Immortals Reviews

"Immortals was OK. I enjoyed the action and the blood and gore. But the story was lacking for me. It is visually nice and there are a lot of great action scenes. But I was a little bored. I just didn't care about what happened. The acting was OK. I really like Luke Evans. I wanted to see more of him. I liked John Hurt in this as well. It didn't impress me. The film is worth seeing at least once."

A decent sword & sandals film. Generally more like 300 than Clash of the Titans thankfully. From the same producers I believe as 300 and it has a very similar CGI visual style to it. A nice twist to some of the Greek mythology in the story. The fight scenes are well choreographed and the SFX are very good. Add to that Mickey Rourke giving a good performance as the chief villain and you have a very good film.

My type of movie! BUT, I watched this movie with jaded eyes, expecting it to be more hype than substance. I was pleasantly surprised. To my amusement, I found myself gripping the arms of my chair more than once in the epic battle scenes. The special effects were solid, the dialogue better than average, and well acted by newer and veteran actors alike. Very well done, compelling storyline, marvelous combat moves, not overly gory...good movie!

Cliched.

Singh is a master of visuals. Here he uses them incredibly well to completely distract you from a rather tired plot. Hyperion, played as a filthy cruel terror by Rourke, wants a special bow so he can release the Titans and take on the Gods. Theseus is your average hero in such a genre. Is he man or god or both? And how will he handle his power? Luke Evans and a band of pin ups play the gods, which kind of makes sense because if I were a god, I'd make myself gorgeous. The action scenes are stunning, but can also feel as though they are ripped straight from a music video. Sometimes this makes them disconnected from the plot and they lack emotion. Compared to last years Clash of the Titans, this just wins on some memorable visuals, which ranges from the costumes to the settings, such as the cliff-side village. Give it a whirl, but I too am waiting for the great classic Greek mythological gem.

Tarsem Singh's Immortals is all show with very little else to back it up.The plot isn't meaty enough to fulfill 100 minutes of screen time, yet the picture spans that length. The story moves at an average pace, but nothing exciting ever happens throughout. The details are thin and even the conclusion is lackluster. As for the characters, they are stale and poorly written with very little to learn about any of them.The action and visuals stand out, as there is extensive use of CG for the backdrops. It gives the film a bit of a comic book feel to it, but this isn't anything to brag about. Certain segments of the action do contain some nice choreography, although they are smothered with CG and change-in-speed motion effects.Henry Cavill isn't much of a lead and part of it has to do with the writing. Stephen Dorff and Luke Evans make up where Cavill suffers, but both lack serious screen time and development. Freida Pinto and Mickey Rourke are ok for what it's worth.Immortals doesn't offer a whole lot on the table, aside from its visual flair; however, that isn't enough to make this a recommendation.

If you see no other sword and sandle movie, this is the one you need to see, unreal, full of great action and drama. Worth every bit of 5 stars

One of the most boring, predictable, empty "action" movies made as of late, concerning an ordinary peasant (Henry Cavill) who seeks vengeance on an evil king (Mickey Rourke) who murdered his mother, and is seeking a magical bow to become the master of the world. It sounded stupid, but I decided I would give it a try seeing director Tarsem Singh has shown to have a Mallick-ian eye for how to shoot a picture, even if his movies are not that great to begin with. Here, we have a screenplay written by what appears to be a third-grader, and the result is a predictable, cliche-ridden fest that never offers any surprises, unique characters, or really a reason to exist. The performances are okay considering the terribly written story, Freida Pinto has proven to be a young talent to keep an eye on, here, like everyone in the cast, she is wasted. It looks like a form of "300", in the route of potential guilty-pleasure territory, instead it is just a huge bore, and not worth anyone's time.

All style, but no substance...disappointing!...

VERY unique action was brought out by the film and even though the producers were having a slight case of nostalgia during production, I think it's a worthy contender for some awards.

Immortals derives from the same visual style as 300 but ironically, the narrative is even more empty, emotionally dry, and stale than the Spartan outing... How is that even possible?

OOOOOHHH, COOL LOOKING SHOT! was the thought that ran through my mind once every 30 minutes throughout this 1 hour and 50 minute movie. And with the snippets of short-lived thrills Immortals offers, we're quickly reminded those thrills are very temporal once the movie makes any effort to do any type of storytelling -- whether it may be the simplest of dialogue describing the backdrop to the story, to the main protagonist's acting. It's funny -- I think this is the only movie I've seen where the highlight of the film consisted of only 10 seconds of the entire experience, but the rest being horrifyingly bad to the point where the storytelling is worse than 80% of baby picture books. In every aspect, Immortals fails. Acting ranges from average to horrendous except for Mickey Rourke (he's a beast), screenplay was corny, and frankly, it was just too boring. There's a love story that pops up out of NOWHERE. Yeah, there's a few glances here and there but there was NO inclination or hints that drew up a love story throughout the course of the narrative. How do I prove that this truth? Before we, as the viewers, understand that the protagonist and Freida Pinto are falling in love, there is not one SINGLE line of dialogue invested to develop this love relationship. None. Nope, not even one. So as you can imagine, I was just like, OH... PFF! There she goes throwing her clothes off out of nowhere -- didn't see that one coming! Was it really necessary to add nudity? It's like those I love boobies! braclets; you're not wearing those bracelets to actively invest money towards the cure to save those who are suffering under the awful detriments of breast cancer -- you're wearing it cause you think you're goofy and cool. Same here. It added nothing to the narrative other then making a bunch teenage boys across the nation hot in uncomfortable places. I feel bad for Freida Pinto; she deserves better.

Undoubtedly, Immortals was a horrible movie. It fails to be an entertaining action movie with a narrative so disastrous, it makes even some of the worst movies look good.

Immortals is what I would call the "ugly duckling" of the big epics it has been compared to (others being "300" and the remake of "Clash of the Titans"). It's very atmospheric and has a great aesthetic, but it lacks compelling characters and a well thought out story. It rarely explains what is going on and hopes that you are familiar with the tale it is telling. I also didn't like how normal they made the gods and titans out to be. It just did not fit well with the story. Most of the time movies like this can get by with their special effects and how entertaining they are, but Immortals only gets a passing grade from me on one of those fronts. It's not an unpleasant or stupid movie, it just didn't live up to the potential I thought it would.

three stars

It kicks 300 out of the water. A triumph of visual storytelling and breathtaking bloody action. A spectacular and heart-pounding action-packed epic that will have you spellbound. A powerful and unforgettable motion picture experiance. It will have you amazed every step of the way with its stunning effects, bold battles, strong performances and superb direction. Henry Caill gives a strong and thrilling performance. Mickey Rourke is amazing. Luke Evans is terrific. A bold and original new take of the Greek Gods and their heroes. A roller-coaster of edge of your seat thrills and spectacle.

The Gods Need a Hero

Absolutely loved it! Great film! Great balance of story and epic battles, it truly was amazing to watch. The story was developed and the fighting scenes were incredibly awesome. Watch out for Henry Cavill he is one of the most promising actors to come in the near future!

Eons after the Gods won their mythic struggle against the Titans, a new evil threatens the land. Mad with power, King Hyperion (Mickey Rourke) has declared war against humanity. Amassing a bloodthirsty army of soldiers disfigured by his own hand, Hyperion has scorched Greece in search of the legendary Epirus Bow, a weapon of unimaginable power forged in the heavens by Ares. Only he who possesses this bow can unleash the Titans, who have been imprisoned deep within the walls of Mount Tartaros since the dawn of time and thirst for revenge. In the king's hands, the bow would rain destruction upon mankind and annihilate the Gods. But ancient law dictates the Gods must not intervene in man's conflict. They remain powerless to stop Hyperion...until a peasant named Theseus (Henry Cavill) comes forth as their only hope. Secretly chosen by Zeus, Theseus must save his people from Hyperion and his hordes. Rallying a band of fellow outsiders-including visionary priestess Phaedra (Freida Pinto) and cunning slave Stavros (Stephen Dorff)-one hero will lead the uprising, or watch his homeland fall into ruin and his Gods vanish into legend.

a movie just for the graphics and effects, weak mixed story.

Based very loosely on certain fables of Greek mythology but interesting none the less, I must admit to loving historical epics or action films set in ancient times and this is another fine fun film in my view.

Obvious comparisons to '300' of course, when I first heard of this film I thought it was the sequel to be honest, its pretty much in the same style lets face it, very heavily influenced I'm sure. This isn't a bad thing though as the film looks really really nice, a blend of dreamy surrealism, gritty sweaty glistening warriors in shining armour, heavenly Gods and some slow motion action all mixed together in a visual classical painting of sorts. So yes plenty of cgi but it works well as it did for '300' in a warm metallic colour pallet.

I still think '300' is the better film hands down, this film was a little slow with its story and didn't really have great acting either, not that '300' was full of epic performances but this film did feel a tad more pantomime, especially with the God sequences in their shiny golden 'Flash Gordon' type outfits.

Rourke wasn't as strong as I had hoped, not sure what I expected but he just didn't wow me, Cavill looked the part but his acting skills clearly need honing whilst the same can be said for Pinto who is absolutely stunning but lacks proper acting skills. Total miscasting of Dorff methinks, really couldn't see him in this type of film and is there a film where John Hurt doesn't slip into his role with ease? not really, nuff said.

The film was as I expected and I enjoyed it, if you like '300' I'm sure you will enjoy this with its graphic novel stylings, not as much blood and not as vibrant in the slaughter department but that's down to very different stories. I'm quite happy to see more films like this about ancient historical/mythical tales, why couldn't they have done the remake of 'Clash of the Titans' like this?

Following in the footsteps of the far superior 300, this is a visually spectacular, albeit mediocerly written sword & sandal picture. I have nothing but praise to bestow upon the fights and artistic style of the film, but when it comes to the writing, we have indubiately found its Achilles' heel. Flat and hackneyed dialogue that we've heard a thousand times before, holds the film back from it ascension towards the heavens. On a positive note, however, the breathtaking action keeps it thoroughly exciting. Mickey Rourke exudes amazing screen presence with his memorable interpretation of the ruthless King Hyperion, and most other cast members do a decent job as well (even if they are pedestrian compared to Rourke). So as part of the Greek-mythos-brought-to-life genre, this stands on pretty solid ground. Solid as in good, but not quite evenly enough to become a subject for repeated viewings. Awesome final battle though, that's something it succeeded to do near-perfectly.

A cheap Chinese knock off of 300.

Good action, good effects, but not as good as "300", "Immortals" is a decent enough action movie. King Hyperion(Mickey Rourke) is in search of a weapon, the Bow of Epirus, that will give him power over the Gods. Along the way he murders the mother of Theseus(Henry Cavill), a stonemason, who then leads men to stand up to Hyperion and wage a battle for their freedom. Yeah, this is a guy movie. Lots of violence, blood, guts, some sex, and crazy battles. Cavill does a great job, especially with his big speech towards the end. He is gonna be the new "Superman" and I gotta say, I think he will be great. This is from the producers of "300", and it's clear that was what they were aiming for. Unfortunately, this movie doesn't have as good a story as "300", or the charismatic characters of "300" either. But it is better than other similar movies like "Clash of the Titans". It's worth a watch. Just don't expect your lady to enjoy it(and if she does,that is awesome!)