe box and go adventuring. In retrospect this was the wittiest momentin the whole film, even if it only made sense to people who knew theoriginal. If you had been wondering if the owl would reappear, thisscene both satisfied your desire to see the owl again and thenreassured you that, "Okay, that's the owl issue dealt with, so no, theowl won't be in the film in general, and now you can stop worryingabout it."The basic strike against the new film, which amounts to 1000 strikes,is that not a single aspect of it is developed in any satisfying way.Dialogue is absolute nuts and bolts stuff to propel the simple plot.The people in the film aren't moved when their pals are killed, so youaren't either. There's a cast of gods in Olympus, but 80% of them standin the background saying nothing, etc. etc.The new Princess Andromeda is dull as dishwater in a cut down role (butI was kind of in love with Judi Bowker of the original film, so I ambiased). The principal female role now belongs to lovely Gemma Artertonas Io, the ageless half human, uh, toga'd spirit type woman.(?) If Ithought anyone would ever say anything remotely poetic in this film,I'd have put money on her character saying it. But nobody does and shedidn't.The old Clash of the Titans was extraordinary with romance, G ratedmagic and beautiful scenery, no matter how naff some of it was. The newone is ugly and weak, brisk and dumb. I think it's safe to say that nokid who is seven years old now will be looking back on this film withany fondness in thirty years' time.
Pete_Tranters_Sister (15 May 2012)
Titans will roar. Fans will cry.
Can I submit a new summary to this page? How about: "The Clash of theTitans is set in the supposedly Greek city of Hollywoodius where a thedemi-god Perseus, raised as a fisherman, becomes an elite soldier afterone sword-fighting lesson, briefly bonds with a group of genericoiled-up men and some token totty, and embarks on a stunninglyunoriginal quest to avenge his dead family." Or perhaps: "Perseus whowas meant to be killed by the man who killed his mother watches his newfamily get killed and vows to kill the evil god Hades who killed themand who also wants to kill his brother Zeus who wants to kill him rightback. Along the way they kill lots of other stuff." And that prettymuch sums it up.It isn't a patch on the original. And it's funny how even though thespecial effects are far more advanced than Harryhausen's work, theoriginal film has a grandeur that this movie never touches. CGI and 3Dis making filmmakers lazy - and this movie is a prime example. So muchtime has obviously gone into crafting the explosions, fights and menshouting RARRRHHH, they've left out the story, the coherence, thecharacter development - all the bits that make a good film. I wouldrather watch a good story with bad effects than a bad story with goodeffects.The acting is generally good although why we had to have a pair ofcomedians is anyone's guess, particularly as they're not funny. Thetree people are a pointless addition. The biggest drawback is SamWorthington who again shows minimal acting ability and zero charisma.And I hate his hair. The supporting cast was good. Mads Mikkelsen wasexcellent. I hope Worthington was taking notes from him on how to be aleading man because so far he's sucked at it."They killed my family!" Yet again, the motivational cliché of choicefor an action film. What was wrong with the original storyline? I haveno problem with reworking mythologies and finding fresh ways of tellingthe stories. I do have a problem when someone takes a good story andturns it into a clichéd mess. It might as well have been called "Clashof the Generic Bad Guys" for all the attention paid to Greek myths.Changing the characters or the story I could live with, but to changethe entire spirit of a film so that it a pathetic shadow of its sourcematerial, what is the point?Characters behave inconsistently. The comedy duo join Perseus' quest tokill Hades and then drop out because they can't fight Hades in theunderworld. Well, where did they expect to find him? Sunning himself ona Bahamian beach? In Medusa's lair, after shouting a billion times notto look at Medusa directly and keep their eyes down, why do they thenrun around trying to look for her? Why does Mikkelsen let himself die?Medusa's got her back to him - can't he keep his eyes shut untilPerseus finishes her off? The dialogue is risible - as a giant scorpionapproaches one man, he shouts "What's that?" Um ... a giant scorpion.Sam Worthington also preaches some pretentious tripe about wanting to"be a man not a god" although once he's getting his ass kicked byMedusa he forgets these lofty principles. And after ranting on abouthow much he hates the gods, he ends up bonding with Zeus, who verykindly brings Io back to life so Perseus can get his end away. Couldn'the have brought back his dead family as well? Considering that's whatcaused all the trouble in the first place.Again, filmmakers ignore the other 50% of the human race. What happenedto all the women? Aphrodite, Hera or Athena are missing. The ones thatdo make the cut are the usual stereotypes. Casseopeia appears brieflybut as she's over thirty she gets killed off as soon as possibleleaving her husband to take precedence. Andromeda, played by an MTA, isbeautiful but also gives bread to the poor - unsubtly hammering homethe fact that she's too nice to be Kraken-food. Frankly though, beingan ex-model is enough reason for me. Andromeda's loveliness makes zeroimpact on Perseus although in the original she was the whole point ofhis quest. We're treated to poor Medusa's story of how she was rapedand then turned into a monster although why we need this backstory isunclear. It certainly doesn't garner any sympathy as Perseus vows to"kill the bitch". What a hero. Io is another pointless addition,showing up as the standard issue love interest. Although if we'retalking sexism in the movies, I will point out that Perseus' skirt wasshorter than hers. And rode up way too much.The only plus point is the design. The monsters are generally good.Pegasus looks great. Sadly, Charon is a blink-and-miss-it affair, theMedusa elicits sympathy rather than horror and the Kraken looks like agiant penis with teeth. I'm sure there's something Freudian going onthere ... (Also with Perseus' joke about how being on a scorpiok isbetter than being in one - hmmm - maybe that's just my dirty mind.) Theset design is also outstanding and it's a shame that so much work wentinto such a poor film.Anyone who (a) has seen the original and (b) has some knowledge ofGreek myth will hate this movie. I expected a glorious update of one ofmy childhood favourites and a return to epic movies, but instead got avastly inferior pretender with an incoherent clichéd plot.I give it three stars - one for the design, one for Pegasus and one forMikkelsen.
(15 May 2012)
If you are buying this for 3-D, spend your hard earned cash elsewhere.
So with the limited number of 3-D movies out there and wanting to make a purchase other than another animated half-rate movie available on 3-D format, I was hoping to put my expensive investment to something more adult like. With hopes, I purchased "Clash of the Titans" Blu Ray in 3-D. I was really looking forward to the film and being amazed because the two animated movies I have, "Monsters vs Aliens" and "Cloudy with a Chance of Meatballs" are quite enjoyable in 3-D. As soon as I put "Clash" into the Blu Ray player, I wondered if there was something wrong with my glasses. I changed the batteries on my glasses, tried different pairs of glasses, and even checked to make sure I had the correct disc in the drive. Everything seemed to be working. I even replaced the disc with one "Monsters vs..." just to make sure my TV had not broken down. The result is this: I do not believe that "Clash of the Titans" was even made into a 3-D version. If you are hoping to be amazed with your TV's 3-D display capabilities, you better buy something else. All "Clash" is, is simply a blurred background with no, AND I MEAN NO, 3-D imagery. In fact, I am so disappointed, I plan on returning it (I hope) tomorrow.Don't get me wrong. I think "Clash.." is a fairly decent movie for entertainment. But if you are looking for 3-D graphics, spend your hard earned cash elsewhere.
Riva Stewart (08 May 2012)
Fun fantasy movie
After his roles in Terminator 4 and the blockbuster Avatar, SamWorthington continues his fantasy leading man roles as Perseus in theremake of the 1981 cult classic, Clash of the Titans. This is a newimagination of the timeless mythology of the world of gods, monstersand men. No stop-action animation and obvious miniatures this time. Perseus begins his life simply enough as the son of a fisherman. Butlife soon takes a cruel turn when the only family he knows is takenfrom him by the gods they serve. Soon he is presented with anopportunity to get justice by a chance of birth, his own. He is told heis the son of Zeus. But Perseus takes no pleasure in this information,he spurns it. He even turns down an offer from Zeus himself to be givensanctuary and end his quest of revenge. Ultimately he embraces being ademi-god to strike a blow at the gods that no mortal man ever could. In this adaptation Perseus is not motivated to battle medusa or thekraken to save the damsel in distress, Andromeda. No, he is on amission of revenge. This is what I liked most that gives thiscontemporary Perseus an edgier demeanor. He is of the mindset that ifAndromeda or anyone else happens to benefits from his conquests cool,but that is not his goal. He is a man with a single focus anddetermination, destroy Hades.Continually catching my attention in this movie were the locations.There were views from mountain tops overlooking a sea of clouds, barreninactive volcanoes to jutting cliff sides, visually stunning. The story line is predictable, so what is there to like? The fightscenes! He and his companions battle witches, gigantic scorpions, adeformed king, medusa and finally the kraken. With the new digitaltechnology you believed they were fighting those scorpions. Medusa onthe other hand; hey, even with new technology medusa and her head fullof snakes is only going to look so real. But, I love to watch a goodfight. In Clash of the titans I got 'em. www.rivareviews.com
(08 May 2012)
no disappointment
When I saw preview for Clash of the Titans in theaters I could not wait to see it... ended up not seeing it in theaters and actually didnt end up seeing it until 2 days ago... i definitely was not disappointed witht the movie... a lot of action, great special effects, o.k. acting, and a good general story (maybe i thought the story was good because i could fill in the gaps with knowledge of the previous clash of the titans/greek mythology)... The blu-ray also looked AMAZING on my 42" 1080p LCD TV... a very good example of what HD can do... overall it is at least worth a rental... ill probably end up buying it... pretty decent movie!
(07 May 2012)
People Need To Lighten Up...
Mythic Greece: After being found drifting in a coffin at sea and saved from a watery grave as an infant by his adoptive father (Pete Postlethwaite), Perseus (Sam Worthington), grows to manhood and ekes out a simple but happy existence as a fisherman on the Greek straits with his adopted family. But storm clouds gather inexorably on the horizon; the Kingdom of Argos, infuriated by the cruel indifferences and vicissitudes of the Gods, has declared war on the omnipotent rulers of Mount Olympus themselves. Almighty Zeus (Liam Neeson), angered by the impudence of his creations, unleashes his banished brother Hades (Ralph Fiennes) upon the face of the Earth in order to teach them a lesson. Perseus' family are amongst the first casualties of Hades' slaughter and, driven by inconsolable rage, he resolves to destroy the very ruler of the underworld himself..."Clash Of The Titans" is a splendid remake of a very silly but fun film. Because, let's be honest, as enjoyable as the original was, it was never a classic - not even at the time of it's release (which I remember very clearly). The original was a giant cheese football of a movie and this film is also a giant cheese football of a movie; the thing that they both have in common is that they're both completely enjoyable, largely because neither one takes itself very seriously at all.Like most of the best remakes, "Clash Of The Titans" reworks the concept of it's progenitor in order to go somewhere a little bit different. This film is a little darker than the original and, in a suitably Ouroborosian twist, has clearly been influenced by God of War: Collection (an excellent PS2 game which was itself very clearly influenced by the original "Clash Of The Titans" - to the point that Harry Hamlin, the actor who played the original Perseus, voiced a character in "God Of War 2"). But while this film may favour a slightly darker tone, director Louis Leterrier (who also made the fiendishly enjoyable The Incredible Hulk (Widescreen Edition) with Ed Norton) knows what made the original work and, CGI effects aside, keeps this film very much in the style of camp eighties fantasy movies like Krull, The Beastmaster and Conan the Barbarian - Collector's Edition whilst throwing in some very subversive humour and the odd nod to the original (the brief cameo from Bubo, the rather naff clockwork Owl from the original, had me in fits of laughter, largely due to the way it was played). Personally, I think "Clash Of The Titans" stands head and shoulders over most of the bilge that has filled our cinemas lately. Sam Worthington makes a doggedly rugged Perseus; the rest of the cast (including Mads Mikkelsen, Liam Cunningham, Vincent Regan, Polly Walker and the gorgeous Gemma Arterton) all do a cracking job and clearly have fun doing it; Liam Neeson wanders around in a silly beard and armour; Ralph Fiennes throws in a combination impersonation of Terence Stamp in "Superman 2", Nicol Williamson in "Excalibur" and Richard Harris in "Gladiator" and the film as a whole is generally just a good, all-round, old-fashioned fantasy romp which doesn't take itself at all seriously and is over in under two hours. Frankly I really have no idea why this remake engendered so much hatred at the time of it's release and I genuinely don't know what's going on with audiences these days. They shower praise on simplistic, portentous drek such as "Avatar" like it's a rediscovered Tolstoy novel, yet they can't enjoy a good, old-fashioned fantasy flick which plays fast and loose with Greek mythology (in a deeply amusing manner) and which is merely the latest in a long line of films in which men in sandals and silly beards kick seven shades of what-the-horse-drops out of animated monsters.Myself personally, I thoroughly enjoyed it from start to finish and would love to see a sequel. Engage with it on the level on which it's intended and I suspect you'll have fun with it too.
starfowl (07 May 2012)
A shallow action film with an uninspired storyline
This film was really an uninspired one, considering its potential,since Greek mythology may always provide the basis for great stories.When I saw the first film (but that was several years ago), I thoughtmythology was indeed used in an interesting way. In fact, it was onlythe original film that made this movie sound so promising to me. But itended up being a betrayal of the source material and full of terriblemistakes regarding mythology. They tried to compensate for this shallowaspect of the script by adding as many aimless action scenes as theycould, and this is not how I define a good movie. But if you don't knowthe original, nor mythology, and if you are not too demanding, you maybe less underwhelmed than I have been. And there is one redeemingquality to this silly movie: the Kraken scene, which was at leastbeautifully shot and showed a very convincing Kraken. I didn't see itin 3D because it had never been intended for 3D in the first place, andthe 3D seemed badly rendered anyway.
musings-morsels (03 May 2012)
Cr*p of the Titans
I haven't had the chance to see the original 1981 Clash of the Titansbut I believe even with the lack of technological special effects, itcouldn't have been as bad as the cr*p that was churned out this year.The re-make had such promise with the all-star cast ensemble, thefoundations of the original film and the intriguing Greek mythologythat can fuel the plot. But instead of doing a little research andactually closely following the myths that were well thought out forhundreds of years. Producer/writers/directors decide to cheapen theproject by turning it into another Hollywood action pack block-busterwith no plot and wooden actors... WHHYYY????? The first scene already got me rolling my eyes when a baby was foundalive and well floating in a coffin that just rose from deep under thesea. The kid was taken in by a sweet fisherman's family who brought himup to become the brooding, handsome hunk of muscle Perseus played bySam Worthington. I'm always supporting rising Australian actors inHollywood with full force. But Worthington's losing me as a fan withhis wooden facial expressions, monotones dialog (with a very heavyAussie accent that made me cringe) and awkward demeanor. Perseus thengets swept into the battle between the gods and the people when hisfamily became casualties of war. He stumbles into the royal court wherehis demigod status is discovered which forces him into the journey tosave the princess, destroy the gods to avenge his family. Typical plotthat could've been substantial if done well, unfortunately in thisClash of the Titans (COTT) it wasn't. COTT lacked story-telling,character development and explanations in focal scenes that left theaudience hanging with no satisfaction.The lonesome fisherman (who's never picked up a battle sword in hislife), single handedly fought off a hoard of soldiers with years oftraining. WTF!?!? I know you're a demigod and all but that's way toomuch BS one can handle, either that or the soldiers were all shite. Inwhich case don't wage war with the gods if you don't have the goods!!The film was then followed by a series of eye-rolling, scoffing andchoke worthy bullshite that I just was not able to accept. The heroesjourney seemed irrelevant after the long sequence of heavily laden CGIfight action scenes & the laughable dialog didn't help bring theaudience back onto the journey's path at all. And was it me or did Zeushave a serious case of multiple personality disorder? One minute heappears to his son Perseus giving advice and offers help. The next he'stelling Hades to carry out the human slaughter with no mercy!?!? If Iwere Hera I would've advised my husband  the god of gods to seekpsychological help. The one thing I thought didn't make my head shakein disbelief was Hades (Ralph Fiennes) acting, his eerily coldappearance made me shiver at times and I have to say was a breath offresh air in a film that had nothing else going for it.One last thing I want to vent about. I'm sick of every movie becoming3D just because it can. And I was stupid enough to follow the hype andgo see COTT with those horrible glasses that fell off my nose every 3seconds. It made the scenes blurry, darker and I didn't see one bit ofimpressive eye popping 3D activity at all?!?! That was a big fat wasteof money and headache inducing experience.I'll end it with my all time favorite scene/line that made me laugh outloud inappropriately. This time it was the all mighty Zeus who'sguilty. In one of the final crucial scenes, he tells all the gods atthe conference to leave him and Hades alone in the room. He slowlywalks up the stairs and dramatically turns! and instead of having aprivate meaningful conversation that required the other gods to leavehe utters 'Release the Kraken!' (oh no! it's not a giant octopus it'selephant man's f**ked up twin!) - WTF WTF WTF!?!?!http://musingsandmorsels.weebly.com/
zavryonish (02 May 2012)
Might be a little disappointing for the fans of yearly version( spoilers!!!!!!)
I gave this movie 5 out of 10. 5 for the visuals,by the way I wasanticipating seeing Cracken in 3D. He looked magnificent, but on somereason he was most of the time in 2D. I tried to like the storyline,but I couldn't. I realize that as a filmmaker you have a right to treatthe myth as you feel comfortable.I did not like what was left of one ofthe few Greek legends with a relative happy end. The only thing thismovie was able to portray better than the original movie, was theviciousness of Greek Gods. Zeus loving people and Hades hating themreminded Biblical story. It was irritating. Even more irritating was hefact that other gods were passive and that people were portrayed asnoble and fearless. In the middle of the movie I could hardly recognizethe myth and was still hoping that the story would make up for thechanges it suffered. It didn't for me. So that is it,I did not like thestory. The acting and visuals were great.
Colin George (01 May 2012)
"Clash of the Titans" (2010)
"Clash of the Titans" is an unusual film to remake for a modernaudience. I mean, how familiar is Joe Moviegoer with the 1981 originalor Greek mythology on the whole? The answer is 'Not very,' and theproducers know it. They've taken broad steps to protect poor Joe fromthe alienating Grecian polytheism and comfort him with an immediatelyrecognizable protagonist. To the layman, and in effect, for the layman,they've dumbed it down.Sam Worthington is Perseus, which I guess is a big deal now that he'sthe star of the highest-grossing film of all time. And when you hireSam Worthington, you get Sam Worthington. The '81 Perseus is aloof,oddly lackadaisical, with shoulder-length hair and a caring,inquisitive disposition. Worthington's Perseus is a buzzcut graduate ofthe Christian Bale/Batman school of acting. His dialogue is gruff,brief, and introverted, because coolness now is apparently inverselyproportional to vocabulary and elocution. It speaks to a certain extentabout the types of characters we hold up as heroes in our currentsocial climate, but more so, it's a simple example of commercialviability over storytelling practicality. Worthington as Perseus is acarefully calculated business move, and the streamlining of hischaracter is indicative of director Louis Leterrier's greater neuteringof the myth for 13-year- old boys. After all, if there's one thing lesscool than masculine eloquence, it's ancient culture.Damn the gods indeed. 2010's "Titans" retells Perseus' story through adecidedly Christian lens. Mount Olympus has been downsized, and Zeus(Liam Neeson) and Hades (Ralph Fiennes) essentially become surrogatesfor God and the devil. Most of the roles fulfilled by other gods in theoriginal film have been reassigned to these two to keep things simple,which would be fine if they were interesting characters. Instead, ahunchbacked Fiennes rasps ominously at his brother, and Neeson sucksall ambiguity out of the king of the gods. It's worth noting that theoriginal is far from a masterpiece, but the insecurities and pettyvengeances of Zeus and his kin are among the more entertaining ideas itputs forth. The remake drops most of these characters and fits Zeuswith a stoic (re: boring) gravitas, and a ridiculous set of digitallyglistening armor.And I can complain until I'm blue in the face about the intellectualinadequacies of "Clash of the Titans," but it's surface level mistakeslike bad costumes and poor action choreography that really kills thefilm. The '81 version is defined by its special effects and set-pieces,and the best we can do in 2010 is CG monsters and post-production 3D?The remake is everything an effects-heavy film shouldn't be: sweepingand grandiose at the expense of intimacy. I don't care how manyscorpions you render or how big you've made the Kraken when I don'teven understand the decisions your protagonist is making.But it's not like the remake ruins a classic or anything. The originalhas its share of problems, and one of the things the 2010 film doesright is to kick the pacing in the pants where it needs to, leavingfewer sedentary dry spells than its predecessor. Regardless, I stillhold the '81 version in higher regard because of its faithfulness indepicting the pantheon of the Grecian gods, and the charm andpersonality of its effects. The mythology is all "Clash of the Titans"circa 2010 has to distinguish itself by, and it downplays thatdifference instead of embracing it. Splash bland action andunimpressive effects on that cinematic identity crisis, and even JoeMoviegoer will agree you've failed.
(30 April 2012)
RELEASE THE KRAKEN!!!
I liked it, but, having LOVED the original 1981 Harry Hamlin version, with creatures by Ray Harryhausen, this movie was a little disappointing. It was good, but I expected more. With that said up front, I could not wait to see this in the theater, and of course opted for 3D so the creatures would stand out from the screen. The Computer Graphic Imaging (CGI) and Animatronics were great!The story begins with a seaman opening a box on his ship that he salvaged from the sea to find a living baby lying inside on its dead mother's chest. He takes the baby boy home to raise as his own. Young Perseus quickly advances to about age 25. As Perseus (Sam Worthington), his mother, father, and younger half-sister are on the ship approaching Argos, they see the huge statue of Zeus being thrown into the sea by the people.Now, let me side-step a minute. Zeus (Liam Neeson) was the mythological god in charge of the humans. Zeus loved mankind, but mankind was getting a bit tired of honoring the gods all the time and still having to suffer and die. Zeus also has an evil brother named Hades (Ralph Fiennes) who is in charge of the Underworld. Calibos lives down there with Hades.Another side-step is that we find out that Perseus is a demigod (half god and half man). Zeus came down one day, disguised as Calibos and made love to his queen, impregnating her with a son (Perseus). King Calibos sealed his queen and the baby in a wooden coffin and they were thrown into the sea. The baby lived, as we saw earlier, and Calibos went to the Underworld for his crimes.Back to the story--now the humans have upset their sponsor, Zeus. The sea begins to rise and Perseus' family all perish in the sea. He is rescued and taken to Argos, where he meets Princess Andromeda and her family. Back on Mt. Olympus, the Council of gods are having a big meeting. Hades is just dying to get at the humans with The Kraken, because Hades takes his strength from the people's fear, while Zeus takes his from their love. Hades says, "Zeus, can I get after the people?" and Zeus allows Hades to do his thing because the people have shunned the gods of Mt. Olympus. So Hades appears in Argos, telling the King he has dishonored the gods. Either sacrifice the princess to the Kraken in 10 days or Argos will be destroyed. Perseus and the small army of Argos set off on a journey to find out how to kill the Kraken before the 10 days are up so he can save Andromeda. Zeus sends his son a few special gifts now and then to help him on his journey, such as a special sword and a black-winged Pegasus. On their journey, they meet giant scorpions, the jin people, and search for Medusa (whose very gaze turns any living creature into stone.)This is a neat movie to see in 3D and on the big screen. It was filmed in Tenerife, UK, the Canary Islands, and Etheopia.If you have never seen this movie, I highly recommend that you catch the 1981 version, whether you see this 2010 one or not. If you want both, I recommend you see the 2010 one first. Both stories follow the same script pretty closely but the 1981 version has a lot more to the story. I also liked Sam Worthington in this type of action role. I look forward to seeing him in future action movies.
scarletminded (29 April 2012)
Dumped on the Greek myths even more than the first one did...
OK, the first Clash of the Titans didn't follow the Greek mythsexactly. Aphrodite gave Perseus his weapons, not Athena, for exampleand it was Ray Harryhausen who wanted a Kraken because he hadn't done astop motion Kraken, since there wasn't one in the myth.But at least the old version had a romance, charm, the silly owl andwitty banter between the Gods. Here, there isn't the majesty of Athenawith her owl or Hera with her peacock, only Zeus and Hades in an almostChristian aimed fight of good and evil that doesn't line up with Greekmyths or ancient Greek culture. Hades has winged demons, red eyes andbasically is like the devil, which he isn't in Greek myth. He justguards the underworld. Poseidon barely makes an appearance as doesApollo...I got sort of nostalgic for the dialog between Hera and Zeuswhich isn't here. Aphrodite is just an extra here too...and at leastthe old version had one Titan, Thetis, in it...this one has none. Itcuts out most of the dialog of the Gods that appeared in the originaland that was what I wanted to see. I thought Zeus with the eagle in thebackground on the trailer led me to believe Hera would be there withher peacock and Athena with her owl. It's like none of the GreekGoddesses even had a voice there. That's really sexist. The charm of the Gods' dialog and other things has been taken over bydark Hot Topic like cool. Gone is Perseus' mother who played a big partin the myth. Gone is the challenge Perseus had to get the Medusa headin order for his mother to not be forced into marriage she didn't want.Gone is the romance with Andromeda, who he falls in love with fromreturning from his quest. Gone are most of the Olympians, since thishas to be only a bland good vs. evil movie. Gone are the Hesperidestoo. A plot line to save family is whittled into a boring revenge moviebecause a guy can't get some fish in his boat. There are other things wrong with this movie too. The Medusa has apretty face for some reason. And a metal hip Hot Topic metal handpiece. Rock and roll. I don't get it. I feel the story of Perseus isvery interesting if you follow the myth so why this garbage? It feelslike the screenwriters have never read a lick of Greek mythology. Imean, they call Pegasus "The Pegasus" which really bothered me and thehorse was black, not white. And there was a herd of them. Zeus' eagleis now a bald eagle, is that supposed to be a US metaphor or something?Poseidon and/or Athena created Pegasus, only one of them. And what wasup with Io? She's from another myth. Cursed with not being a cow, butwith immortality. What? And Charon looked like a bad Halloween storeprop. And Hades comes also to reek revenge when Andromeda is said to bemore beautiful than Aphrodite...I was expecting Aphrodite to come tobash heads, but she didn't. And the Djinn, why where they even there?Wrong mythology. Which throws Islam into the already Christian Zeus(God)/Hades (devil), Perseus (Jesus) framework. It's such a mess, Idon't know what else to say about that.This movie is like a vampire, sucking any joy out of the myths. Theyreplaced a story about how a man tried to destroy his son because of anomen and turned it into a lackluster adventure film. It has no heart,no decent acting other than Liam Neeson and Ralph Fiennes, but really,give them a phone book to read and it would be worth while to see. Istarted fast forwarding through it once I saw Hera wasn't around tocounter Zeus, nor Athena with her owl. Disappointing. The rest was lameadventure film with OK special effects. I wish it could have had morestory or once closer to the Greek myths. Like I said the first versionmessed up Greek myth a bit but at least had charm. It was fun, ituplifted you at the end, kids could see it, it was more of a familyfilm. This is pure dreck. It's devoid of any values, moral quests sincein the myth Perseus is trying to help his mom, romance or anythingjoyful. It's just dark and vapid. Eye candy for those who don't havethe patience to read a book on Greek myths.
(28 April 2012)
Uhmm... no.
Let me start off by saying this movie SUCKS. It has to be the worst oneof the year. First of all, It's story is terrible, I don't want to spoil anythingfor you but this movie is so bad that it doesn't even matter. So hereit is: Humanity is revolting against the Greek gods, so the god of theunderworld threatens to release the "Kraken" unless the humans kill aprincess (I'm confused as well. This plot sucks.)So instead of killing the princess, they decide to go on a journey toprevent the kraken from coming. Sounds epic, but too bad it's horriblyexecuted. The action starts off with the God of the underworld sendinghis personal fighter (How cliché) out to kill the group of adventurers.He fails, and it results into a fight against giant CG scorpions. Thenthe adventurers fight some Labyrinth of Pan creatures, and then theyfight more stuff.... and then they fight some more, and then some more,and then finally, the best part of the movie... the credits roll. This movie is just a mindless fight to the next. That's it. This is basically God of War smashed carelessly into a movie. The onlydifference is that God of War is better in every way (did I mentionit's a video game?)So do yourself a favor, save your money to see Robin Hood instead. Youwill thank me.I give this a 2/10 (and I'm pushing it).
doniedark (26 April 2012)
why did they bother
reasonably entertaining.... i suppose....badly shot effects.....no character interaction (that you will remember anyway) this was hypedso much, just goes to show you who owns the press!! the first movie wasbetter in 1980 odd!! at least it had some character they seemed to bein a hurry, this should have been a long film, with some characterdevelopment this could have been one to remember, especially with thiscast (that were really wasted) DONOT waste money seeing this at the cinema, definitely a cheap DVD ordownload job!!
(25 April 2012)
Good Eye Candy!
This review is from: Clash of the Titans (2010) (Amazon Instant Video) I've seen a lot worse movies than this thats for sure. The actors were good. The eye candy was Good.Worth the rental!
Review total: 20, showing from 1 to 20