Clash of the Titans

Clash of the Titans is a remake of the original 1981 version of the movie. Chances are you've probably seen it by now at least once, maybe more than that. It's been on TV dozens of times over the years so any serious movie buff has already seen it. So I went into this with a certain level of pre-existing knowledge and expected it to be mainly an updated version of the same story. I was surprised to find that it's been revamped in nothing but good ways, keeping the good elements while throwing out the crappy ones.

Since this movie is ancient, there are no spoilers to be had for the most part. The same basic story is in place. Perseus is the son of Zeus, a demi-god. Half man, half mortal, and all that. Though in this version of the story he doesn't find this out until he's coming home from a fishing trip with his parents. As they're sailing in to the harbor at Argos, they witness soldiers knocking down a statue of Zeus in an act of open rebellion against the Gods. Even though they were minding their own business, Hades randomly attacks their boat, sinking it, and killing Perseus' parents - or who he thought were his true parents. For their defiance, the people of Argos are given an ultimatum by Hades: Sacrifice one of their own or be fed to the Kraken.

This kicks off the rest of what you'd expect to see. Perseus finding out who he really is, making plans to get revenge against Hades, finding out about the Kraken and embarking on his quest to find the means to bring the Kraken down. As a nod toward the original 1981 film, the mechanical owl got a quick cameo - thankfully thrown aside as a piece of junk. I found that thing extremely annoying in the original and was glad to see it would not be involved. The scene at the arena where Perseus gets his god items was left out, instead replaced by a short bit where only the sword is given to him. Fans of Calibos may be disappointed to find he hasn't got much of a role to play in this version. Instead of being primarily fixated on Andromeda, he's an agent of Hades and is mostly a backdrop and a boss encounter for Perseus later on. The entire scene in the swamp is gone, most likely because that only served as a mechanism for losing the helm which isn't in this one.

The Stygian Witches still have their part to play, as does the Medusa, who got a much needed boost in the form of some excellent CGI and a longer battle scene in a far better setting. By far the best improvement though, as illustrated by the picture for this post, was the Kraken itself. The original was extremely campy and rubbery looking. The new one is nothing short of awesome. Keen observers of the pic here will also notice a difference in Pegasus. I'll leave you to take the closer look :)

All in all, this remake is far better than the original story. It flows together much better, has far better special effects, and tells a much more interesting version of the myth. Hopefully I haven't ruined things for you too much. Definitely worth checking out, unlike pretty much everything else out there right now.

On the immediate horizon

Iron Man 2 is out in May, previews of that look good.

A new version of Robin Hood is coming as well. I don't know how many different ways this needs to be told, really. Russell Crowe will probably do an awesome job of it though.

The last of the Shrek films is up in May too. Thank God.

However, the big one I'm really looking forward to after seeing the previews is Prince of Persia: The Sands of Time. Oldbies like myself will recognize the fact that this is a video game title, but damn, the previews are anything but cheesy video game title content.
.........................
RIP United States of America

July 1776 - November 2012.

       
« Kerchner v Obama
Oblivion Projects »

Posted on Apr 19, 2010 12:56 am by Samson in: | 19 comment(s) [Closed]
Comments
Ruined things too much? I was fully expecting to blow this one off completely based mostly on what we'd discussed last time about it as an upcoming movie. What you've posted here makes it sound like it might be worth seeing after all. Yet once again, we owe you thanks for playing the guinea pig that got to go test the waters first for us. ;)

Iron Man 2: Hopefully it'll be a good one, I'm planning on catching it as soon as I can, which likely means once it's released to video.

Robin Hood: As you say, it's a great story but how many different takes can you really make on the same story? At least they've got Russel Crowe going for them this time. On the other hand, Men In Tights was really quite a riot...

I'd heard the whole Shrek series is expected to be re-released all over again but in 3-d this time, so don't be too quick to bid it farewell. (Check out the whole story at Reuter's - it seems Star Wars & Titanic are going there too.)

Actually, I always thought that episode of the video game seemed to be based on some ideas that might work better on the big screen than in a video game anyway, guess we'll get to see if I was right about that soon enough. :)

       
Samson said:

Clash of the Titans (Mar) - Yep. A remake of the 60s or 70s movie of the same name. Maybe older, I don't know. The version I have in mind sucked really bad, but it looks like someone wised up this time around and may have produced something actually worth watching.


Uh. I don't think you quite read that right. I also had the dates way wrong, goes to show you that even for a 1981 release it was really BAD. The 2010 remake is in a whole new league. I should also point out I saw it in 2D, not 3D, so that Reuter's link about Shrek is making comparisons to something I didn't see, but I'm guessing Clash of the Titans would have looked just fine. And please Dreamworks, just don't, the world has had enough Shrek to last a lifetime and then some.

       
Hrm, I haven't yet seen any ads for Clash of the Titans, but the description sounds pretty cool. Might not make the effort to see it in the theater but might end up a dvd buy. Yes, I'm very picky about what I go see at the theater. I just prefer the comfort of my own home :) Unless someone wants to take me on a date....?

Seriously? Russel Crowe as Robin Hood? There goes all my fantasies. Geez... could they find someone any older? [/sarcasm] :rolleyes: :sick:

And Shrek, can't even waste the energy to say how much I detest those movies, even while my daughter grew up loving them. It would be extreme torture to force me to watch it.

Iron Man 2, yeah. If it's as well done as the first one, which was understated IMO, then that's a must see. Robert Downey Jr. *yum*. Now him I could get into as Robin Hood, lol

Prince of Persia, yes I recognize it as a video game title, but know nothing about it, so no further opinion here :)

       
I have to agree this movie was pretty damn good. I have watched the following over the last few weeks in no particular order, but i enjoyed them all:

The Book of Eli
Ninja Assassins
The Hurt Locker
Men Who Stare at Goats
The Blind Side

       
@Samson: No, it wasn't that I hadn't read that right, it's that I was still thinking more along the lines of typical Hollywood treatment of remakes in which they use the improve the special effects and provide new actors (who are often rookies getting their big break through the remake but who can't actually act), recycling most of the script, and trying to make it feel less like a re-colorization by adding yet further ways to break the mythologies the story was based on. Having seen only a couple of ads for it that weren't very good ads, didn't help either.

No, the Reuter's link was just about Shrek, not Clash of the Titans. Apparently the "last" Shrek is in 3-D and they're going to try to wheedle more money out of the franchise by going back and modifying all the original digital movies to be 3-D for DVD re-release, at the end of the article they also mentioned that Star Wars and Titanic are also being redone into 3-D as well.

@Hanaisse: Aww, if you were a bit more local, and we could afford it (along with baby sitters), I'm sure Dragona and I would be happy to take you for a date, though I'm not sure about the logistics of that, but... :shrug:

You had fantasies about Robin Hood? Guess that raises the questionable question of which Robin Hood.. I've always been most partial to Disney's cartoon version myself, and Men in Tights was awesome, but then I've never fantasized about the character either... As for your sarcasm, they might've gotten Sean Connery to play the role instead.. :tongue:

Bah, the Shrek series has some great technical qualities and some really good older songs getting recycled, even if the kids are the only ones to really fall for the cliche parody story lines as if they were new material.

Robert Downey Jr. (born 4/4/65) isn't too old for you, but Russel Crowe (born 4/7/64) is, eh? So, that one year of age difference is that big a deal, huh? :tongue:

Prince of Persia: The Sands of Time - all the info you need about it. ;)

       
Fury, you sure have a great sense of timing always posting while I'm still writing like that.. ;)

I haven't seen any of those movies yet, but I liked the ads I saw for Book of Eli and Ninja Assassins. I've heard interesting things about Hurt Locker and the ads for The Blind Side didn't look bad, but Men Who Stare at Goats just sounded like yet another middle age crises movie to me. :shrug:

       
ObRobinHood: Yes, but unlike some other Robin Hoods, Russel Crowe can speak with an Australian accent.

...no, wait...

Raise your hand if, whenever somebody mentions the Disney Robin Hood, you start whistling the intro theme. Thanks, Conner. ;)

With a name like Ninja Assassins, can it possibly be bad?

And man am I out of touch with movies these days. Newest thing I've seen lately is Generation Kill, and that's from 2008. Of course, with ticket prices what they are anymore, it's better most times to just wait for DVD.

       
Ticket prices are bad enough, but when they make you sit through commercials on top of all that it's just too much sometimes. I mean, you know already that those ads have paid for the showing and everything else 500x over and yet you still get ripped for $9 a shot.

As far as Robin Hood, I rather liked the version with Kevin Costner as a serious telling. Men in Tights is awesome if all you want is a good laugh.

       
Happy to help, Dwip. :lol:

Can't argue that point, Samson, if they're going to sell advertisment space at the theaters, it sure would be nice to pass along at least enough of the profits from it to make it feel like we're not being totally gouged at the door too.. on the other hand, the last time I saw a movie at the theater, I believe it was only $7.50 each, but Dragona tells me that's because we went during matinee hours and they'd have been $11.50 each if we'd have gone in the evening instead and that was while we were in New Mexico this past winter. How have we let things become SOOO expensive???

For a serious Robin Hood, I agree, Costner did a pretty good job.. now if only someone would teach him how to act... ;)
"If all you want..."??? Oh, come on, how could you not love a movie with characters like Ahchoo, Blinkin, Latrine, and The Sheriff of Rottingham? Let alone great lines like "I lost. I lost? Wait a second, I'm not supposed to lose. Let me see the script."? Let's face it, almost anything by Mel Brooks is practically guaranteed to be worth seeing at least once. ;)

       
I liked Prince of Thieves too, although it IS pretty mockable, witness Men In Tights.

"Save me, save me, hurt them, hurt them!"

"Save them, save them, hurt you, hurt you. I've got it."

My childhood credibly informs me that the Disney version is still best, however.

       
Of course, with ticket prices what they are anymore, it's better most times to just wait for DVD.


In Australia, we have this thing called the Internets, and one of the really nice thing about the Internets is that it allows you to download movies from bit torrent :). Of course, if you like the movie, buy or rent the DVD when its released so that you are doing your part to support big corporations.

Like Exxon, who made so much moolaa last year that executives fill bath tubs with it and wash with George Washington, yet, they paid no tax in the USA, go figure. /end troll.

       
Hell yeah I've had fantasies about Robin Hood! And yes, the Kevin Costner version. But it leans more toward the romantic tragic story line with <insert current fantasy figure here>. If that makes sense. Man, we need more women here! You guys just don't understand!

And lol Conner, it's not literally the age of the actor, it's just that Robin Hood, the character, should be younger. Sad (and funny) thing about that is, I'm older than both of them :stare: That to say, I guess I've never been a fan of Crowe.

Men in Tights.....five thumbs up :lol:

Can honestly say I don't start whistling the Disney version of Robin Hood. I can't even recall ever seeing it.

       
yet, they paid no tax in the USA


Not to rain on your troll parade, but this is patently false. Exxon, like every other normal company, paid their fair share of corporate taxes. The Dems seem to think a fair share is a lot more than it is currently though, so they simply run around making false claims that these companies pay none at all.

Anyway, I'd sooner stop watching movies all together than resort to getting them from the internet. There's not much point in watching them on a tiny 19" screen with a pair of cheap speakers. I can do better in the living room with the HDTV and DVD player. Although renting is even getting ridiculously expensive.

       
Anyway, I'd sooner stop watching movies all together than resort to getting them from the internet. There's not much point in watching them on a tiny 19" screen with a pair of cheap speakers. I can do better in the living room with the HDTV and DVD player. Although renting is even getting ridiculously expensive.


I watch the movies that i download on a 54" tv in my living room, both the tv and the dvd player play avi format and have usb inputs that accept anything from a small usb stick to a large external hard disk. Sure you miss out on some quality, but most of us cannot really tell the difference between blueray and dvd standards, nor 320k and 96k bitrate audio, and if it is a dvd rip you still get surround sound most times.

I prefer to rent these days over going to the movies, 4 new releases cost about 12 bucks, compared to 16 bucks i think now days to see a movie at one of the large chains and 12 bucks at the independent cinema on the island. The kids go the the movies more often than we do, and most often its to the local independent, gotta support local business and all.

Anyway, I'd sooner stop watching movies all together than resort to getting them from the internet. There's not much point in watching them on a tiny 19" screen with a pair of cheap speakers. I can do better in the living room with the HDTV and DVD player. Although renting is even getting ridiculously expensive.


Actually they did not, in the USA they paid nothing, its been all over our media, i will try and find you some sources if i get time later. Originally the story came out of Canada and got no US coverage, Jon Stewart did a large piece on it, in his typical and unique way.

Link to Jon Stewart Story

       
This is a movie topic so all I'll say on the Jon Stewart thing is that he's a blithering idiot who shouldn't be taken seriously by anyone with brains. He's not a news source, no matter how hard he may try. Also, you double quoted, but that's ok :)

You can go right on watching your stolen pirated movies if you like. I have more honor than that.

       
As I was going to say before the site blew up in my face:

Hanaisse said:

Can honestly say I don't start whistling the Disney version of Robin Hood. I can't even recall ever seeing it.


I've been thinking about this for hours, and still don't comprehend it, really. You actually mean to tell me that there are people, in the last 40 years, who have been or been around children and not seen that movie? Inconcievable. It has the best intro of all time, even. And that Robin Hood. He's a fox.

Speaking of the intersection of early 90s movies, male leads, completely awesome music, and romantic tragic storylines, I have a sudden desire to watch Last of the Mohicans. In that epic struggle between Kevin Costner and Daniel Day-Lewis, well.

       
Better yet Dwip, there are those among us who have seen Disney's abomination of a Robin Hood movie and really wish we hadn't.

       
:facepalm:

       
@Hanaisse:
I'll have to ask Dragona if she wants to come defend/share your Robin Hood fantasies... I'll just snicker for a bit in the meantime though. ;) :lol:

I suppose Robin Hood really should be a younger looking character, but still, it's not a bad choice.

@Samson:
Um, you use that tiny resolution on a mere 19" monitor? .... Guess you don't want to know about the 42" monitors that Dragona and I use.... like Fury, we can also route downloaded movies to our 60" living room TV if we want to, but with our ISP issues we could only download them after 2am EST. :shrug:

@Fury:
Sorry, don't know nothing about Exxon or taxes, paid or evaded, but I still won't pirate a movie just because I've got access to the internet. :(

@Dwip:
I agree, Disney's version of Robin Hood had it's faults, but Robin as a fox was perfect! :lol:

       
<< prev 1 next >>
Comments Closed
Comments for this entry have been closed.
Anonymous
Register

Forgot Password?

SuMoTuWeThFrSa
 1 2 3
4 5 6 7 8 9 10
11 12 13 14 15 16 17
18 19 20 21 22 23 24
25 26 27 28 29 30