Metascore
39

Generally unfavorable reviews - based on 37 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 9 out of 37
  2. Negative: 13 out of 37
  1. 75
    For its intended audience, I suspect this will play as a great entertainment. I enjoyed myself, particularly after they released the Kraken.
  2. 75
    A roaring old-school action adventure for kids, with as many mythical beasts as a year at Hogwarts and a healthy dose of smiting without the crazed bloodlust of “300.”
  3. A popcorn movie that reaches back to the fantasy epics of old and forward into the digital future, where the word "unimaginable" no longer exists.
  4. Reviewed by: Richard Corliss
    70
    As to the chief complaint about Clash of the Titans -- that the movie stinks -- what can I say? I liked it. This is a full-throttle action-adventure, played unapologetically straight.
  5. As Zeus, Liam Neeson twinkles where Laurence Olivier kvetched, and Ralph Fiennes, as Zeus' dark brother Hades (who has egged on the revolt to challenge Zeus), has a slinky nastiness.
  6. 63
    This lavish, spectacular reworking of director Desmond Davis' beloved 1981 original is the rare sort of remake that actually makes sense: With all due respect (and copious apologies) to the generation that grew up with the first film, Clash of the Titans just wasn't very good.
  7. Clash of the Titans is ancient Greece at its cheesiest. It's a big hunk of feta comin' at ya in 3-D.
  8. 63
    Clash of the Titans is a flawed but mildly entertaining regurgitation of Greek mythological elements, but it's also an example of how poorly executed 3D can hamstring a would-be spectacle.
  9. 63
    For all the impressive (but not dazzling) effects, the scattered jokes and stentorian acting (especially from the Olympians), there’s not much here that will stick with you after the popcorn’s gone. But as any ancient Greek could tell you, that’s sort of the point.
  10. Reviewed by: Angie Errigo
    60
    Poorly written nonsense, but lovers of beefcake action will be happy enough with the heroes gymnastically vaulting monsters and slicing and dicing their way around the ancient world. An extra star for Ralph Fiennes, who is a god.
  11. Alas, it all comes off as hit and myth, mainly due to our leaden, buzz-cut hero, Perseus (Avatar’s Worthington, no Harry Hamlin), and zero sparks of heavenly-body chemistry or humor.
  12. Full of high flying action, nifty monsters, valiant heroes, plotting villains and impressive CGI.
  13. There’s little here to improve upon the stilted quality of the original, and it’s even more cumbersomely plotted.
  14. The movie hasn’t one character or sequence more memorable than the next. It’s as violent, humorless and brutally efficient as a Stalinist purge, a juggernaut of slaughter and smashing that stuns the senses and leaves nothing behind in the memory.
  15. 50
    It all passes quickly, as far as that goes, but when it’s over it passes entirely. And something that sells for a premium price ought to linger.
  16. Reviewed by: Nick Pinkerton
    50
    "Transporter" director Louis Leterrier is sure-footed when battling Gorgons and giant scorpions, but he muddles the comic-grotesque opportunity of the Stygian Witches.
  17. 50
    Modestly entertaining by the low standards of spring blockbusters. As with "Transporter 2" and "The Incredible Hulk," Leterrier aims no higher than competence and achieves just that.
  18. Medusa, at least, is fun to watch, and, as a bonus, we in the audience don’t have to worry about turning to stone (although, watching this film, your eyelids do get awfully heavy).
  19. 42
    Clash of the Titans redefines 3-D but in the wrong way; the movie is dull, dingy and, well, let's just say dull again.
  20. Charm, alas, is the one thing lost in all the banging and clanging of the remake.
  21. 40
    There are a number of cheeky winks from the filmmakers specifically aimed at Harryhausen fans; in the end, though, Leterrier's Clash of the Titans is nearly as messy an assemblage of mythic odds and ends as the original.
  22. The remake doesn’t as much improve on the original as match it goofily amusing moment for moment.
  23. Reviewed by: Brian Lowry
    40
    This "Titans" reboot merely demonstrates that building a more elaborate mousetrap doesn't necessarily produce a more entertaining one.
  24. 40
    Say what you like about the feuds of old, they exerted a dynastic thrust that made sense, whereas Leterrier’s magic tricks are the foe of logic; for some reason, the scorpions wind up as friendly transport for our heroes, so why battle them in the first place?
  25. Reviewed by: Claudia Puig
    38
    There's nothing worse than a boring behemoth.
  26. Reviewed by: Ty Burr
    38
    The results are -- there’s no other word for it -- a disaster.
  27. In the new Clash of the Titans, the effects are computerized, the hero is questionable and, instead of an owl, we get a turkey.
  28. 30
    Unlike the original -- which, in a crazy stroke of genius, allowed Shakespearean thespians like Claire Bloom and Maggie Smith, plus Bond babe Ursula Andress, to mix it up as jealous goddesses -- the new Clash of the Titans is frightfully low on babes.
  29. It isn’t a train wreck--a train wreck would be memorable. What’s wrong is wrong by design.
  30. It's doubtful that records are kept about this sort of thing, but consider the possibility that Clash of the Titans is the first film to actually be made worse by being in 3-D.
  31. Reviewed by: Cliff Doerksen
    30
    This remake is interesting mainly for the chance to see top-flight acting talent labor over dialogue so leaden you could cast bullets from it.
  32. 25
    The film is a sham, with good actors going for the paycheck and using beards and heavy makeup to hide their shame.
  33. Reviewed by: Amy Biancolli
    25
    No matter how you dissect it, Clash of the Titans will never, ever be a serious motion picture.
  34. Can't overcome mythic stupidity.
  35. What's wrong with this sad fiasco goes far beyond its visual deficits.
  36. Reviewed by: Dan Kois
    12
    In striving for a combination of grit and grandeur, Leterrier misses a chance to make the kind of camp classic that could have endured for generations. Instead, it's a muddled disappointment.
  37. Reviewed by: Dana Stevens
    10
    Clash seems to be deliberately steering clear of camp, when in fact it should have steered straight into camp and stepped on the gas.
User Score
4.8

Mixed or average reviews- based on 381 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Positive: 73 out of 174
  2. Negative: 65 out of 174
  1. Aug 27, 2010
    10
    This movie rocks!! It's far from perfect, with bad writing and acting, but its still awesome!! It's full of nonstop action, adventure, CGIThis movie rocks!! It's far from perfect, with bad writing and acting, but its still awesome!! It's full of nonstop action, adventure, CGI effects, and fantasy. A great tribute to the films of Ray Harrihaussen. The critics and the haters don't understand that its just a big, dumb, epic action spectacular!! Full Review »
  2. Apr 13, 2011
    1
    It's a shame that Sam Worthington comes across as so terribly humourless in this movie. Ultimately distinguished from the other warriors onlyIt's a shame that Sam Worthington comes across as so terribly humourless in this movie. Ultimately distinguished from the other warriors only by his incongruous buzz cut and beardless aspect, Sam's Perseus grimaces his way through every scene; his accent (now Australian, now American, now - gasp! - English) was the only unpredictable thing about his performance. Had he appeared to be enjoying himself, perhaps we would have too. As it was, the movie seemed like a randomly strung-together sequence of tenuously related events overseen by Perseus' perpetually frowning visage, culminating in a not-terribly-engaging monster battle. Full Review »
  3. Sep 17, 2010
    8
    The biggest problem with this film is the acting, but it didn't stopped it from being a very good film.The special effects are outstanding andThe biggest problem with this film is the acting, but it didn't stopped it from being a very good film.The special effects are outstanding and this is a big plus because if you don't like the film you can still be amazed by the realisticnes of this special effects and computer animation. But i didn't liked the film because of that but because it tells you about the Greek mythology, witch to me is all I need. Sure, it has got bad acting, and is a little cheesy but it is still a good film. Not great but also not bad movie. Solid Full Review »