Clash of the Titans

With Avatar raking in close to $2.7 billion, and Alice In Wonderland edging $700 million, 3-D film has got no signs of slowing down anytime soon. So film studios are inevitably going to be releasing 3-D films like running water. Case in point: Warner Bros. decision to convert the originally 2-D blockbuster Clash of the Titans to 3-D despite being in post-production, and it’s release date being only weeks away, after a test screening proved to be a ‘roaring success’. They must have seen a totally different film than this reviewer did, because the lackluster and disappointing remake of the campy 1981 original combines a lazy and daft script with sloppy and cheap visuals, making for an ultimately disappointing outing. Leterrier tries hard, but ends up losing sight on his audience, more focused on the effects and visuals than if the audience can enjoy it or keep attentive. The plot is as simple and dumb as it gets, and can pretty much be summed up in a few short phrases. Kill Medusa to kill the Kraken, and kill Hades to get revenge while you’re at it. Oh, and don’t forget to keep Perseus alive. Anyway, we follow the story of demi-God Perseus (a gruff Sam Worthington), ‘the bastard son of Zeus’ and his quest to find Hades (Ralph Fiennes) after killing his ‘father’ (Pete Postlethwaite). On the way, they to set out to kill Medusa to get her head to kill the Kraken. Yup. The good thing about Clash is that it doesn’t take itself too seriously. That said, it’s not the fun-filled romp that Leterrier and co. want it to be. Most of the enjoyment comes from the hideous but gut-bustingly hilarious dialogue. Neeson and Fiennes (see what they did there?), make absolute fools of themselves, with Fiennes’ presence being unintentionally hilarious and too Voldemort-esque, and Neeson being the definition of camp. Worthington is good enough, but lacks charisma, and his Aussie accented Perseus doesn’t work. Gemma Arterton is given little to do, and Mads Mikklesen is unconvincing as a good guy. Clash’s biggest shortfall, though, is its so-called 3-D. The 3-D transfer ruins the film, with all the action and otherwise beautiful locations being a blur. If you took your glasses off, the film would look exactly the same. The CGI is surprisingly pretty average, although the Kraken is pretty darn spectacular. What prevents it from being a total dud are its action set-pieces, and this is where Leterrier obviously excels. As seen in The Incredible Hulk, Leterrier produces some similarly bonkers set-pieces here, including the scorpion attack, the Medusa chase and the admittedly underwhelming but decent enough Kraken attack, which is what saves the film from its dull first half. Unfortunately, the 3-D transfer annoyingly obscures the action. Some of the sets and locations look great, and some of the creatures look like the birth child of something from a Guillermo Del Toro dream, a lot of the other costumes and effects look cheap. Leterrier’s attempts at emotion and romance don’t really click, and a lot of the film, despite being presented in 3-D, is one-dimensional, with a high lack of characterization. It’s a lost opportunity and a crushingly disappointing return to the swords and sandals epic genre. There’s not much to recommend, and it’s extremely silly, but if you do go, then don’t waste your money with the unnecessary 3-D.

1 thought on “Clash of the Titans”

  1. I heard the 3D effect was pretty bad, but I didn’t see it in 3D. Mostly because I don’t buy it as the future of cinema. You did sum up my feelings towards this movie, however I disagree with you on the fact that you believe this movie isn’t taking itself seriously. This movie felt like it wanted to be taken seriously.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Related Post