Warner Bros. Pictures | Release Date: April 1, 2010
4.9
USER SCORE
Mixed or average reviews based on 416 Ratings
USER RATING DISTRIBUTION
Positive:
130
Mixed:
158
Negative:
128
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 characteres (5000 max)
0
KeithC.Apr 1, 2010
My friend fell SOUND asleep and was snoring in 10 minutes. Unfortunately, I said awake and watched this mess of a movie. Do NOT waste your time to see this movie unless you are homeless and seeking shelter and a good sleep. As my friend My friend fell SOUND asleep and was snoring in 10 minutes. Unfortunately, I said awake and watched this mess of a movie. Do NOT waste your time to see this movie unless you are homeless and seeking shelter and a good sleep. As my friend said, this movie was "better than midol". ABSOLUTELY a WASTE of time and money. I saw it for FREE and almost got up and walked out (in hindsight I should have). Cheesy story, fair acting, no eye candy, no real focused fighting scenes, and NO 3D. Don't WASTE your money or time. Expand
1 of 1 users found this helpful
0
JosephKApr 22, 2010
I hated the original, and the remake was worse! I wish I could force the next director of a sword and sandals epic featuring the Olympians to read "Beyond Good and Evil" so that they might try to stop imposing Christian concepts of good and I hated the original, and the remake was worse! I wish I could force the next director of a sword and sandals epic featuring the Olympians to read "Beyond Good and Evil" so that they might try to stop imposing Christian concepts of good and evil on the Greek pantheon. Hades wasn't evil, he was just gloomy. I feel like the script was written at the time of the original Clash of the Titans by a twelve year old kid who loved to play Dungeons & Dragons: I want giant scorpions! and jinn! flying monkeys, no flying gargoyles! Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
3
AlistairV.Apr 3, 2010
"Clash of the Titans" is just like every summer blockbuster ever to be released in the last ten years: boring, shallow, and really rather dull. It concentrates on style over substance. However, "Clash" has the distinct disadvantage of also "Clash of the Titans" is just like every summer blockbuster ever to be released in the last ten years: boring, shallow, and really rather dull. It concentrates on style over substance. However, "Clash" has the distinct disadvantage of also being rather mean spirited. It seems to be championing atheism and/or humanism in such a dogmatic manner that it rather bludgeons you over the head with it. All the people who want to pray to the gods are seen as insane zealots and Perseus, who refuses to pray, himself, is seen as a stronger individual because of it. Also, I really didn't know who to sympathize with through the entire film. I know I was supposed to be rooting for Perseus, but I was very much sympathetic toward Hades's plight. I wasn't supposed to be, but I was. Rather like, G.I. Joe or Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen, I found myself rooting for the bad guys half the time, partially just because the good guys are so bloody irritating. Only, in "Clash," it's even worse, because, the only relatable characters on the "good" side are killed off before the final battle! And, this may be a cheap shot, but just about everyone except Perseus looks like some slightly less aged form of Mickey Rourke. This movie is not worth your time. Don't bother. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
3
ArnoldRApr 4, 2010
Epicly disappointing! Two of the three major sequences (Three Witches & Medusa) were not improvements over the original. Pegasus is (basically) written out of the story. Only the Kracken sequence is what audiences expect, and it comes during Epicly disappointing! Two of the three major sequences (Three Witches & Medusa) were not improvements over the original. Pegasus is (basically) written out of the story. Only the Kracken sequence is what audiences expect, and it comes during the final ten minutes of the film. Skip the 3-D, which is boring and not worth the extra $. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
2
SausageApr 5, 2010
Jake sully tackles the gods in his next voyage after Navi...Oh...wait...?? I think Ive witnessed better acting from a plank!!!
0 of 0 users found this helpful
1
PaulByApr 5, 2010
Don't get me wrong, i love CGI action epics, even if they have a cheezy storyline..... so i ignored any bad reviews of this - but please heed my warning, this movie is terrible. Worthington is awefull - i kinda liked him terminator, but Don't get me wrong, i love CGI action epics, even if they have a cheezy storyline..... so i ignored any bad reviews of this - but please heed my warning, this movie is terrible. Worthington is awefull - i kinda liked him terminator, but it looked like he was acting the same part (aussie action guy!), didnt even bother wearing a wig! - you could have started the movie with him time traveling from the future into ancient greece, thats how out of place he seemed throughout the movie. The same goes for his felmale sidekick, who is superfluous, and appears to be in their as eye candy/ love interest. You could have removed both characters, and the movie would have been better - the supporting warriors put in a much more convincing show than any of the lead characters. It's so badly edited, the movie jumps all over the place, half the time it doesnt explain enogh, other times the characters explain too much..... yes Perseus is the son of a god, we get it ...stop saying the word demigod every five minuites... aargh! For the first time in a long time i was looking at my watch in the cinema, and wanting the movie to hurry up. If i had to use one word to describe it it is BORING... other reviewers have said this and i couldnt undersatand how this movie could be, ... but please believe me it actually is. Even the great CGI, and awesome Kraken in the endscene couldnt save this absolutre stinker of a movie. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
0
MZApr 5, 2010
I'll vote this for worst story of 2010. Sucked from the beginning till the end. Bad costumes, storyline and action scene.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
0
ScottHApr 9, 2010
Not only was this movie terrible from an enjoyment view point. It was ripe with inaccuracies. Zeus sporting armour and a brown beard???? Hades doesn't have wings and wears a headdress, but the movie said so. The process leading up to Not only was this movie terrible from an enjoyment view point. It was ripe with inaccuracies. Zeus sporting armour and a brown beard???? Hades doesn't have wings and wears a headdress, but the movie said so. The process leading up to Medusa's death is 90% wrong. Not to mention Medusa is supposed to be ugly as shit, not kinda hot like she is in the movie. The climax is a guy walking up stairs. I was going into this movie because it looked like it was going to be good. I could not have been more disappointed. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
2
DickS.Apr 1, 2010
Epic story, over condensed, with too much focus on action that quite frankly sucked. This movie was terrible. I expected it to be less than good going in, and was still very disappointed. The 3D was nothing special either.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
0
RadostinRApr 26, 2010
Hello. I apologize for my bad English but I decided to write to you. You can not deny that deal well with the effects in movies, but I can not agree with the fact that falsify history and mythology. You Americans let distort human values and Hello. I apologize for my bad English but I decided to write to you. You can not deny that deal well with the effects in movies, but I can not agree with the fact that falsify history and mythology. You Americans let distort human values and history. Read the legend of Perseus. Why did you make this stupid movie.Why do you allow to falsify mythology. All your movies (American) are not true. Why? Thoughts that you can replace the facts. All films on historical themes and mythology are skewed. These are the 300 and Clash of the Titans and the legend of the Golden Fleece, for Odysseus, the Trojan War and the Roman Empire. All movies that you Americans have created fake facts. Why do you allow to falsify mythology. All your movies (American) are not true. Why? Thoughts that you can replace the facts. All films on historical themes and mythology are skewed. These are the 300 and Clash of the Titans and the legend of the Golden Fleece, for Odysseus, the Trojan War to the Roman Empire of Alexander and Macedonians. All movies that you Americans have created fake facts. This nonsense that you distribute. For what do you think. How long? Can you write more but will stop. Please do something real. Do not you see that your children learn so wrong. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
1
jasong.Apr 2, 2010
Avoid this movie ive only given it 1 because of the special effects which you've already seen on the trailer wooden acting boring terrible story the 80s version wasn't perfect but it has at least a bit of charm and made for a Avoid this movie ive only given it 1 because of the special effects which you've already seen on the trailer wooden acting boring terrible story the 80s version wasn't perfect but it has at least a bit of charm and made for a minuscule amount.oh year if you are dumb enough to watch this movie like me don't go to a 3d showing why?because it isent in so called digital 3d this was obviously not filmed with 3d in mind and they just tacked it on so they could make extra money poor movie not really in 3d rip off. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
2
JadaD.Apr 2, 2010
If you enjoy an action movie with no plot that makes absolutely no sense, go see this movie. I can't recall the last time I paid to see a film this bad, normally waiting until they come out on DVD. Even with low expectations, I was If you enjoy an action movie with no plot that makes absolutely no sense, go see this movie. I can't recall the last time I paid to see a film this bad, normally waiting until they come out on DVD. Even with low expectations, I was upset at the quality of the story. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
2
KyleBApr 3, 2010
Even though this movie has epic visual effects the story is choppy and the dialogue is very 1 dimensional. Sam Worthington is a terrific actor but unfortunately he isn't given much room to showcase his abilities. This movie was a huge Even though this movie has epic visual effects the story is choppy and the dialogue is very 1 dimensional. Sam Worthington is a terrific actor but unfortunately he isn't given much room to showcase his abilities. This movie was a huge disappointment. Don't waste your money folks... you'll kick yourself after wards. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
0
DanL.Apr 3, 2010
Horrible, absolutely horrible. I love the original, its one of my favorite movies, I still love the original to this day. I do not know why filmakers want to delibertly destroy a classic.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
0
EIApr 3, 2010
What a waste of 1.5hours of my life which I will never get back. Apparently the writers never gave any thought in creating a story that keeps the audience interested. Special effects can only do so much. Oh i wished the people who What a waste of 1.5hours of my life which I will never get back. Apparently the writers never gave any thought in creating a story that keeps the audience interested. Special effects can only do so much. Oh i wished the people who created/wrote/directed the God of War trilogy made a movie that does justice to the great Greek mythological stories we read as a kid. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
0
MartinRApr 4, 2010
Worst. Movie. Ever. Not only does this film annoyingly alter Greek mythology beyond all recognition; the Clash of the Titans features no actual clashing Titans. Instead it provides the Gorgon Medusa and a very altered version of Keto that Worst. Movie. Ever. Not only does this film annoyingly alter Greek mythology beyond all recognition; the Clash of the Titans features no actual clashing Titans. Instead it provides the Gorgon Medusa and a very altered version of Keto that they dubbed 'Kraken' - neither creature doing much more than killing off the hairy-bearded-man-fodder that this movie seems to have in high supply. Furthermore the plot was trite, clichéd, and the acting subpar to the point of distraction. Which is sad considering the number of fantastic actors that they had in the movie (Gemma Arterton anyone?). If you don't mind watching an easily predictable and heavily over-foreshadowed sham of a film, this might be the movie for you. (On the bright side, alot of stuff does get smashed) But I, for one, have much more productive things to do with my time... like stare at static or try to lick my elbow. On one final note; the 3D version that I spent 13.50 to see sported more 3D during its previews than in the entire showing. I miss Avatar already. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
2
DonDApr 4, 2010
Cheesy is the correct the word for this movie. OK...I know the original is not Lord of the Rings, but I do remember the original being fun. The first hour of this movie had me wanting to stick toothpicks in my eyes to keep them open. I was Cheesy is the correct the word for this movie. OK...I know the original is not Lord of the Rings, but I do remember the original being fun. The first hour of this movie had me wanting to stick toothpicks in my eyes to keep them open. I was falling a sleep. The funny aspects of the film seemed very forced. Think of the most cheesy 80's buddy cop film and you have the funny bits in this movie...CORNY. The main character is not strong and his speech in the middle of the movie had me laughing. I will say that the special effects are good. Go knowing that you have seen the best parts of this movie in the trailer. It will also remind you of why Harry Potter, Lord of the Rings, X-Men and other movies of the type are better. Those movies balance humor, fantasy and action into a good movie. This director needs to watch those movies and learn. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
3
KeijiMApr 4, 2010
Its a boring movie. A list actors and effects, with C rank action. Kept dozing off through out the movie from how dredfully boring it was. No constant average muddled action. No big scenes. Probably one of the most overrated movies for this Its a boring movie. A list actors and effects, with C rank action. Kept dozing off through out the movie from how dredfully boring it was. No constant average muddled action. No big scenes. Probably one of the most overrated movies for this year. Absolutely terrible. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
2
hcApr 5, 2010
I was rooting for Medusa and the Krakon. what a waste of story, actors, cgi, even Pegasus. Mind you, I had low expectations going in. No one releases a movie this time of year unless it's pretty crap, but sheesh, Clash had to make a I was rooting for Medusa and the Krakon. what a waste of story, actors, cgi, even Pegasus. Mind you, I had low expectations going in. No one releases a movie this time of year unless it's pretty crap, but sheesh, Clash had to make a contest of it. Really, the writing/story is where the epic fail spews forth (as with so many movies, it seems)--and it's not even campy good like the original, just plain ole amateur hour. Also, it's really not worth seeing films in 3D that weren't shot/made for 3D----seriously, paying extra bucks to watch a coin flip at me is insulting. what a lame movie all around. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
3
WillBApr 9, 2010
Horrible acting and even worse writing. Don't see it. The special effects DO NOT make up for these down falls.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
2
ErikaSApr 9, 2010
When i saw olympus, it reminded me of hercules. and not to mention, i haven't seen hercules in over 8 years!!! it's called "The Clash of the Titans". where are the titans then? where's the clashing? no. there's no When i saw olympus, it reminded me of hercules. and not to mention, i haven't seen hercules in over 8 years!!! it's called "The Clash of the Titans". where are the titans then? where's the clashing? no. there's no clashing in this movie. there's a head and there's a monster turning into stone. oh wow.. interesting clash of powerful weapons that come from the sacrifices of women. a very cheesy and boring, unrealistic movie + end. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
2
SA.May 2, 2010
The SFX were good but the story was horible and thew last kracken fight was just boring and cheesey just like the rest of the movie. Plus the 3D glasses gave me a headache.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
0
JHApr 10, 2010
Absolute crap. No 3D, no mythology, no entertainment. They completely ruined the plot, and there's tons of technical errors. You'll feel much more satisfied renting the 1981 original.
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
3
smijatovAug 13, 2010
This is one of those films that you go into not expecting to be funny, but then you laugh so hard because it is so bad!!!
Well, to start with the story: it is totally ridiculous and not according to the myths. Well, the basic story is, but
This is one of those films that you go into not expecting to be funny, but then you laugh so hard because it is so bad!!!
Well, to start with the story: it is totally ridiculous and not according to the myths. Well, the basic story is, but it's been so Hollywoodised and twisted that it just makes no sense.
The dialogue is soooo thin that you can see through it and the plot more wholes than Swiss cheese. It's just a plain stupid film, but it definitely has interesting action scenes and some impressive visual effects. Surely, it will entertain (hence the 5), but it will give you nothing else. It's a film you watch and are entertained during it, but afterwards you just don't care to ever think about it again.
Expand
1 of 2 users found this helpful11
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
2
RazvSep 21, 2010
Bad movie. I wasn't expecting more than a plotless, full of random action movie and still, i was disappointed. The characters are poorly made, the plot, well, there is none, and the fight scenes (the only thing I actually hoped to have hadBad movie. I wasn't expecting more than a plotless, full of random action movie and still, i was disappointed. The characters are poorly made, the plot, well, there is none, and the fight scenes (the only thing I actually hoped to have had some quality) were simple and unrealistic. Expand
0 of 2 users found this helpful02
All this user's reviews
3
SonicphotoAug 29, 2010
Clash of the Titans is probably the worst movie of the year with a pretty bad script that doesn't even relate with Greek Gods as it should. Not only that but the acting of Sam Worthington is pretty bland for a hero that we must suppose toClash of the Titans is probably the worst movie of the year with a pretty bad script that doesn't even relate with Greek Gods as it should. Not only that but the acting of Sam Worthington is pretty bland for a hero that we must suppose to like and support. The movie definitely has the high productions of visuals and sound, but that's just not enough to ignore the fact the movie never seems to have a truly exciting moment or an emotional one. You just simply wait for something interesting to happen, and when you think it will, it fails to make an impact on you. And in terms of its mythology that is based on, it frankly uses it badly by re-creating visually the gods badly with pathetic costumes and situations that just don't seem to fit very well. Expand
0 of 2 users found this helpful02
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
0
opixNov 19, 2010
Clash of the Titans : Clash of the writings, Clash of the actings, Clash of the actions, Clash of the 3D 's, Clash of the critics, Clash of the lovers, Clash of the haters. Clash of the reviews.
0 of 1 users found this helpful01
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
1
CharlottePApr 13, 2011
It'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 everyIt'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. Expand
6 of 9 users found this helpful63
All this user's reviews
2
Cotts1988Apr 30, 2011
Clash of the Titans takes Greek mythology, Ralph Fiennes, Liam Neeson, giant scorpions and Medusa and manages to make them all boring. There was almost nothing to enjoy in this movie, even the action felt largely dull. An underwhelmingClash of the Titans takes Greek mythology, Ralph Fiennes, Liam Neeson, giant scorpions and Medusa and manages to make them all boring. There was almost nothing to enjoy in this movie, even the action felt largely dull. An underwhelming disappointment and I sincerely hope that the proposed sequel is much, much better than this mess. Expand
1 of 2 users found this helpful11
All this user's reviews
2
itz_giologicalMay 23, 2011
If you look at the two latest Hollywood takes on Greek mythology (Percy Jackson and this snorefest built around epic cliches), Clash of the Titans may be set closer to the period. The wonderful talent carrying it were wasted by a scriptIf you look at the two latest Hollywood takes on Greek mythology (Percy Jackson and this snorefest built around epic cliches), Clash of the Titans may be set closer to the period. The wonderful talent carrying it were wasted by a script that's obviously trying too hard. It has nothing to boast but spectacular visual flash. But what I discovered here is that there is range in Sam Worthington's acting. If he wants to keep up the claims that he'll become the next Russell Crowe, he should go more to dramas than in epics that give no damn to mood and character. Expand
0 of 1 users found this helpful01
All this user's reviews
1
nomad4lifeOct 16, 2011
Just awful. Terrible acting, poor script and story. I like the Desmond Davis film so was looking forward to this but it failed on every level. Even actors you can normally rely upon struggle to lift this dire excuse for a film (Leeson,Just awful. Terrible acting, poor script and story. I like the Desmond Davis film so was looking forward to this but it failed on every level. Even actors you can normally rely upon struggle to lift this dire excuse for a film (Leeson, Postlethwaite, Fiennes). The only positive thing I can think of is that Gemma Arterton is stunning in this movie. I guess the effects are OK too but nothing special. Expand
0 of 1 users found this helpful01
All this user's reviews
3
freeride1993Mar 26, 2012
terribly stupid badbadbadbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddd. nver seen such a stupid corny movie
0 of 1 users found this helpful01
All this user's reviews
3
heyitsmegrif4Jan 2, 2012
The film benefits from cool action and great special effects but there aren't enough of those things to actually save the film because it lacks adventure and strong performances. I give this movie 33%.
0 of 2 users found this helpful02
All this user's reviews
3
spadenxDec 25, 2011
It was ok. The acting was far below what I expected, Especially from their A-list cast. Also everyone seemed really out of place, It didnt feel like a movie taking place in ancient times. The only person who really fit perfectly was MadsIt was ok. The acting was far below what I expected, Especially from their A-list cast. Also everyone seemed really out of place, It didnt feel like a movie taking place in ancient times. The only person who really fit perfectly was Mads Mikkelsen, He stood out to me for some reason. The action was average and is never good nor bad.

Overall it was just a pointless remake that does nothing but prove just because its newer doesnt mean its better.
Expand
0 of 1 users found this helpful01
All this user's reviews
1
MattCarterWADec 13, 2011
How dare they? I don't understand who allows these things into the theaters. Am I the only one that was tricked by the awesome trailer with the excellent music and exciting STABBING scorpions? Shame on me, right?

Sam Worthington was the
How dare they? I don't understand who allows these things into the theaters. Am I the only one that was tricked by the awesome trailer with the excellent music and exciting STABBING scorpions? Shame on me, right?

Sam Worthington was the champion for this movie. Coming off of Avatar, and from his (the only good) performance in Terminator: Salvation, I was ready to believe he was a rising star. But no, this was just a paycheck for him. For us, it was a series of poor edits, miscellaneous adventurous montages, sub-par set design, and the highest build-up for the least satisfying "Release the Kraken" line I have ever heard. Liam Neison, how could you?

The sole, sparkling moment in that 106 minute tale of darkness is when a strange, crystalline creature (...what?) explodes, predator style. Unfortunately, he explodes to no avail, but that is beside the point. It was hilarious. He removes himself from the generic tale the best way any of us could, the self destruct button. He alone sustains this movies 1 rating....How dare they?
Expand
0 of 1 users found this helpful01
All this user's reviews
0
MegWhiteleyMar 30, 2012
Horrible movie, is really boring, the screenplay terrible, have good effects, but a terrible 3D, I think that Wrath of the Titans is better than this part.
0 of 3 users found this helpful03
All this user's reviews
2
csw12Mar 25, 2012
To put it simply Clash of the Titan is horrible film. Acting was so bad people on sci fi movies would have done better. Visuals are disgraceful and story is nonexistent. Why would anybody make a film like this, oh is it because of the money.To put it simply Clash of the Titan is horrible film. Acting was so bad people on sci fi movies would have done better. Visuals are disgraceful and story is nonexistent. Why would anybody make a film like this, oh is it because of the money. FYI the movie was a flop at the box office. RELEASE THE KRACKEN. HOW STUPID. Expand
0 of 2 users found this helpful02
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
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
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
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
0
eagleeyevikingDec 12, 2013
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.
1 of 1 users found this helpful10
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
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