Wrath of the Titans Reviews

Page 2 of 299
½ December 6, 2014
I hate when filmmakers create a sequel to a film that is a remake. It's bad enough that you aren't talented enough to have an original idea, but then you turn around and make a sequel to a remake? To be fair, unlike "Clash of the Titans", "Wrath of the Titans" is an original story with little basis in mythology. However, also unlike "Clash of the Titans", "Wrath of the Titans" is not an enjoyable film.

This film has many problems. The action seems more mindless and generic. The story is not as interesting as that of the first film. And the CGI can be really great at some times, and god awful (pun intended) at others.

Additionally, Sam Worthington does not give as strong a performance as before, and Liam Neeson and Ralph Fiennes' roles are so small that they offer little to the film. Bill Nighy has a fun little part as Hephaestus, and it's about the only enjoyable part of the film.

You could say that "Wrath of the Titans" is bad because of poor writing, acting, or directing. I like to think of it as the wrath of karma!
Super Reviewer
May 17, 2015
Or, "she works hard for the money", cause that's all this one amounts to, a grab for cash. Some of that CGI money could've been spent on the writers, but noooo. And you get what you pay for. Rosamund Pike though adds needed verve to the proceedings.
½ April 5, 2015
did they really need to make this movie ...
½ April 4, 2015
the 1st was way better,the effects is the only thing that saved this one
½ September 8, 2012
So honestly i find the movie a little to say, action packed, which draws from the story line, however i do enjoy the visual effects, and the cast of this movie, in my opinion this movie is a step up from the first, and finally the professional critics of this movie critique without stating what is wrong and show only general distaste due to there disinterest in the first of the series, quite frankly i thoroughly agree with ign's review however.
½ February 27, 2015
Well that was bad. An confusing. Seriously I feel like this movie made little to no logical sense. Oh well. At least the first is still decent.
½ February 17, 2015
CG a mythological epic does not make.
February 16, 2015
An inferior sequel to 2010's Clash of the Titans, which was only so-so itself. The movie has a video-game plot (hero must find scattered pieces of an ancient weapon to vanquish world-threatening evil) and a nonsensical back story, but pretty decent visual effects (even if the ultimate villain looks a lot like Lord of the Ring's Balrog on steroids).
February 10, 2015
I can pretty much say the same thing about this movie that I've said about many movies: Clichés. Sam Worthington is back with his sword and scaffold, as the half-God, half-human warrior Perseus, whom is caught up in the midst of a plotless story and production designs that are hardly well structured and not intriguing.
There is also bad acting from Worthington, Rosamund Pike, Toby Kebbell and a brief appearance from Bill Nighy - all of which, are leading the plot nowhere, playing underdeveloped and meaningless characters. In comparison to its predecessor, Wrath of Titans doesn't live up to the memorable action, excitement and great casting of Clash of the Titans (which I gave four stars), and instead this sequel almost kills everything that made the last movie a truly great action hit. Wrath of the Titans doesn't even outweigh the almost disastrous movie attempt of the 'Prince of Persia game franchise', called Prince of Persia:The Sands of Time. Jake Gyllenhaal, the actor who portrayed the prince in that movie, is a more superior actor than Worthington turned out to be in Wrath of the Titans.
Truth be told, the monsters and mythical creatures depicted in the movie aren't even that exciting for their use of bad CGI - again, this almost killed the memorable monsters in the first movie, but clichés and overrated ideas, to the awareness of the audience, are commonly the basis of delivering appalling entertainment, which clearly isn't entertainment. I really don't think it would be worth my time to watch another 'Titans' sequel.
February 7, 2015
With poor acting and a bad story line the fact they they tried to cover that up with over the top cgi was pathetic and the fact that they tore apart one of the actors over this which wasn't his fault it was the directors it was like this was the directors first ever movie I would not recommend.
½ February 3, 2015
More exciting and energetic than its predecessor.
March 12, 2012
was lukewarm about the CLASH OF THE TITANS remake. might watch this on TV, but hardly priority viewing
½ January 14, 2015
The CGI is improved, but its just as dumb as the first. Acting is still underwhelming, and the plot twists are no better.
½ December 27, 2014
This film is basically a repeat of the first Titans film and it does not make great viewing and eventually it gets very boring and tired
½ November 7, 2012
Surprisingly a bit better than Clash remake.
December 25, 2014
Bueno personajes y es que lo mitológico engancha, aun así se convierte en una película que se olvida fácil y parece hecha solo para el 3D
December 21, 2014
Wrath of the Titans manages an impressive feat. To make gods appear weak and unimportant. Frankly, rosamund pike excluded, the acting is more abysmal than ever. Sam Worthington fails on pretty much all conceivable levels and even the great liam neeson and ralph fiennes frankly bomb. The dialogue is not much better. Cheesy and almost campy, the dialogue fails to justify the immense pressure that (apparently) the film expects you to feel. The direction is confused and the action is just there to make the film seem better. It doesn't work. There's almost nothing to commend this film on, including the story which is utter nonsense. But it does have one positive: its special affects aren't bad. They're just not good.
Super Reviewer
½ June 19, 2012
Colour me amazed! what in the name of Greek buggery has happened here?! The first film was a complete and utter abomination which brought shame upon Hollywood, it wasn't good enough to buff the boots of the original. I still don't think anyone knows what Harryhausen thought of it.

So I didn't have high hopes for this sequel, which I think is understandable. But to my amazement this franchise has done a complete U-turn and actually come up with a semi decent film, well at least in looks anyway.

Bottom line this is a monster mash of epic proportions, its takes the concept of the original Harryhausen masterpiece and expands it ten fold with dazzling imagery. This is really what they should have done with the first remake instead of making crap up, but what I really can't get my head around is why this sequel looks SO MUCH BETTER than the first! The last film had the Kraken which did look damn fine, but even that doesn't come close to anything in this sequel.

All the monsters here look terrific, yes there is a time lapse between films of course but the divide between quality here is huge!! What can I say about Kronos...a colossus of an effect, eye popping! I haven't been so impressed by a CGI effect since Gods knows when, I can't remember. He just looked stunning, stunningly real, as if they actually did awaken a real god from the fiery depths of the underworld, colour me stunned! The only creature I didn't like was the Minotaur which looked like a naff character from 'Mortal Kombat' (Motaro without his horse back end).

To be brutally honest the film is kept alive by the effects, the rest of the film is filled with pitiful acting and some of the most bizarre collection of accents for ancient Greece ever. The hero has an Aussie accent, Bill Nighy for some reason uses a Yorkshire accent (Northern England), how on earth they came to that decision I don't know. Finally you have Agenor who is said to be a thief so of course they give him a London cockney accent! why?? what are they implying?

Yes the film is basic pantomime but so was the original classic. The cast list isn't quite as impressive as the classic but it suffices and everybody does their bit to try for that grandiose epic taste. The whole film does look really really good with lovely locations, great costumes, beautiful landscapes and a solid score.

In short I think they have finally captured the classic fun adventurous look of ancient Greek mythology just as they did all those years ago with classic films like 'Jason and the Argonauts'. Yes this sequel does follow pretty much the same pattern as the first, ending with a big monster to battle in the exact same way with virtually the same outcome, but because it all looks so crisp you really don't mind or notice too much.

This new film gives you exactly what we wanted all along and what the classic did perfectly...well created mythological monsters. For once the CGI does do the trick as it should and could if used properly. Ignore the first film this is what you've been waiting for, hopefully the third will continue the goodness.
December 12, 2014
Rosamund Pike struggles to bring any sense of regality to this mess of a film. She stands out as being one of the few lead actors who actually tries to portray anything approaching characterisation and emotion. Both Liam Neeson and Ralph Fiennes manage to pull off their Greek God acting in an acceptable manner but sadly, few of the other actors make much of an impression. Sam Worthington mumbles incoherently and spends much of his time being beaten up and staring exhaustedly at his son in an effort to summon up that last drop of strength to bump off whatever CGI monster is trying to eat him at the time and quite what Edgar Ramirez thinks he's doing with his lack lustre performance is beyond me. Jonathan Liebesman clearly doesn't care about his actors or the incomprehensible plot and concentrates on the special effects. It hats be said these are impressive but sadly, one gets the feeling of watching a sequence of video game scenes, stitched together with a tenuous bit of pseudo-Greek mythology. The editing is clumsy meaning there are several plot points that simply don't make any sense and one is left with too many unresolved threads or jarring cuts to allow the story to develop and flow. This film was really just made to cash in on the success of the first film and is, at best, a second rate action movie. All noise and no no substance and rather a let down.
½ November 30, 2014
Eh y i cant se riese movie
Page 2 of 299