Visitors Review

(2012-05-26 08:09)

Was disappointed at first...later..

I don't like the main actor. However the movie tells a different story which first I disliked and then I liked. Because I think this is exactly what director wanted. And if not, I do like it anyway. I do wish it was longer and things were a little different in already changed scenario, with different cast. But what done is done. No one says that no one else will do a better clash of the titans in future.

(2012-05-25 23:22)

Can't say it's good cinema, but it's entertaining in that cheestastic way.

"I went to this film, because I wanted to be entertained, and I was.""Why go to movies to nit-pick? It just wants to be entertaining.""Why take a film like this so seriously? It was just trying to entertaining."These above quotes are things you will read all over websites. They are the lowest common denominator of cop-out quotes defending a film that will be forgotten long before it even hits home video. EVERY MOVIE'S GOAL IS TO ENTERTAIN. DUH! What movie wasn't trying to be entertaing? Please find me this film that specifically wanted to not entertain. I would like to see it. JEEEEZ.Anyway, the new REMAKE of Clash of the Titans is pretty much one of the few films I've seen that truly lives up to the title remake. It's just as cheesy as the original Clash. The acting just as stilted to over-the-top. And the special effects are the real star. Sure, the original Clash(a childhood favorite of mine) was silly and cheesy, but guess what, so is the remake. It's got the same stupid cornball Greek mythology and bland characters. The original film had the benefit of many well regarded theatre actors slumming it in small parts of Greek gods, so it had an advantage of over the top fun acting.I'm not sure if the special effects are better in this version. They're more modern, but not really any more convincing. Design-wise they're fun to look at and cool, but I never really thought I was watching actual characters doing battle or interacting with characters of flesh and blood, but rather watching live actors duke it out with special effects. So, on that level it's the same as the original. Though, with the exception of the Kraken, I thought Harryhausen's designs were a bit cooler.There's no real drama or even story to this film. None of the characters really have an arch or a conflict of any interest. Seriously, they don't. It's all very slight and unassuming. And the heroic acting that follows from Sam Worthington is the same. He's fine in the film. Though, a dash of Hamlin's Perseus' charm would've gone a long way.Liam Neeson and Ralphe Fiennes showing up to even read the phone book would be more than enough with these type of stupid movies, so they can't be fouled for their particiaption in this film. They seem to be having fun and they're both very effective in their respective and totally silly roles.So, basically this film has a thin plot to hang special effects sequences on. It's retains most the elements of story from the original with minor changes that don't really "change" the point of the film or where it's going. I really had hoped this would've been better. I wanted to like it more on a real cinematic level, and not on the guilty pleasure cheese level of Michael Bay's original Transformers. I wanted this thing to be Jaws, Star Wars, or even Speed, but it's just time diverting, undemanding and curiously entertaining. It's no classic. I garuntee(though I could be wrong) it will be forgotten by most before next year.I appreciate the work and skill that took to put this thing together. I'm sure it will make a ton of money. I'm sure the CGI will be award worthy. But who cares? Big box office and 'kewl' special effects don't really mean much anymore. Everything is a hit and everything has 'kewl' special effects. So, when annoying peeps who utter with disdainn things like, "why take a film that just wants to entertain so seriously and nit-pick", just reply back, "BECAUSE I WASN'T ENTERTAINED, and my tastes have grown tired of the same thing every summer and want more from my entertainment." That's all.I'm not bashing the film. It's worth a rent. It's worth a buy if you admire the designers behind the CGI special effects. I found the thing entertaining, but not consuming. It's really the same thing with the original. I imagine if I was six and saw this thing for the first time I would be enthralled, and then fifteen years or so later laugh at how silly the thing I loved ultimately is. SO, this remake gets three stars for having cool monsters, cheesy but fun premise that made me smile, and bringing my inner six year old out to play. Now it's time to put the inner-kiddie to bed so I can watch a new Atom Egoyan film.PS: It's a Warner Blu Ray so the picture and sound is amazing, better than the theater. The special features are more sparse than I would have expected, but it mostly deals with special effects and in much depth. THere's a throw away puff piece about new action hero Sam Worthington that's just promotional, but if you're a fan of him, then you'll love it. That's it. No commentary unfortunately, that's my favorite special feature. I would've also liked a comparison piece about this and the original, kind of like they did on the remake of House on Haunted Hills DVD. It could've had a cool interview with Harryhausen and his thoughts on one of his babys being remake. Ho hum.

Douglas Young (2012-05-25 14:49)

Show me the Kraken

(Synopsis) "The Clash of the Titans" is set in the Greek city of Argoswhere a war is about to explode between man and the gods. Persesus (SamWorthington) raised as a fisherman, but is actually a demi-god, becausehe is the bastard son of Zeus (Liam Neeson) is about to take on thegods after the death of his family at the hands of Hades (RalphFiennes). It is Persesus' destiny to rescue the city of Argos from theruthless rage of Hades and his Kraken monster. With nothing to lose,Persesus leads a band of soldiers on a quest to defeat the Kraken,which in turn prevents Hades from overthrowing his brother Zeus anddestroying mankind.(My Comment) This movie is the ultimate struggle for power that pitsman against creatures (giant scorpions, snake-haired Medusa, and theKraken), a king against gods, and gods against themselves, and thevictor wins the earth. The film was not shot using 3D technology, butconverted to the 3D format at the last minute to be trendy, and itreally shows. The 3D creatures are not improved at all, and thebackground scenery only looks like it is in HD format. I did not seeanything that came flying out from the screen as a real 3D movie wouldhave, except for the credits. Now I did like the CGI special effects,especially, the scene with Medusa. There are some good fight sceneswith Sam Worthington playing Persesus. The other actors were just soso. You can wait to see this movie, and better yet, see it in HD on TV.(Warner Bros., Run Time 1:58, Rated PG-13) (5/10)

(2012-05-24 17:48)

Awesome!!

This review is from: Clash of the Titans [Blu-ray] (Blu-ray) Great Movie, watching it on blu-ray is amazing, the detail and clarity is great!Very happy with our purchase!

(2012-05-23 15:08)

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!

(2012-05-23 00:47)

Crash of the Titans

The trailers for this film made me bubble with eagerness and excitementfor what looked to be an excellent movie.I don't trust trailers anymore.What a ripoff! The special effects are murky, the acting boring, andthe plot about as uneven as Nicolas Cage's recent acting record ascompared to ten years ago. Now that's pretty uneven. I wanted to carewhen a character would get impaled on a scorpion's stinger, but I foundmyself incapable of feeling for characters we had no relation to orunderstanding of. The only reason I would ever care if some Greek dudegot obliterated would be if he had a cool hairdo. Rewrite thescreenplay so as to be free of campyness (to an extent of course) andgive me a character that I can be sympathetic for, not some snottydemigod. Get a grip. If you have a Friday night to kill, try"Gladiator", "300", or Lord of the Rings. Skip this mess.

aaron esmonde (2012-05-22 00:33)

New sandals, old hat...

New sandals, old hat, Clash of the Titans is an enjoyable remake, butthe original only made in 1981 doesn't seem that long ago. The 2010 version strength is that you don't see sandals, Gods andmonster adventure films much these days(unless they are made for TV).However, you cant help but think why remake Clash of the Titans whenJason and the Argonauts would have been more advantageous. Sadly the score is pretty forgettable but the effects are great, minusa disappointing CGI Medusa. The old world feel is captured perfectlycredit to director of photography Peter Menzies Jr. the locations arebreathtaking, Sam Worthington is a reliable as the an action hero buthis character is underdeveloped. There are some great performances byMads Mikkelsen and heavy weights Liam Neeson and Ralph Fiennes. Therest are a mixed bag, yet Gemma Arterton is startling first-class as tois the almost unrecognisable Jason Flemyng as Calibos. However, ifyou've seen the original, Calibos like Perseus lacks characterisation. Apart from a few tweaks, director Louis Leterrier's version retreadsthe first. While it exceeds it predecessor in some parts, thankfullythere's no owl, it includes the Sheikh Sulieman; Lo; scorpions; Pegausand flying monsters; in places it fall short of the original -TheMedusa scene;the training of Perseus and Calibos role.Nevertheless, it's a fun adventure film and I'd happily watch aninevitable sequel.

(2012-05-21 14:02)

Amazing special effects, but not much else

This review is from: Clash of the Titans (DVD) Like many others, I was a fan of the earlier version of Clash of the Titans. This modern version is plagued by all the same problems that seem to be a part of today's movie making: the makers let the special effects dominate the movie, and dismiss everything else. I loved this movie for the special effects, and it is worth watching, and even owning, just for that alone. The characters, the monsters, the battle scenes, the gods, etc. were all worth the price of admission. My favorite part is that the winged stallion Pegasus is jet black, and has a herd of pure white winged mares. But I would have liked a little more story. Another of the problems this movie has is its' near complete lack of color. Everything is in muted shades of bronze, brown, black, gray and cream. It totally amazes me that today, with fantastic fabrics in every color of the rainbow easily available, no one in Hollywood seems to think to use them. For all the colors this movie has, it might just as well have been filmed in black and white. Not to mention that many of the scenes, like the confrontation with Medusa, are so very dark that it is hard to make out the action. Directors today seem bogged down by "historical accuracy" and "true to life". But this story is not a history lesson, it is a fable. The original Clash of the Titans remembered that it was a fairy tale, used beautiful fabric and bright colors, had characters in it that looked like they bathed, and had bright backgrounds filled with light that let the audience see what was going on. With the modern version, I felt like I should run it through a computer, and add color and light to it. As it is, the heros are brown, the monsters are brown and the backgrounds are brown. Moreover, the makers of this movie did nothing to tell even a bare bones story. There is no reason in this movie for Perseus to rescue Andromeda, or to risk his life for the city---he is a stranger to the princess, and the people of the city have not exactly been friendly to him. He is imprisoned, tortured and then forced into taking on the quest. He should have taken off the first chance he got. The idea that he has some vague idea of getting back at the gods is not sufficient. This movie is worth watching, with fantastic special effects, but I would have loved to see how much better it could have been with bright colors, more light and a better story.

paul david (2012-05-20 18:46)

Entertaining enough but not memorable. Slightly disappointing

This is one of those movies of which I had high expectations as ablockbuster. sorry folks, this is no blockbuster, it is nowhere as goodas 300 and the recent Percy Jackson and Lightning Thief scores for me awhole lot better in terms of interpretation of Greeks mythology.Sam Worthington as Perseus is likable but thats about it. He is no SeanBean and doesn't deliver a strong enough character performance for mefor a 'demi God' and the women throughout are models rather thanactresses delivering good lines.The opening boat scene is intriguing enough but the first let down isseeing the haircut of Perseus on the beach as a child, trying toconnect where he was and what he was doing, it didn't wash for me. Histaking to the Argos King and Queen and the confrontation inside thePalace was bizarre.I agree with comments about the Krakken and the Medusa, they could havemade more of Medusa and exploited more the real myth of Perseus andMedusa. My 11 year old son liked the film and things like Zeus givingPerseus the coin to enter the Hades underworld (same as in PercyJackson) was interesting.I don't say the film wasn't interesting or entertaining and there weresome great scenes but I didn't go to see a mix of King Kong meets Lordof the Rings. Too much wizardry for me and the logic of Greek mythologybecame lost. Too many corny lines, poor lines, too much emphasis on theaction without really connecting it to the story.Certainly not a film to see in 3D.

(2012-05-20 03:20)

The Trench of Esophageal Putridness Clashes with your Olfactory

burp... yeah, it seems like a rude way to begin a review... yet when this nasty stench comes your way, you'll think of the cracken belching and blowing the stink at you. i find this helpful, and if you do not, it's cool, but you lose the time, and the money.

billnich-1 (2012-05-17 00:54)

If it were possible....

If it were possible to remake a film that was more campy, more cornythan the original, this movie accomplished that in spades.Aside from great special effects (the film's only real attraction) andA-list stars, the final product is a loud, tiring film that one is gladto see come to an end.As campy as the original was -- also with A-list talent andstate-of-the-art special effects for its time -- at least it had astoryline that was not too rushed so as to get to more action and morespecial effects, characters you care about because they were somewhatdeveloped and enough dialogue to keep even the mythological noviceinformed as to who the characters are, why they are important and whatmakes them heroic.SPOILER ALERT (if you know nothing about the myth of Perseus) Mybiggest disappointment was the Medusa sequence, which in the life ofPerseus is the climax of the myth. Perseus was born to kill Medusa andbring back her head. Here, it is just another fast-paced actionsequence with no sense of climax or importance to the story other thanhe has to do it to get to the next awesome special-effects laden actionscene. End possible SPOILERSAll in all, if you are a lover of Greek mythology, see the original,and try to forget that Pegasas was ridden by Bellerophon, not Perseus(he had the winged sandals). If you want a mindless action film thatcould just as well have been Jason Bourn in ancient Greece, see thismovie.

(2012-05-16 12:17)

Clash Of The Titans

This review is from: Clash of the Titans [Blu-ray] (Blu-ray) I Love This Update Version Of This Movie? Sam Worthington Is Very Good As Well? Story Line There Are Some Changes, But The Show Was Not Bad At All.

(2012-05-16 02:47)

Much Worse than the Original

Special effects are just OK and that is not enough to make up for an insipid story. Do not buy.

(2012-05-15 14:32)

GARBAGE

This movie is garbage. I consider myself a tolerant movie goer. I almost never walk out of a movie or turn my DVD player off before a film is finished. I usually give movies a chance to redeem themselves in the end. The last time I wanted to walk out on a movie was Batman Forever. This movie I turned off about 20 minutes in. First of all, it has absolutely nothing to do with the original, a movie I grew up loving as a child. Secondly, it has absolutely nothing to do with the actual Greek myth it is based on. And thirdly, it is full of plot holes and inconsistencies as to make the story a farce of itself.As you are watching you are forced to wonder things like, how does Perseus manage a buzz cut in Ancient Greece when everyone else in the movie has authentic hair? Why do the gods sit around wearing shiny armor when they are . . . you know, gods? Why do the humans build a gigantic statue of Zeus and then, in rebellion, destroy it? After all, aren't they just destroying their own work? How does Perseus mother know she has been raped by Zeus when he transforms back into god form . . . did they have photos of him somewhere? How does Perseus' father survive a lightning bolt? And why does he develop superhuman strength afterward, enabling him to lift a coffin with his wife and baby in it? The nonsense goes on and on. And I can't get over the whole man vs. god thing. It's ridiculous and has nothing to do with how any ancient person would ever think. Nor can I imagine how any society could try to kill the gods, when the gods give them the air to breathe, food to eat, water to drink, etc. The original film understood the myths and portrayed ancient Greek mentality much more accurately. This movie is just garbage, plain and simple.

(2012-05-09 02:33)

Nice Version

I thought they did a fairly good job of remaking the movie. I enjoyed it, but (stupid as this sounds) the lead actor's extremely short hair ruined the movie. It did not fit in with the fantasy of that period.

(2012-05-08 15:10)

Uneccesary Product Packaging

Everyone has shared their opinion of the movie, but I don't understand the growing trend for Blu-Ray's to be released with a DVD and digital copy. I could maybe understand the Digital Copy, but why the DVD? If someone is buying the Blu-Ray, why would they EVER watch the DVD version? They charge $16.99 for the DVD itself, but its thrown in this package as filler. At least have a product version where its only the Blu-Ray and sell it for less. Its a waste of materials and resources to include it with the Blu-Ray. Thats like throwing in a Ford Focus if you buy a Mercedes.

(2012-05-08 15:45)

Clash of the Titans

Perseus (Sam Worthington) was found by a fisherman in the middle of the sea when he was only a child. Raised by the fisherman, Perseus was treated like a son despite his mysterious beginnings. But when his adoptive family is killed by Hades (Ralph Fiennes) in the midst of the Greek city Argos' war against Zeus (Liam Neeson), Perseus finds out that he's a demigod, the son of Zeus. Rather than joining the gods in their war with the humans, Perseus joins the humans in an effort to find out how destroy Hades' Kraken, a legendary destroyer of cities, and in turn seek revenge for the death of his family. I'm fairly certain that I'm not the only one who, when this went into production, wondered why they chose to remake a 1981 film rather than creating a movie based on the hugely popular God of War video game series. I guess part of my reticence to this idea has to be my general disinterest in remakes, but at the same time one has to admit that video game movies generally fare worse than remakes as a rule. Then the casting started poring in for this remake/reimagining, and I started to get a bit excited about it. Sam Worthington proved his mettle as the best part of Terminator: Salvation and did a great job in Avatar, and anytime you have Liam Neeson and/ or Ralph Fiennes in a movie, especially together (they're first time on screen together since Schindler's List) you're most likely up for a good time. To fill out the brilliance on screen, Louis Leterrier was set to helm the project having done movies that have ranged from merely good (Transporter, The Incredible Hulk) to transcendent (Unleashed or Danny the Dog). Needless to say I was more than slightly interested to see what this would all lead to.While you might expect this film to completely re-imagine the film, but rather even down to the special effects the films has a much more old school feel to it. This is both one of the strengths of the movie and a detriment to the movie as well. While it utilizes all of the special effects at it's disposal, it still lumbers like an unweildy beast at times. The mix of CGI with the look of practical effects doesn't look as good as other movies that have come out recently, and other creations don't mix well with the practical creations. Overall, though, Leterrier knows how to work an action sequence, and the action really does work, even if the ending is slightly anticlimactic. The most disappointing aspect of the movie though is the 3-D transfer which doesn't appear to be in 3-D except the very beginning of the movie, other than that the cost of the 3-D surcharge is asking a lot of viewers, and proves just to be nothing more than a cash making gimmick by Warner Bros.With all of the great actors that were involved in this movie, the acting is strangely subpar. Ralph Fiennes hams it up as god of the underworld Hades as does Jason Flemyng as former King of Argos Arcisius, and Liam Neeson isn't given much to do as uber-god Zeus. Sam Worthington is surprisingly flat as the demigod Perseus. Most of the time Worthington appears to be bored or just not even trying. Of everyone on the cast the most believable actors are Pete Postelthwaite as Perseus adoptive father Spyros, and his demise early on in the movie is truly lamentable, and Gemma Arterton as Io, the ageless beauty who helps lead Perseus to his destiny of defeating the gods.I'm not saying the movie's horrible, this isn't Transformers 2, but it's also not Avatar either. All in all it's still a fun movie worth a look-see, but it's definitely not the best that the cast and crew could possibly have to offer. I enjoyed myself at the theater for this one (even if I was annoyed by paying the 3-D surcharge for nothing), and I suggest you give it a shot. You might find yourself slightly disappointed, but you'll probably still have fun as well.3/5

Robert W. (2012-05-08 05:09)

Ridiculously stone cold action flick---nothing more and nothing less...pure entertainment

There is plenty to say about Clash of The Titans. Is ithistorically/mythologically accurate? Well who cares for one...I meanit never was set out to retell in accurate details the religiousbeliefs of ancient Greece and if you're going to see it for that thenyou need your head examined. Films like this especially were made forpure and utter entertainment. That means if they take liberties withfamiliar characters or legends they are simply trying to put a new spinon things instead of dragging out the same old bit. The story for Clashof The Titans exists but barely matters and is only a surface storybecause this film thrives on absolutely mind blowing special effects,brutal and impressive battles and red blooded male heroes. Underdifferent circumstances this style of film could really belly up andturn out to be boring and over shot but instead this recipe works wholeheartedly for this film. You will sit there and your jaw will drop atthe incredible effects and battles which there are a few key moments inthe film that are nothing short of stunning. I did not see this in 3Dand don't particularly wish to mostly because I think the 3D for thisfilm was forced in at the last minute and the special effects areamazing enough with cheap gimmickry.A star has risen...Sam Worthington had an incredible 2009 havingstarred in Terminator 4, and of course the biggest film of all timeAvatar. And now 2010 gets kicked off with the first really big flick ofthe mid-Season blockbusters. I don't find Worthington is really starstatus...yet. I don't dislike him I just find him a little dullsometimes. He has an intensity about him but its a quite intensity, andnot quiet like Bruce Willis but truly under the radar and that couldhurt him. Still he leads the cast well and pulls off the underdog herovery well. Rising as a Hollywood legend Liam Neeson plays the godamongst gods Zeus. Its not a huge role but he definitely commandsscreen presence and instantly ups the ante on the cast. He is terrific.Ralph Fiennes is brilliant as Hades. He does an amazing job and theonly thing I can say about the role is that I wish there was more to itand I wish there was more scenes between him and Neeson as enemies andbrothers at odds. He is a terrific villain but sadly underused. AlexaDavalos is lovely but mostly a third tier character with little depthto her. The supporting cast that is Worthington's small army areterrific but mostly undeveloped characters meant to support only.Director Louis Leterrier is becoming a force in Hollywood. He didnearly the same thing with The Incredible Hulk reboot in 2008...greatspecial effects, decent story, all entertainment. However he did greataction and a good story for Danny The Dog (his first film) which Igreatly recommend. He was ideal for directing this. There were somedefinite mistakes in the film. First of all the most impressivecreature, battle and special effect was the incredible build up andappearance of the Kraaken. The unfortunate part is how incredibly fastit is defeated and vanishes. You want to pause and rewind just to seethe creature. They spent just a little bit too much time on thescorpion battles (as incredibly cool as they are) and not enough timeon the final battles. Clash of The Titans could have been a Lord Of TheRings sized epic but instead they put it together for sheerentertainment at a reasonable length and cut out what would have madeit story based. Unfortunate perhaps but the entertainment is non stopand you won't be disappointed but please don't see this withexpectations of mythologically enhanced story. 8.5/10

(2012-05-04 20:26)

Save your money. Buy the original.

This review is from: Clash of the Titans [Blu-ray] (Blu-ray) Its not worth the price of admission. Buy the original and see how it was suppose to be.

tieman64 (2012-05-04 09:26)

Jake Sully battles giant scorpion and gives head to evil sea monster

Humans battle CGI in "Clash of The Titans", both equally onedimensional.The film is mostly terrible, but there are some good things here. RaminDjawadi's score drums up excitement, there is one good action scene andthe film manages to avoid being camp and silly, a hard task for thesesword and sandal fantasy movies. See Brad Pitt's "Troy" to see howwrong this production could have gone.The film's portrayal of "Gods" and "Mythical Creatures" lacks power.Peter Jackson's "Lord of the Rings" movies weren't great, but Jacksonknew how to hype up his beasts and wizards with some some good olefashion bombast. When Jackson's wizards and sorcerers raised theirvoices, you wet your pants. In "Clash of The Titans", you're countingthe seconds till they shut up.7/10 – The target audience for this film has long abandoned cinema infavour for interactive media. So who is responsible for this film'sprofit? The middle aged and the elderly.