“Interesting”
Swift shot: This is a new version of the old classic, with epic special effects and immersing performances by all cast members. Still, it didn’t manage to really capture my heart like the original; it will disappoint die-hard fans of the classic in several places. Where director Louis Leterrier tried to sparkle with novel approaches to familiar scenes, but it was like eating a low-fat Twinkie – what’s the point? Why mess with these scenes? This new version kills the momentum and destroys child-like memories of the original. Simply put, just because something looks better, doesn’t mean it tastes better. Clash of the Titans 2010 will leave you disgruntled and hungry for the classic!
What is it about?
Demi-god Perseus (Sam Worthington) and his winged steed, Pegasus, almost an afterthought in this version, are on a quest to kill the Kraken. Perseus is the son of Zeus (Liam Neeson) and a mortal queen (some hottie), though the queen had no idea she was tricked into bedding Zeus who took the form of her husband. The king, Acrisius (Jason Flemyng) disgraced and betrayed by Zeus, sends Perseus to die in Poseidon’s seas – but the gods protect him and see to it that he lives to fulfill his destiny – to destroy the only thing that even the gods fear, the Kraken!
The Queen of Argos, Cassiopeia (Polly Walker) has dared to claim her daughter Andromeda (Alexa Davalos) is more beautiful than even the goddess Aphrodite. Given that these gods and goddesses are the most vain creatures in the universe, they can’t let that slight go unpunished. So, naturally, these omnipotent creatures decide to wipe out their creations and start again. An interesting twist though, the gods feed off of man’s love, or fear, to survive as gods. So, to destroy man, is to destroy themselves.
Enter Perseus, the perfect solution to Zeus’ dilemma, like most great heroes, a half-ling of the competing factions. As Zeus struggles with his decision to destroy man, or at least Argos, his brother Hades (Ralph Fiennes) is plotting to thrive off of mortal’s fear – not love. So fear vs. love is the central theme of Titans. The morality of the gods rarely really ever comes into play, which I think the original did a much better job of portraying. While the struggle and the politics of the gods is touched on, the classic’s gods felt more alive – and less sparkly! Whoever decided to make Zeus sparkle like a damned Twi-god, I hope the REAL Zeus visits you in the form of an anal slug.
So, you be the judge, is it to be Zeus’ mercy or Hades’ wrath that draws man back to the gods? Or, can man stand on his own feet and shun the gods once and for all, as they sit high on Olympus and judge and seduce mortals? How will Perseus destroy the very thing even the gods fear?
Why I was disgruntled
I have always loved this story, the quest, putting your ass on the line for something bigger than yourself, of course in THIS version, vengeance is the main force driving the quest, not love. Perseus witnesses Hades kill his adoptive family and is bent on retribution for their loss. So, I guess the director was tired of focusing on love from the original, a very important part before which quite literally gets tacked on to the end of Clash of the Titans 2010. Fear and wrath, in this case – the opposite of love – leads the way.
My favorite characters and scenes were sliced to mere grains of sand in the vast desert of this film’s “epic” special effects. Yes, they were “riveting” and “spine-tingling” quite amazing in some places and a force to be reckoned with if that is all that you love, then so be it, lap it up like scorpion blood. If a film lacks substance where it counts, I don’t care how cool it looks in theaters or at home. I have always been a function over form guy.
The new generation of fans will love this film and tell us old-fogies to shove it up our butts. I can’t say I disagree wholeheartedly, taken on its own merit, this is a fine film, but I can name several scenes that I could prove to these youngins destroyed the film for me.
As I mentioned earlier, Zeus’ sparkling was overdone and unnecessary, there were some incredibly cheesy moments – of course us old fogies had the clock-work owl, but somehow it didn’t come across as complete cheese to our adolescent minds. Who knows, maybe Siskel and Ebert tore the 1981 film to shreds for being cheesy too?
The scenes I loved as a kid were all there, for the most part, yet even though they looked so much better and I even found empathy for Medusa, the Gorgon, a creature who terrified me as a child, missing was the sheer terror and tension of the original confrontation. When you see it, you will know what I mean. The witches scene was far too brief, certain characters were lost and others added that I didn’t care for.
Even the heroine changes in 2010, enter Io (Gemma Arterton) who acts as the guide and moral compass for Perseus and his men. She is a sort of limbo soul, trapped on the earth for, guess what, refusing a god. These gods need to stop seducing our women!
Io was an interesting character, a beauty on screen, and a bad-ass too boot. Really? Hollyweird just couldn’t accept the damsel in distress theme, they had to ratchet it up a notch and add a female ass kicker. I thought Medusa played that part quite nicely myself, but, whatever, this isn’t MY Clash of the Titans – you can have it, kids. I prefer the original, in all its cheese.
Bottom line for Clash of the Titans, save your 3D money for another film, don’t go into it expecting certain memories from the past to stay intact – you will be INCREDIBLY disappointed if you do. Have an open mind, experience it as a new angle to your old classic.
I just found this blog a while ago when a buddy suggested it to me. I’ve been an avid reader ever since.
Just watched it. I agree, this was more flash than substance, content to transition from action scene to action scene with barely a breath for anything else.The medusa scene was a complete disappointment – though the cgi did kick some arse – where was the suspense? The tension? The hairs on my neck laid flat the entire time!
Besides Tron, I don't have high hopes for this coming wave of 80's remakes.
I am really looking forward to Red Dawn, and since it is different enemies, it can be a new version and I won’t care, Clash of the Titans took specific scenes and tried to re-imagine them. I think Red Dawn can be a whole new film and stand ok on its own. We’ll see though
You seem to give it 3.5 stars just for nostalgia. But your review would seem to indicate as less deserving rating.
Nah, I stand by it, check out our breakdown of what the stars mean, here: http://iratefilms.com/rating-system/ or just click above where it says Our Ratings. This was one that wasn't worthy of a 4 or a 3, so it needed a 3.5.
My problem with these 80's remakes, is those who saw the original will always be disappointed because their trying to find that first taste of originality…and their not going to get it because not only have you already seen the story on film — your paying to watch a movie that isn't a mystery and quite frankly, as you know what will happen and who, its more of a test to see how good or bad it holds up against the original film.
I cite the third installment of Star Wars: The Revenge of the Sith. What a less than appreciated piece of the trilogy huh? You already knew that Darth would die at some point, that he was going to trash everyone after excepting the Emperor's bidding, and you knew regardless of how great the fight scene was — Obi was going to walk away from it and Anakin was going to turn into Darth Vader. If you were a huge fan of Star Wars — you already knew this… and the entire show was simply a re-fresher with your mind attuned to how bad it was going to be versus what your imagination propped it up to the first time.
I would wait for the DVD anyway, only because I wouldn't be motivated to pay for something I already saw — having this one being hyped with a special 2D gimmick to make me go. Throw in a new girl, some affects — its all the same. At least in my view.