Warner Bros. Pictures | Release Date: April 1, 2010
4.9
USER SCORE
Mixed or average reviews based on 422 Ratings
USER RATING DISTRIBUTION
Positive:
131
Mixed:
160
Negative:
131
WATCH NOW
Stream On
Stream On
Review this movie
VOTE NOW
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Check box if your review contains spoilers 0 characters (5000 max)
4
BillyBApr 10, 2010
the actors did their best, but it all came down to the story, it was just ridiculous. i feel i could of wrote a better script then that.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
2
GregAApr 10, 2010
Before you pay all that money for actors and special effects you need a good script. One without giant plot holes or nameless characters you care nothing about. If you don't get the script right...the film is DOOMED from the start. Such Before you pay all that money for actors and special effects you need a good script. One without giant plot holes or nameless characters you care nothing about. If you don't get the script right...the film is DOOMED from the start. Such was the case with Clash of the Plot Holes! Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
9
BobRApr 11, 2010
People take things too seriously for One Herclues messed with Greek Mytholgy this was more on the right pages of greek mytholgy. Two if you read the reviews your going to hate it because they are over crtical of the movie just go see it with People take things too seriously for One Herclues messed with Greek Mytholgy this was more on the right pages of greek mytholgy. Two if you read the reviews your going to hate it because they are over crtical of the movie just go see it with out expecting much its a remake of a classic and everything is there too enjoy. Its a Summer block buster all Fighting story line is ok and Acting from liam nesson was excellent. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
10
JameyGApr 12, 2010
I thought that this movie was awesome when i saw the preview i knew right then and there that i had to see it. All of the action and movements were great. I thought it was so good that I saw it twice in the same week. I saw it in 2D the I thought that this movie was awesome when i saw the preview i knew right then and there that i had to see it. All of the action and movements were great. I thought it was so good that I saw it twice in the same week. I saw it in 2D the first time and in 3D the second time. But let me say this if you want to see it in 3D, don't bother its a waste of money. But some of you losers that say it suck have no taste in movies!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I also thought that Sam Worthington was good in this movie like he was in avatar and in Terminater Salvation. He's got my vote for actor of the year! Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
7
N.LuckyApr 13, 2010
Despite some corny lines, next to nothing in the character development department, and a blatant rape on Greek Mythology, I quite enjoyed this film. It had a lot of great moments, and though the acting was pretty average, Gemma Arterton Despite some corny lines, next to nothing in the character development department, and a blatant rape on Greek Mythology, I quite enjoyed this film. It had a lot of great moments, and though the acting was pretty average, Gemma Arterton proved to be a very nice addition as Io, and Ralph Fiennes was very slinky as Hades. Liam Neeson was good, but didn't really jump out of the box for me. All in all, a very enjoyable film, especially when Medusa loses her head. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
9
timothyvanhorenbeeckApr 13, 2010
This movie doesn't have a brilliant story or dialogues, it's not gonna win oscars or other prices, but people re not going to this movie for the story or the dialogues, people go to this movie for awesome effects, just like transformers.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
1
NinjaXApr 14, 2010
This was like a SyFy movie with a high budget, less drama, and worse acting. 95% of the characters in the movie were so throwaway, they didn't even have names. To prove this point, the ending credits only showed Actor Names. My Summary This was like a SyFy movie with a high budget, less drama, and worse acting. 95% of the characters in the movie were so throwaway, they didn't even have names. To prove this point, the ending credits only showed Actor Names. My Summary of the Movie: Pouty Persius needs to get a medusa head so he can kill the Kraken while people suddenly appear just so they can die around him. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
8
NickHApr 17, 2010
Movie was actually pretty good. Actually maybe better than i expected. I wanted to see this movie because the God of war games. Creek mythology has been always interesting.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
3
MarkRApr 18, 2010
This is one of those "so bad, it's good" kind of movies. If you watch it with friends, you will have a lot of fun pointing out everything that's wrong with it. It butchers mythology, acting, and common logic so much. If you're This is one of those "so bad, it's good" kind of movies. If you watch it with friends, you will have a lot of fun pointing out everything that's wrong with it. It butchers mythology, acting, and common logic so much. If you're having an off day, go see this movie and you will feel better about yourself in comparison. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
4
JoradTApr 18, 2010
Definition of mediocrity. This film was really dull. Never do I fall asleep in films but this almost made me fall asleep. None of the characters were at all interesting (were the exception of the two hunters who barely had much screen time), Definition of mediocrity. This film was really dull. Never do I fall asleep in films but this almost made me fall asleep. None of the characters were at all interesting (were the exception of the two hunters who barely had much screen time), and almost all the scenes were dull, even the action scenes. The gods seemed like wimps and the last battle between the kraken was a big disappointment. One final point is that if you do go see this film do not, and I repeat DO NOT, watch it in 3D. There is literally NONE in the film. Biggest waste of 3D ever. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
0
JamesDApr 2, 2010
How did they screw this up? Such a waster. Rent the 1981, save the money.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
3
HarlanSApr 2, 2010
The original movie is by far much much better. I was sadly disappointed after watching this remake. I love the original and was hoping that it would or could match the feeling of danger, excitement and awe. Unfortunately, most of it is a let The original movie is by far much much better. I was sadly disappointed after watching this remake. I love the original and was hoping that it would or could match the feeling of danger, excitement and awe. Unfortunately, most of it is a let down. The fight with Medusa was just awful and had no climax at all. Perseus as a fisherman who all of a sudden becomes a warrior and knows how to use a sword ?? I dont think so. Atleast in the original he was training with swords from a young age. NOT a good movie at all. Such a shame .... I had such HIGH HIGH hopes. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
3
JimGApr 2, 2010
The only thing that kept me from giving this an outright 0 is that it looked nice and I liked the final scene with the Kraken. Now that we have the good stuff ou of the way...The movie was terrible in just about every aspect, awful dialogue, The only thing that kept me from giving this an outright 0 is that it looked nice and I liked the final scene with the Kraken. Now that we have the good stuff ou of the way...The movie was terrible in just about every aspect, awful dialogue, no character development, and a hypercondensed story were the least of this movie's problems. Everything about it was just awful. Even the name is unfitting, this story has nothing to do with Titans. I think this was supposed to be the story of Perseus, the reason I say I think is because they butchered this ancient greek myth so badly that it was nearly impossible to recognize. The only thing's they really got right were Perseus being a demigod, slaying medusa, and the Kraken. They left out the reason why he needed medusas head (it was not to destroy the Kraken), Athena's Shield, Hermes' boots, and the nymphs and the helm of darkness, Atlas, and his marriage with andromeda is scratched as well as the part where he turns an entire hall of enemies to stone. Sorry for the mythology rant but it is realy irksome to see such a fabulous legend twisted so badly. There is much more I could say but I think I will just finish by saying if you are thinking about going to see this, you really might as well just go see the Lightning Theif instead, same basic story except different take on it. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
8
ThomasS.Apr 2, 2010
This movie is pure fun. It's not a great film, it's got its fair share of issues, but as a popcorn flick it delivers. I personally think the original 1981 "Clash" is overrated (I love all the other Harryhausen films, but Hamlin is This movie is pure fun. It's not a great film, it's got its fair share of issues, but as a popcorn flick it delivers. I personally think the original 1981 "Clash" is overrated (I love all the other Harryhausen films, but Hamlin is lame and boring, the story is convoluted, and while the effects have their moments that shine, overall they bog the movie down). As a remake, I find this one, while imperfect, to be superior if for only being enjoyable . This is the kind of movie I'd throw in when I want to watch something that offers a little more than 1999's "The Mummy," but not as heavy-handed on the drama as "Gladiator." Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
1
CMilesApr 30, 2010
if you would love a film that resembles an episode of channel Fives The Legendary Adventures Of Hercules then get down to the cinema and waste your money on this jumbo sized piece of cinema cack!! the costumes and effects are just as bad as if you would love a film that resembles an episode of channel Fives The Legendary Adventures Of Hercules then get down to the cinema and waste your money on this jumbo sized piece of cinema cack!! the costumes and effects are just as bad as the story and the story just as bad as the directing, in all a terrible piece of film. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
3
AlexanderCApr 3, 2010
The only comparison to the lack of story to this movie was the sequel to the impressive Transformers movie adaption. In Clash of the Titans, Worthington uses the same monotone style of acting as he did in Avatar. The only difference is that The only comparison to the lack of story to this movie was the sequel to the impressive Transformers movie adaption. In Clash of the Titans, Worthington uses the same monotone style of acting as he did in Avatar. The only difference is that it works in Avatar, because of the amazing world and cast around him. In "COTT", I never felt like I was seeing anything new. Big scorpions? We saw that in Transformers. The kraken was cool, but the build-up to its release was more fun than the actual monster itself. The story, and even the acting was secondary to the action, The only impressive parts were when Persius was fighting one on one with any of the monsters. Everything else seemed like it was a mash up of previous CGI blockbusters. It sort of felt like 2 hours of the arena scene from Star Wars episode 2. Even THAT scene got tiring. The Music had no real effect on me. There wasn't a single theme that really made the movie distinct. Much unlike movies like "Star Trek", The music was not used to portray heroes and villains, but to portray the intensity of the scene. This was one of the reasons that I never felt truly sympathetic to Worthington's character in the movie. The acting, like I stated before, was not really helpful to the plot. It felt like nobody in the movie really wanted the role. Worthington seemed to be filling the shoes of a character that wasn't really meant for him. Liam Neeson and Ralph Fiennes were the only two real bright spots in the film for me. Neeson makes Zeus seem more than a one dimensional god. The only problem I have with the character is that he seems bipolar at times, and kind of stupid too. Fiennes basically plays Voldemort with hair, but it is still a good role for him. He looks good as Hades. As for the story, where is any of it explained. In the scorpion fighting scene, the camera is so shaky, that the fighting doesn't seem like part of the plot, but like a bad video game sequence that just needs to fill up some time. It took me 5 minutes to realize they were fighting 2 scorpions. As for the story, there isn't really a story, and the "journey" isn't really a journey. When they are traveling, there isn't really a sequence like "Lord of the Rings", where I am really blown away by landscape. Do they really expect me to believe that something like the Kraken exists, without anything on land to really rival the excitement of it? The whole point of a movie like this is the journey itself, not the result. I felt cheated when the heroes didn't really progress. And don't try to tell me Persius changes, because he doesn't. He is angry at the Gods in the beginning and the end, and never really changes. He just uses different weapons. You have to wonder: if they had all these ideas for awesome Greek Gods and monsters, why did they spend what felt like half an hour on some random scorpions, and some ugly rock faced people. People want to see more ancient Greek monsters Medusa, who by the way, looked terrible in the movie. I was extremely disappointed, and you kind of wonder why they don't re-imagine the Odyssey, or atleast make something original. What have we learned about remakes? They don't work. They especially don't work when the movie isn't about what the title implies. What Titans are actually fighting eachother? And didn't Zeus say that he was supposed to turn the humans on each other? When did that happen. It seemed like it was just humans versus Gods. The Clash of What Titans? Unless this movie is going to have two parts, which would give more to character development, this is probably one of the most disappointing movies I have ever seen. O, and how does Persius know to put his sword to the heavens, and how does he know how to ride a horse that is flying through the air with no saddle? And where does he gain sympathy for the princess, and where in the movie is plot primary? 3.5/10 > Only because the Kraken was pretty cool, Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
0
DanielH.Apr 3, 2010
Terrible movie. Plot holes up the butt. Cheesy lines. The only good acting was from Liam Neeson, and he was in it for 10 minute of the whole movie. Terrible. Terrible. Terrible.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
0
YaelEApr 3, 2010
I'm sorry, but this movie was incredibly lame and relied solely on overblown CGI effects. The acting, plot, characters was deathly boring, unimaginative. There was no charm, zero personality, chemistry or point. When compared to the I'm sorry, but this movie was incredibly lame and relied solely on overblown CGI effects. The acting, plot, characters was deathly boring, unimaginative. There was no charm, zero personality, chemistry or point. When compared to the 1981 original with great acting, memorable scenes and a very gorgeous leading man (Harry Hamlin - RIAOW) the original, is a masterpiece in comparison. The 2010 version just doesn't make sense at all. It's a mess, a campy Ralph Fiennes redoes his Harry Potter character and Sam Worthinton I'm sorry to say was a HORRIFIC choice (AND I"M AUSTRALIAN !!!!!). Gemma Aterton would turn up to the opening of an envelope being in every movie possible, no matter how cheesy. Agness Deyn as Aphrodite is another WTF? moment in this film. I thought perhaps Michael C. Hall as Perseus would have lifted this movie 100%, but I think he had cancer treatments at the time......ALL I can say to this shambles of a movie is SHAME SHAME SHAME. I study History and Classics at university and this would inexcusably DREADFUL. Don't loose your brain cells on this lame duck !!!!! MINUS 20 OUT OF TEN is my score. LIAM NEESON.....WHAT THE HELL WERE YOU THINKING ????!!!! Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
10
CaseyF.Apr 3, 2010
Epic movie, I'm going to see it again tomorrow. It's a simple plot that doesn't get too full of itself, full of awesome characters and intense action that kept me excited throughout, and I don't see how the critics Epic movie, I'm going to see it again tomorrow. It's a simple plot that doesn't get too full of itself, full of awesome characters and intense action that kept me excited throughout, and I don't see how the critics didn't enjoy the film. It's a remake, so it isn't gonna be perfect, but where remakes are concerned Clash of the Titans is one of the best. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
4
ChrisGApr 4, 2010
You will hate this if: You can't stand bad acting, don't like huge somewhat confusing action scenes, or want to see an accurate protrayal of the greek stories. If you can keep from thinking to much about what's wrong with it, You will hate this if: You can't stand bad acting, don't like huge somewhat confusing action scenes, or want to see an accurate protrayal of the greek stories. If you can keep from thinking to much about what's wrong with it, it can be entertaining. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
3
ChristopherA.Apr 4, 2010
Most of the characters, especially Perseus, looked much better in the original. The only improvements it had over the original were the visual effects, Liam Neeson and Ralph Fiennes. The Kraken also looked very good. The 3-D was also Most of the characters, especially Perseus, looked much better in the original. The only improvements it had over the original were the visual effects, Liam Neeson and Ralph Fiennes. The Kraken also looked very good. The 3-D was also terrible. It looks as though it wasn't in 3-D at all. It didn't make it look better like it did with Avatar and no jumping out at you. That was a waste of an extra $3 (the tickets cost $11 each for 3-D at nighttime from where I go). They should have just taken the original and used the exact same plot, only that it would have the visual effects and the actors in this film. The ending in the original was better and Sam Worthington acting is less on par with his roles in Terminator Salvation and Avatar. If you ever go see this movie, watch the ordinary version. It'll save you a few bucks. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
6
PhilVApr 4, 2010
I gave this a 6 because i was entertained by some of the action but like a lot of movies lately i did not connect emotionally to any of the characters and the story just fell short. I liked the story much better in the original and was I gave this a 6 because i was entertained by some of the action but like a lot of movies lately i did not connect emotionally to any of the characters and the story just fell short. I liked the story much better in the original and was really looking forward to this with the updated visuals. They only really showed 2 of the gods in this one but they were well done by Liam Neeson and Ralph Fiennes but i enjoyed the different interactions all the gods had with each other in the first Clash. I also liked when Perseus was in love with Andromeda in the first one and that her queen mother said she was more beautiful than the god they prayed to instead of the humans waging war on the gods and they had hades instead of posseidon (trying to please the god of war crowd i suspect, which i am one and god of war is way better than this movie by the way), Also Kalabos and Pegasus were much better integrated in the story in the first one. If you haven't seen it do so and you'll agree thought the special effects are laughable. The special effects were very good and the sets were good in the new one but very dissapointed in the story. The Last Airbender i believe will deliver the story i am looking for because its being done by a director who believes in telling a good story. If that one dissapoints I am going to shed a tear for the lost art of good storytelling in a summer blockbuster type movie. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
1
JoeMApr 5, 2010
Mundane in every possible aspect. Poor action, special fx, acting, plot, there is not one impressive thing in this movie. And I went in with low standards hoping to be impressed.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
0
MalachiCApr 6, 2010
This is one of the worst movies I have ever seen. The wardrobe was ridiculous (what was the medusa wearing? why was the armor from the iron age of rome in ancient greece), the acting was atriocious, the plot butchered greek mythology (a This is one of the worst movies I have ever seen. The wardrobe was ridiculous (what was the medusa wearing? why was the armor from the iron age of rome in ancient greece), the acting was atriocious, the plot butchered greek mythology (a KRAKEN is of Norse Myth; Hades used a helmet given to him by the Cyclops to defeat the titans), there was no character development, and there were numerous plot holes. This movie embarrassingly butchers Greek Mythology and doesn't do the original Clash of the Titans any justice. Unless your IQ is approaching zero, this movie will not be enjoyable for you, even if you are completely wasted. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
4
JimWApr 7, 2010
A decent action film, nothing special. Poor script-writing, great CGI, weak and predicable story. Neelson and Fiennes are great as the gods but are the rare shining light in this mostly dull film. Some moments such as the kraken fight and A decent action film, nothing special. Poor script-writing, great CGI, weak and predicable story. Neelson and Fiennes are great as the gods but are the rare shining light in this mostly dull film. Some moments such as the kraken fight and medusa chase brighten it up but mostly this is a fairly weak film. Only worth seeing if you REALLY like CGI filled action films. No where near as good as the trailer suggests. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
5
RyanDApr 8, 2010
The film was okay. Nothing special and quite a boring plot. Most the film was watching the main characters travelling from one place to another, which made it quite tedious, especially when the the majority of acting was very bad. However, The film was okay. Nothing special and quite a boring plot. Most the film was watching the main characters travelling from one place to another, which made it quite tedious, especially when the the majority of acting was very bad. However, there was some parts of good action, very good animations and quite nice visually. Nothing compared to Avatar though. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
7
JeffHApr 9, 2010
The point of this movie isn't the acting, the thin story or the terse dialogue. The reason I went to see this movie and had fun was that it was a decent popcorn movie, or a "ride" as they say. It was all about how cool it the next The point of this movie isn't the acting, the thin story or the terse dialogue. The reason I went to see this movie and had fun was that it was a decent popcorn movie, or a "ride" as they say. It was all about how cool it the next action sequence going to be. Instead of getting ridiculous and falling apart on the third act, like say Transformers or any superhero movie, this one just starts out ridiculous and stays the course. It was fun. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
1
MchaelP.May 1, 2010
The original movie is a classic. The remake rates as one of the work movies I have seen. The plot line is choppy, scenes are overacted and contrived. I feel bad for the actors who now have to have this movie to their credit. They really The original movie is a classic. The remake rates as one of the work movies I have seen. The plot line is choppy, scenes are overacted and contrived. I feel bad for the actors who now have to have this movie to their credit. They really shouldn't put this on their resume' as an accomplishment. They had an opportunity to make this a great movie. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
3
DavidPApr 12, 2010
Post Avatar I think we've reached a point in technical achievement where great effects simply cannot sell a movie anymore, simply because they are becoming standard, even mundane. As with Alice in Wonderland, this film had great special Post Avatar I think we've reached a point in technical achievement where great effects simply cannot sell a movie anymore, simply because they are becoming standard, even mundane. As with Alice in Wonderland, this film had great special effects but lacked the kind of story that could make you really get lost in them. Unlike Alice this film lacked the caliber of performances that could at least keep you entertained. A dozen different ideas were flying around in this film and none of them was developed to the point of interest. The 'bling' on Zeus was simply annoying to watch, the 3 D was a poor afterthought that made good cinematography end up looking like bad green screening. Sam Worthington, who was so enjoyable in Avatar and the saving grace of Terminator: Salvation, has little to work with in the one dimensional role he's given and still manages to underachieve. The only good thing about this film was that it made me smile in those brief moments where it reminded me of the original, admittedly campy classic. If you haven't seen it, you should, and skip this big budget monstrosity. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
7
ScottJApr 12, 2010
Not bad action movie with decent special effects. I wish they would have developed the plot more and characters. Hades and Zeus were good but they could have done better job with Perseus role. Personally, I liked the 1981 original film that Not bad action movie with decent special effects. I wish they would have developed the plot more and characters. Hades and Zeus were good but they could have done better job with Perseus role. Personally, I liked the 1981 original film that I saw 20+ years ago as it had better plot and characters acting . Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
7
RickAApr 13, 2010
I so do like these kinds of movies. I do not think that it was as bad as made out to be. Acting B+, story B-, special effects A-. Worth the money but would probably would not see it twice, but would own it on video.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
5
JamesH.Apr 14, 2010
This movie isn't as good as the campy and fun 1981 version. It is completely humorless. It does have some good CGI, however, and that held my interest. The story doesn't follow the 1981 version - there are desert creatures that This movie isn't as good as the campy and fun 1981 version. It is completely humorless. It does have some good CGI, however, and that held my interest. The story doesn't follow the 1981 version - there are desert creatures that play a big role here not in the original, the scorpions are not created the same way, he falls in love with a different woman, etc etc. I've also seen many 3D films the last 2 years and this is the worse of them all. Some images are doubled, and some images of people's heads look like there is a growth on the back of the head. They obviously added the 3D after the movie was shot to capitalize on the 3D craze. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
7
AVApr 14, 2010
Very unoriginal but still enjoyable.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
4
ScrambledPixelApr 15, 2010
For all of its CGI wizardry, its kinetic action sequences and its retrofitted 3D, there is no masking the fact that Clash Of The Titans is a pretty flat film. A remake of the campy 1981 original, the film takes itself much too seriously and, For all of its CGI wizardry, its kinetic action sequences and its retrofitted 3D, there is no masking the fact that Clash Of The Titans is a pretty flat film. A remake of the campy 1981 original, the film takes itself much too seriously and, failing to see the absurdity of its hyper macho subject matter, is all the more amusing as a result. Clash Of The Titans opens with the camera drifting through the cosmos. The stars are forming diagrammatic constellations while an accompanying voice over delivers a patronisingly basic overview of Greek mythology. This introduction inadvertently sets the tone of the film in two distinct ways. Firstly the sequence is entirely CGI but makes no noticeable use of 3D, a foreshadowing of the disappointing implementation of the technology throughout the rest of the film. Secondly, the history lesson style of the prelude underestimates its audience dramatically, a condescending direction that again, is continued throughout the film. Even more clumsily plotted than the original, Clash Of The Titans focuses on Demigod Perseus (Worthington) as he seeks revenge against Hades (Fiennes) for the murder of his adopted family. His revenge is placed against a backdrop of war and anarchy, with the Greeks warring against the Gods. While this premise is an interesting one, the characters are so one dimensional, their motivations so artificial and their dialogue so forgettable that the film quickly boils down to: fighting, walking, fighting, walking, repeat ad nauseum. In the middle of the film the tangled plot lines becomes so contrived and clichéd that the writers simply kill off 80% of the characters to avoid writing a decent conclusion to their journeys, it Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
4
BrentPApr 18, 2010
"Clash of the Titans" fails on many levels. There is virtually no real character development that leads viewers to feel for Perseus and root for his success. The 3-D is fabricated and should have been left in the 2-D version. The excitement "Clash of the Titans" fails on many levels. There is virtually no real character development that leads viewers to feel for Perseus and root for his success. The 3-D is fabricated and should have been left in the 2-D version. The excitement is drained out of the film because of an over emphasis on special effect sequences and little attention to human experience. The highlight of the film is in the trailer. "Release to Kraken!" is the only reason for seeing this film. Of course, Liam Neeson could say anything and we'd all take him serious. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
8
KevinGApr 25, 2010
Well i read some of the critics say this movie was junk. But my friend said it was awesome,so i went and saw it. I thought it was very entertaining and exciting.The monsters and bad guys were done very well. Good story etc.Fighting scenes Well i read some of the critics say this movie was junk. But my friend said it was awesome,so i went and saw it. I thought it was very entertaining and exciting.The monsters and bad guys were done very well. Good story etc.Fighting scenes were very good. Alot of action. I'm the first one to say if a movie is junk and they're alot of bad movies out there. Maybe because it didn't have a gay charactor in the movie that some people didn't like it. I just don't know why some people thought this movie was bad. But also some people loved dream girls which was horrid. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
4
KundKAug 27, 2010
Unfortunately, this was a waste of money and talent (where applicable). In the olden times they had stories but no way to put the spectacle on the screen. Now, when the imagination is the only limit, they cannot make a coherent story evenUnfortunately, this was a waste of money and talent (where applicable). In the olden times they had stories but no way to put the spectacle on the screen. Now, when the imagination is the only limit, they cannot make a coherent story even based on the Greek mythology - the treasure trove of some of the greatest stories in the history of mankind. It is best to ignore this mess and watch the original in all it's cheesy glory and than rent the other Harryhausen masterworks. Compared with this, Prince of Persia was deep, complex and three-dimensional. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
4
theshermanatorAug 15, 2010
This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. I really wanted to like this film. I actually really thought it had potential from watching the original trailer but as Clash of the Titans is now, it's a completely average and underwhelming film. Which brings me to the Kraken. Throughout the film the ever present threat of the Kraken is supposed to build up anticipation of what this monstrous thing looks like and the power it must posses. Then at the end of the film they kill off the Kraken within five minutes! Seriously monsters throughout the movie were stronger than the wimp they made the Kraken out to be. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
0
markAug 16, 2010
This movie could have been worth the money if only Liam Neeson would have proclaimed ... "Wee-lease the KWAKEN!!".

And what a poor Kraken it was. It was the Eddie the Eagle Edwards of Krakens.
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
0
ChaunteAug 16, 2010
I grew up watching this film and hoped the "remake" would be the same story with newer special effects......WRONG! The acting sucked, the story was changed and the only part that made sense was Liam Neeson as Zeus. When will Hollywood learnI grew up watching this film and hoped the "remake" would be the same story with newer special effects......WRONG! The acting sucked, the story was changed and the only part that made sense was Liam Neeson as Zeus. When will Hollywood learn to stop remaking the classics (which they obviously cannot top) and start coming out with their own ideas? This movie did nothing more that infuriate me as the original was one of the best films ever made. Whats next...a remake of Beast Master, Mary Poppins.....? What a waste of an hour and 45 minutes of my life. The director and main actor should be shot! Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
4
shlugalugAug 27, 2010
This was a good time kill but Clash of the Titans is left to be a memory rather than sat on my DVD shelf. The special effects are good but at times, itâ
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
5
pinattarJun 30, 2012
Not as bad as critics make it seem, not not as good as the trailer made it look. The first 20-30 minutes were very entertaining, but after that I started to get bored. The action scene were drawn out and in some cases really poorly edited. AsNot as bad as critics make it seem, not not as good as the trailer made it look. The first 20-30 minutes were very entertaining, but after that I started to get bored. The action scene were drawn out and in some cases really poorly edited. As for the story, it was interesting. I don't remember much from Greek mythology, so I'm not sure how "accurate" the characters are. There was one thing that keep on bugging me, why did Gemma Arterton go with them, what was her reason? Was it to protect Perseus? And how did she find them since she didn't leave with them? She just walks up the Perseus when they're in the forest, and they make no attempt to explain why she was there. The acting was what you would expect from an action movie. Ralph Fiennes basically played Voldemort for the first half of the movie which I thought was amusing. As for Sam Worthington, he was not that good. But oddly when I was watching the movie I noticed that he didn't speak that much, not sure if that was a deliberate attempt to mask his acting or not. The special effects were cool, they reminded me a lot of Transformers they way they had the light make those horizontal streaks on the screen. In all it is a below average action movie. 5/10. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
2
FLOPAD180Sep 8, 2010
Ok, i screwed up and accidently wrote 10 on my last review. there is no romantice appeal to this movie and nothing ive never seen before. Overall this movie was dry. like a desert fire in my mouth. DRY
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
5
TokyochuchuAug 26, 2012
Clash of the Titans reminds me of old school adventure films like Sinbad & The Eye of the Tiger or, uh, Clash of the Titans. It's certainly not high art but then those movies never were. This Clash of the Titans is, however, good clean fantasy fun.
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
2
BathmatJan 26, 2011
Ok, so my last review sucked. I don't usually review movies but I know what makes a good movie if I ever bothered to make one. I'd make sure the movie makes sense to a wide audience, I'd generally avoid 3D, I'd make sure the actors ar good,Ok, so my last review sucked. I don't usually review movies but I know what makes a good movie if I ever bothered to make one. I'd make sure the movie makes sense to a wide audience, I'd generally avoid 3D, I'd make sure the actors ar good, I'd make the movie plot innovative and original, I would make sure the movie isn't obviously greenscreened or have over the top special effects and I'd have to make everything perfect, even if it costs a lot of money. No "That'll do" will be allowed. This movie did sound kind of intresting, but it was a flop. It was none of those things above which make a good movie (well at least from my point of view). First the good points: (this won't take long) This movie will appeal to hardcore greek mythologist enthusiasts and if you've ever wondered what a turd that gives you seizures looks like, you're in luck. In a kind of good way. Now the bad points: The plot did not grab me one single bit, even at the start. I was thinking "Fail" in the first second of the film. The greenscreening looks like a homemade Star Wars film. The characters were boring. Unoriginal. Yes, you could even do originality with Greek mythology. The special effects were over the top with constant flashing and constantly suffling through scenes back and forth, kind of like a turd that gives you seizures. The battles and the choreography were not well done, not even acrobatics could save them from being boring. The acting is bad. Not in a Michael Jackson way, but the traditional "The Domondedovo Airport terrorist attack was bad way". And then there's the worst part: The ending. I could not catch the name of the mythical creature that destroyed the town. The main character defeated it in a strange way that was weird. Then Hades showed up, hoping for a spectacular finale. The main character finishes it in a boring way in seconds. Ok, after THAT long review, bottom line: Avoid it please. $100 Million US dollars shoved into a turd that gives you seizures. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
2
ChowdahMay 29, 2017
This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Where to begin with this movie? The acting is weak, minus Mads Mikkelsen, who is always great. The story is never really fleshed out and feels incredibly rushed despite some really slow scenes. Bad pacing. The protagonist is arrogant and foolhardy, yet instead of growing from his mistakes and arrogance he never suffers any consequences. After a single battle, where he didn't do much, he suddenly commands battle hardened veterans who despised him less than 30 minutes before that, and who had relative contempt for him about 15 minutes earlier. The movie is filled with scenes that remove your willing suspension of disbelief. For me personally, the worst of which was after the big save at the end of the day, the princess who had a grand total of like 3 mins with the protagonist, offers him the kingdom and acts like she's in love with him.

Just outright awful writing and acting.
Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
6
BrandonBonaseraNov 16, 2011
CLASH OF THE TITANS may have terrible acting, writing and 3D, but it is still pretty entertaining with great special effects.
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
6
ZilcellMar 30, 2012
Acting was mediocre, the story was tolerable, and the special effects were great. I'd say the dialogue could have been better in some parts however.
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
7
oxanaAug 24, 2014
The trailer of this movie is one of the worst I've ever seen (scene after scene of fighting without actually revealing anything of the movie itself other than it seems to have a lot of characters - and a lot of fighting); I was really hopingThe trailer of this movie is one of the worst I've ever seen (scene after scene of fighting without actually revealing anything of the movie itself other than it seems to have a lot of characters - and a lot of fighting); I was really hoping the movie would be better, and it was.

There was a good plot going on, although the events kept jumping forward at a fast pace. They certainly didn't make the characters stay in one place for too long. Thanks to that, the movie seemed really short.

I think the cast was pretty good, as were the characters, although there was very little time to learn to know them. None of them was outrageously good, or bad, and I thoroughly enjoyed watching Sam Worthington, Mads Mikkelsen and various other actors play their part.

There was some depth in this movie, and it wasn't all about the fighting either. It was sad to see such good potential go to waste when the plot thinned and thinned into something rather disappointing. Especially the few confusing, pointless (romantic?) scenes ruined the ending. I hate it when they try to put something between two characters who clearly have nothing to do with each other.

I am not too familiar with the myths and legends of the ancient world, but this illustrated those very nicely, loyal to "reality" or not.

And I must say, the movie looked really good. Where the plot was too fast-paced and hurried, the amazing scenery, animals and such were superb. Especially loved Hades' power and the pegasos.

Go see this movie if you're even somewhat interested, because it is better than the trailer tells you. Even if it is missing a little substance here and there, the movie is good, no denying it.
Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
7
skyminsterDec 4, 2012
Clash of the Titans is definitely enjoyable, and has exiting action, but too much of that "exiting action", the director's gotta just calm down and slow the film down to create a more relaxing and emotional do, the action can be kept, but notClash of the Titans is definitely enjoyable, and has exiting action, but too much of that "exiting action", the director's gotta just calm down and slow the film down to create a more relaxing and emotional do, the action can be kept, but not all of it. The director concentrated too much on the action and special effects, which made those parts great, but everything else is dumbly acted and scripted, this doesn't stop the film from being enjoyable, far from that, but all you see is awesome action, special effects, and filming, everything else is dumb and fairly poorly done. If it was less fast-paced, had actually good acting, a main character that's not too generic, and a well written script, I'd be giving it a 9/10, but no, it's too in your face with constant action and cheese, so I give it... 6.7/10 (rounded up to 7). Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
6
Critic2012Jun 8, 2012
Clash of the Titans is not particularly good from the acting and writing perspective- in fact, its pretty terrible. But the action and adventure and scope of the film are enormous fun, and that compensates for what it lacks in other areas.
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
9
Midge115Apr 14, 2012
This movie is exactly what it says it is. Anyone who sees it should know that. It doesn't matter how bad the story is in this film, it doesn't matter that it's a remake, it doesn't even matter that there are so many parts of the story thatThis movie is exactly what it says it is. Anyone who sees it should know that. It doesn't matter how bad the story is in this film, it doesn't matter that it's a remake, it doesn't even matter that there are so many parts of the story that are truly "deus ex machina". What matters is that this film delivers intense action and it's great to see with friends. The sword fights have amazing choreography, the CGI is astonishingly good, and Sam Worthington and Liam Neeson shine out as great actors in this film, although the Djinn Headman (the sorcerer guy in the desert) is the most creative and awesome looking character in the movie. Overall I give it a 9 because it's fun to watch and it has amazing action with amazing CGI for the monsters. Definite 9 for being advertised for what it is. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
9
JuanoloApr 2, 2012
First off, this is a 9 out of 10 movie. Acting is all right. Notbamazing, but still good. Score is great. Adds to the epic sequences they happen. Also, it has unbeleiveable great epic set pieces. They're really good. Visual effects ate great,First off, this is a 9 out of 10 movie. Acting is all right. Notbamazing, but still good. Score is great. Adds to the epic sequences they happen. Also, it has unbeleiveable great epic set pieces. They're really good. Visual effects ate great, and the story is good. Overall, this is a good movie. It may not be amazing but still, it's a great movie. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
0
Trev29Mar 16, 2013
Mind bobbling piece of trash. Disgraceful acting and story that is intertwined with thoughtless action scenes that are incredibly banal. An embarrassing attempt at creating entertainment.
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
6
A_NorthernerMar 27, 2012
Standard fare epic fantasy historical action film in the vein of 300. Louis Leterrier, of Transporter fame, leads Sam Worthington as Perseus into combat against the gods of Olympus. Worthington fits the bill as the all-Greek action hero butStandard fare epic fantasy historical action film in the vein of 300. Louis Leterrier, of Transporter fame, leads Sam Worthington as Perseus into combat against the gods of Olympus. Worthington fits the bill as the all-Greek action hero but has little to work with in the script department, often finding it cliched and riddled with cheesy one-liners. The cast includes some big names, Liam Neeson, Ralph Fiennes and Danny Huston but these characters are given little screen time in comparison with Worthington, with the exception of Fiennes, notable for his terrible portrayal of Hades complete with Voldemort voice. Worth mentioning that the visuals and special effects are excellent as one would expect with a film that relies upon them so heavily. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
3
rodriqueJul 9, 2012
This movie is horrible,with a poor script and bad performances This remake to 1981 classic is probably one of the worst remakes Warner brothers has already produced.
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
3
dev92Aug 24, 2012
Not a good film, I prefer my films to require brain cells to watch. I love Greek mythology but this was an abomination of classic mythology. I think viewers who enjoy 'popcorn action flicks' may enjoy this film but even they may think thatNot a good film, I prefer my films to require brain cells to watch. I love Greek mythology but this was an abomination of classic mythology. I think viewers who enjoy 'popcorn action flicks' may enjoy this film but even they may think that this was just not good enough. The ironic thing is that I actually think the acting was fine. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
4
cameronmorewoodNov 15, 2012
It's the movie event of the year, if your a ten-year old boy that is.
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
4
YoursTrulyNov 13, 2012
How mediocre.
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
4
Compi24Nov 28, 2012
Although some of its other lesser-billed cast members do fairly well here, "Clash Of The Titans" unfortunately cannot lift itself up and over the hurdle of poor writing.
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
7
Patrick94Dec 28, 2014
I thought it was decent. The CGI didn't look that great at times though (the giant scorpions). I'd say it's slightly more enjoyable than the Percy Jackson series, and IMO way better than the similar Hercules movie with The Rock.
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
4
worleyjamersDec 8, 2012
Very flawed, but the special effects were great. Also, casting Liam Neeson and Ralph Fiennes as important characters was a great choice. A decent film.
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
5
ToffenuffNov 23, 2013
Some decent action and a handful of cool fight moments. Excellent special effects for sure. Standard becoming a hero to save the world plot. Writing is subpar and some of the acting is pretty bad, though I think partly because of someSome decent action and a handful of cool fight moments. Excellent special effects for sure. Standard becoming a hero to save the world plot. Writing is subpar and some of the acting is pretty bad, though I think partly because of some terrible lines. As a big Greek mythology fan I was disappointed in how inaccurate it was. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
5
RedShadowHatDec 31, 2012
Good story line, for a movie that I thought was going to be horrible, but the acting wasnt great. They didnt really seem to be in character at some points. Not enough fights and battles and most of them were kinda boring and took too long.Good story line, for a movie that I thought was going to be horrible, but the acting wasnt great. They didnt really seem to be in character at some points. Not enough fights and battles and most of them were kinda boring and took too long. And the movie was also too long, I got bored right away. It is still a good movie too watch once then never watch it again. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
1
sil3nt_nickMar 24, 2013
Jaw dropping special effects matched with a failure of a story line.
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
6
KivaJun 11, 2013
The action was good and it had good plot. Much better than the sequel. it was enjoyable. I liked it i can say
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
7
morfilJun 13, 2013
Adventure, pure adventure, regardless of complaints about story, acting, etc. The effects were ok. Maybe the mythology was used superficial, but, anyway, why should we be so serious about mythology in this century?! It's just a spring for newAdventure, pure adventure, regardless of complaints about story, acting, etc. The effects were ok. Maybe the mythology was used superficial, but, anyway, why should we be so serious about mythology in this century?! It's just a spring for new art, that's it. Get over it! Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
8
Gojira63Jun 13, 2013
Comparisons with the 1981 original are inevitable. I see this new version of the Clash of the Titans as more of a reimagining of the story than a remake of the original. This leaves us with two completely different stories that are eachComparisons with the 1981 original are inevitable. I see this new version of the Clash of the Titans as more of a reimagining of the story than a remake of the original. This leaves us with two completely different stories that are each outstanding in their own right. Although the story is pretty straight forward it is told as an epic quest that the demigod Perseus experiences as he wrestles with his identity while battling fierce giant scorpions, the three witches, the Gorgon, Medusa, and the condemned Calibos culminating in a final showdown with the giant and terrifying Kraken, mythic sea creature set loose by the gods to destroy the city of Argos and the beautiful Andromeda who is being sacrificed to assuage the wrath of the gods. The motive for this epic quest is that the humans have rebelled against the gods and after killing Perseus' earthly family Hades has used the human rebellion as a means to defeat his brother Zeus to become King of the gods but he must also contend with a vengeful Perseus.

Liam Neeson was an excellent choice as Zeus with his booming voice and commanding presence and Ralph Fiennes does a spectacular job as the deliciously evil Hades, king of the Underworld. Sam Worthington also does an excellent job as the hero Perseus whom he portrays as a smoldering angry warrior forced into circumstances beyond his control as he comes to terms with who he is. The special effects of the movie are equally spectacular and top notch and as a lover of giant monsters this version of the behemoth Kraken of the deep is worth the price of admission. I just wish he would have had more screen time. As an epic action adventure movie the Clash of the Titans delivers 2 hours of enjoyable fun and exciting entertainment.
Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
7
kubathereviewerAug 8, 2013
I personally liked this movie, the action was good and the casting choices also worked. The plot was a bit weak as well as the dialogue but still a pretty good movie
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
2
dyshpoJul 29, 2013
I've never felt so betrayed the trailer was so epic i thought they were going to give us what the original missed on but no. The ending is a miss it has many problems. But fun to watch it was entertaining.
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
4
RayzorMooseNov 20, 2013
The titans clash with mediocre flash.
The movie has a solid performance from Sam Worthington, and a few good action scenes. The rest of it is utter rubbish with poor directing, and a poor script.
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
0
blowbackFeb 15, 2014
Unmemorable, pointless and soulless remake of one of the best 80s movies. Shame on you Mr. Louis Leterrier. I know you can do better. PS: Sam, go back to Pandora because that was more believable than this.
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
0
vikesh2206Nov 9, 2014
With terrible acting, a pathetic script, miserable 3D, a tedious plot and derivative elements, Clash of the Titans hits rock bottom in showing what a movie can be.
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
5
Mr_MoviesAug 31, 2014
This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. If i were to sum this up in two words it would be this. NEEDS WORK. Even though the special effects are really good and the fight scenes even better the story is not very good. the story centers around the Greek demi-god Perseus (before he got his skull bashed in in god of war 2) who has been tasked to find a way to kill the Kraken before it wipes out an entire city of people who have rebelled against the gods. Perseus and most of the other characters are never developed very well most of them are just there to be killed and i barley caught their names. the story is pretty bare but ancient Greek story's have never been complex masterpieces so i will forgive that. Over all it is a 5/10 looks good but dose not play out as good. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
9
f3l1p3Sep 16, 2014
Um bom filme. Ele tem todo um brilho que reflete a sua obra original,o Destino de Perseu. Só acho que o filme se perde em algumas partes,mas não atrapalha em muita coisa.
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
4
CineAutoctonoDec 24, 2015
"Clash of the Titans" was a very boring movie , about the script , ero was outstanding in CGI and plot, but Sam Worthington in Avatar would suit instead of this disaster.
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
4
EpicLadySpongeMar 5, 2016
I felt like watching a bored version of fighting and clashing for the ultimate victory for exactly 106 minutes (as Metacritic told me so enough). We'll have to see about Wrath of the Titans soon enough.
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
2
MovieMasterEddyApr 3, 2016
A hero's quest? No, a fool's errand.

"Clash of the Titans" is the latest example of Hollywood's belief that any terrible script can be made palatable if you just throw enough money and British accents at it. Director Louis Leterrier
A hero's quest? No, a fool's errand.

"Clash of the Titans" is the latest example of Hollywood's belief that any terrible script can be made palatable if you just throw enough money and British accents at it.

Director Louis Leterrier wants his movie to be a serious action-adventure, an epic with mythic resonance; if he didn't, he wouldn't have cribbed so much from "The Lord of the Rings" movies. But 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.

What appeal the movie has comes from its two biggest-name stars, both of whom deliver outsized performances befitting their status as, well, gods. As Zeus, Liam Neeson struts around in a disco-inspired silver outfit that shines so brightly we can barely see his face. As his brother Hades, Ralph Fiennes swoops up from the underworld in his own cloud of dirty smoke, like an infernal Pig Pen. They're welcome counterpoint to Sam Worthington, the Australian actor who previously played monotonous, clenched-jaw hero Jake Sully in "Avatar" and who, in "Clash of the Titans," plays Perseus as Sully with better legs.

Foundling Perseus, the offspring of Zeus and a human woman, comes to the city of Argos as its king declares war on those inconstant gods. Sent off in search of a way to kill the Kraken, the leviathan who is the gods' greatest weapon, Perseus and his band of merry misfit soldiers hack and slash their way through a rogues' gallery of quasi-mythological creatures.

The action kicks off with an endless battle against a nest of giant scorpions - a fight that, like most of the movie's set pieces, is hectic, gory and visually incoherent. The scorpions of stop-motion master Ray Harryhausen's 1981 original "Clash" may have lacked the trompe l'oeil magic of contemporary CGI, but at least Harryhausen knew how to direct an action sequence. Watching a bunch of undifferentiated muscular dudes in tunics pretend to fight some imaginary scorpions, I could only think how much better the scene would have been were it scored to, say, the Scorpions' "Rock Me Like a Hurricane." So lacking in wit and flair is "Clash" that such groan-worthy ideas seem preferable to what's actually on the screen.Later, Perseus visits the Stygian witches and battles a truly lame-looking Medusa. A trip to the underworld does give the movie one of its few moments of real visual invention, as skeletal Charon's ferry is pulled across the river Styx by waterlogged zombies.

Then - as anyone who has seen the movie's endlessly replayed ads is aware - the gods release the Kraken. He's huge; he's slimy; he has tentacles. His attack on Argos is as leaden and unthrilling as can be, as is Perseus's inevitable triumph. The movie's conclusion promises a sequel, and given the economics of Hollywood, that's a threat we must take seriously.

Why? Because Warner Bros. has spent wisely to buy a hit. They even converted the movie -- at the last minute and to unimpressive effect -- to 3-D in order to take advantage of exorbitant ticket prices. It hardly matters that "Clash," unlike recent examples of glorious Tinseltown excess including "Avatar" and "2012," offers so little bang for the buck. "Clash of the Titans," unfortunately, is too big to fail.
Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
1
BroyaxJan 21, 2017
Histoire bidon incapable de s'inspirer au moins correctement de la -pourtant- si vaste mythologie grecque, scénario très poussif incapable de s'extirper de son remplissage auto-suffisant, ce qui signifie beaucoup trop de dialogues dont on seHistoire bidon incapable de s'inspirer au moins correctement de la -pourtant- si vaste mythologie grecque, scénario très poussif incapable de s'extirper de son remplissage auto-suffisant, ce qui signifie beaucoup trop de dialogues dont on se fout comme d'une guigne et trop peu d'action... avec un titre pareil "le choc des Titans" on attend toujours et je me suis endormi entretemps. Les acteurs sont en roue libre et du coup un peu à la masse ; quant à la réalisation, si elle s'avère correcte dans l'ensemble, elle ne fait que se reposer sur les effets spéciaux. Bref, très mal construit, branlant et bringuebalant de partout, le choc du film merdique en pleine face. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews