Clash of the Titans - Movie Reviews - Rotten Tomatoes

Clash of the Titans Reviews

Page 1 of 1152
Super Reviewer
April 8, 2010
This was a fun movie. Watching it on a big drive in screen was interesting and fun. It really did hearken back to the old movie. I can def see that 3d would have been worthless.
Super Reviewer
May 25, 2010
A noisy, dull and flat blockbuster that plays exactly like a video game, with no character development or energy, and fails so miserably due to an overly serious tone, a horrible script and a hero with no charisma - and the tense Medusa scene is the only thing that works.
Super Reviewer
October 27, 2012
Fabulous special effects. They alone make the movie worth seeing. The story, on the other hand, is a bit hard to follow and contrived.
Super Reviewer
½ April 2, 2010
I went into this film thinking it would be good...boy was I wrong! this is an epic failure of errr...epic proportions, in short I hated it, it is bad, very bad. For starters if possible its actually more hammy and cheesy than the original, the God scenes on Mount Olympus are awful and look like something outta Flash Gordon, I realise its suppose to be heavenly but the shiny silver armor?? come on! surely they could of been a little less gay.

That's just for starters, the acting from everyone (and I mean EVERYONE!!) is terrible, really bad and I see what people have been saying about Worthington now, a really poor performance here, almost TV movie standards. The less said about Neeson and Fiennes panto performances the better (the CGI on show that accompanied Fiennes was laughable, simply awful).

As for the film its just a jumbled mess and takes a totally different path to the original making it completely wrong frankly, as usual Hollywood MUST add or make up new stuff and ruin the entire story...why? Christ knows. For some reason we have a whole new species of blue eyed rock creatures or something, they look ridiculous, like something outta 'Zena Warrior Princess'. Plus we hardly see Calibos or Pegasus and there are just huge chunks missing in the story involving Calibos and Pegasus, I could go on.

The other stand out failure was certain scenes and the look of the film, the river Styx scene for example, in the original its filmed on location, its eerie, misty, you don't see much of the boatman which lends a nice air of spookiness, its a really nice setup. In the new version its clearly on a set, you see the boatman fully taking all atmosphere out of the scene and the boat is fudging huge! Second example, Medusa's lair, in the original its dark, tense, quite eerie and spooky, stone people everywhere.

Medusa is actually quite a scary creature and like in all good fantasy films she is hidden until the last moment. In the new version we see Medusa almost straight away, she has a human face which isn't scary, its not eerie or in the least bit tense, zero atmosphere. Clearly another tacky set with over the top CGI and its all over too quickly with silly big effect stunts and leaping around. I think the term less is more sums up the film comparisons perfectly here, this new version getting it lost in translation.

Only plus points...the Kraken is pretty wicked looking, Pegasus is smart looking despite being the wrong colour. His wings are the best CGI in the film and there's a lovely little cameo from Bubo thank God.

I can't recommend this, its an insult to the original classic, its terrible, no heart and soul and is just another overblown CGI mess. Such a shame and wasted chance, I really hope they don't remake any other classic Harryhausen films, stick to the far superior original.
Super Reviewer
½ June 1, 2014
Remake of Clash of the Titans is a train wreck that relies far too much on CGI, as well as bland performances from the cast. What makes this a poor effort is that the original didn't need a remake as it wasn't that great to begin with, it was a borderline decent affair that had its moments, but in the long run was a forgettable movie that didn't warrant multiple viewings. With this remake, they follow essentially the same idea as the original, but use way too much CGI, which cheapens the film. Add to that tiresome performances from the cast, and you have a film that is painful to sit through that never is anything really entertaining. Clash of the Titans didn't necessitate a remake because the original wasn't memorable and there was limited ways to improve upon the plot, which of course the filmmakers seem to copy here, and never establish anything refreshing. With boring performances and a wasted cast, this remake joins all the others that have failed to really establish something good to a classic film, but in this case since the original wasn't memorable, I'm curious to know why they even went ahead with this movie. The film follows practically the same path as the original, but with insane CGI that is over the top, and fairly pointless in the long run. I found myself not really enjoying this one, in fact I found it to be a very bad movie and I was hoping that it wasn't as bad as what everyone has said about it. Don't go expecting great things from this film, it is a very disappointing film and it's a film that is highly forgettable because it's defi9nitely not a good movie.
Super Reviewer
½ August 5, 2013
The remake of the 1981 original is much more better (visually, of course) but it is obviously inefficient from the lackluster script. But though misdirected, the script wasn't that much harm to take away from the thrilling CGI-work throughout the entirety of the film. 3.5/5
Super Reviewer
½ March 25, 2010
Although it diverts from the original story and the original film version, this newer take on the story of Perseus is still pretty entertaining and decent in its own right.

The effects are better, and the overall look is sleeker and sharper, but there's no charm to any of this. Even though the old version's effects look cheesy, they were awesome because it took more effort to do them, and they had a certain charm to them. The effects here are suitably creepy and cool, but they don't wow me.

Aside from these quibbles (and the liberties), it kind of bugged me that Worthington didn't cover up his Aussie accent, and that he uses "hell" and "bitch" in an out of place modern context. I get why it's there, but it doesn't really fit and kind of shakes one out of the story for a bit. The action scens are great, and are very well done, but they all seemed rather rushed to me, and didn't radiate with as much intensity and tension as they should.

The casting and performances are all pretty good and, accent aside, Worthington has really become an amazing and credible action star thanks to his last few roles (this included). He's a great choice for Perseus, even if he seems lacking in the department of human emotions and depth. Fiennes is good as always, but his casting as Hades reeks of obviousness. Good job anyways though. Neeson is good as Zeus, and I can't think of a better choice, but I felt underwhelmed ofr some reason.

Actually, that's kind of how I felt about the whole movie. It was fun and entertaining, and a remake was probably not a bad idea, but things just feel a bit more artifical and cold, and that's not cool. I did like a certain cameo appearance of a character from the original film though- that was certainly a nice touch. I'm okay with some of the CGI even though I would have preferred more practical stuff, but I kind of wished the film was loinger so the action scenes wouldn't have to feel so rushed and so some more depth could be given all around to the characters and story.

So yeah, this isn't a great film, and the original is better, but it's a fine enough remake, and it's worth at least a watch or two.
Super Reviewer
November 5, 2011
This movie costed 125 million dollars to make, which begs the question: Where the heck did all that money go? The settings look cheap, which makes the film look like a community theatre production. The costumes are bland and the over-use of makeup makes everybody look like a clown. The filmmakers removed all the substance and depth from the original. This leaves the film's plot to be extremely thin and meaningless. The visuals offer little to counter the film's vacuous plot. Compared to the Ray Harryhausen's brilliant stop-motion effects, the film's CGI looks terrible. The characters are one-dimensional, giving the actors very little to work with. Sam Worthington seems bored and Ralph Fiennes talks in his "Lord Voldemort" voice. Not even Liam Neeson can make the thin material work. This remake lacks the sense of adventure or excitement of the original.
Super Reviewer
June 16, 2012
When I first watched this, I thought it was pretty bad. Now a couple years later, in anticipation for the sequel, I decided to revisit and see if it is as bad as I originally thought. Time has been good to this remake, and I actually dig it more now. It's the story of mankind's revolution against the gods head by Zeus(Liam Neeson). Perseus(Sam Worthington) a demigod leads the revolution as he attempts to save a princess from Hades(Ralph Fiennes) who threatens to unleash the Krakken, a beast that could destroy mankind. The special effects are amazing, the story is just ok, and the performances are decent(at best). But it's a good dumb action flick, that is big on spectacle and low on substance. Which is fine, because sometimes you just need a movie like that every now and then. It'll never be considered a classic, but it'll be known as a fun movie, that is good for a couple hours of popcorn entertainment.
Super Reviewer
January 14, 2010
Clash of the Titans, has great characters, and a really good story that would grab a lot of people's attention, but that doesn't change the fact that it was rehashed from the 80's and tried to change a few things to make it inventive, while failing at that. It is surrounded by a lot of poor executions that bring my overall rating down. Sam Worthington does a decent job as Perceus, but the rest of the cast sort of fell flat. The visual effects were very average and albeit laughable at points, except for some reason at the end, it seemed as though they spent most of the budget on making the Kraken look good, which in both films has very little screen time. It does pay a few little homages to the original, poking fun at the 1981 version for about half of the film, but the fun quickly turns you off once you realize that they are only picking fun to let you know that they have changed the events and the way the story will play out. As enjoyable as this film is, it is almost an insult to the original. I kind of liked this movie at times, but there are many flaws that I have no problem complaining about. Infact, it really is not that good of a film at all, but it is nice to see the gods back on screen. To conclude, the effects are weak, the editing is awful, the score is very random and out of place, but the story is fun to see, and the characters are great! The 2010 version of "Clash of the Titans" is a very mixed bag. It's the type of movies that you will shrug your shoulders and forget about.
Super Reviewer
½ March 24, 2012
Although this an adventure film with enemies i think its basic, the allies die to soon, it could have lasted so much longerand theres a very minimalistic amount of mythical monsters that used which ruined it badly and the whole film just seems like it is hurried.
Super Reviewer
April 10, 2010
A warrior with the blood of Zeus running through his veins is charged with defeating a fearsome creature who is set to be unleashed on the city of Argos if its princess is not sacrificed. I wasn't a big fan of the original film so I went into Clash Of The titans with low expectations and surprise, surprise. Even they weren't met. It's just another example of the kind of poorly scripted CGI fests that plague modern cinema featuring dialogue that's all sound bites, characterisation by montage and battle sequences that look more like Transformers than Jason And The Argonauts. As always seems to be the case when hack directors are given a 3D project, Leterrier seemed far more interested in showing various objects spinning into camera than telling a coherent story and there are a host of horrible performances on display; Sam Worthington is as wooden as his ship and plays Perseus like a Mitchell brother and Ralph Fiennes' Hades is similarly bad, seeming more Harry Potter than Homer. Some of the visual effects are quite impressive and Gemma Arterton is very easy on the eye but otherwise there's very little to commend this episodic, weakly plotted and strangely dull swords and sandal version of Lord Of the Rings. A bit of a Greek tragedy really.
Super Reviewer
August 19, 2011
Clash of the Titans was a movie which critics hate and despise and the viewing public seem to love. Although I am the public I hated this film as much as teh critics and fellow RT's seem to agree.
* 1 Star
Super Reviewer
February 27, 2011
Cheesy visuals and boring story make a okay movie that you will only remember some action scenes
Super Reviewer
February 1, 2011
It's not the best it could've been but it kinda works for me.
Super Reviewer
½ January 26, 2011
This one is easy to review, everyone else has done that already. All I will say the original was much better, I am not much for computer graphics in order to enhance a movie and lots of scenes were far from the original, it was actually down graded by some of the adult only lines. This should have carried a different title. 2 1/2 stars
Super Reviewer
½ February 1, 2010
probably the dumbest thing so far this year. will be remembered only by this line: " i know youre part man and part god, but you got the best of both worlds. "
I believe that in about 50 years, we will start to hear dialogue a little like this:
"Eh... that a banana?"
"No. bananas are yellow. this is also yellow, but its not a banana."
"oh... thats a french fry, huh?"
"yep. theyre both food and yellow!"
"How romantic.... wanna fuck?"
"ok! quick, get the banana!"
Super Reviewer
August 3, 2010
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.

This film could have been better, but it sounds like the sequel is on a better track. I probably wouldn't have been interested in a sequel, but I think I will give a second one a shot.
Super Reviewer
January 13, 2011
In this movie some good actors and Sam Worthington demonstrate style over substance.
michael e.
Super Reviewer
½ January 2, 2011
i had no care to see it but i was forced too for my dads birhtday, and i really had no expectations for this movie and i was expecting it too suck, and what do you know it did, the action was terrible and about 95% of the time it was so dark i couldn't tell what was going on, im not lying.
Page 1 of 1152