Clash of the Titans
This movie ultimately tries to have it both ways. It wants to be a traditional heroes’ quest like the original film was, but it also tries to be something the first film wasn’t- a film where man uses it’s free will against the Gods that have fed off of them for centuries.
The truth is, the latter is a compelling story, as demigod Perseus (Sam Worthington, who plays the part he’s given well) seeks vengeance against Hades (Ralph Fiennes, in full Voldemort mode) for the death of his mother, adopted father, and sister after they happen to be in the wrong place at the wrong time.
The problem is, the rest of the movie follows the story of the 1981 “Clash of the Titans”- which was the ultimate swan song for stop-motion master Ray Harryhausen- to a “t.” If you’ve seen that one, you know that the story’s motivating for is Perseus’ love for Andromeda, who is to be sacrificed to the Kraken after her mother Casseopea insulted the Gods. That storyline is intact…except for the fact that Perseus couldn’t care less for Andromeda (Alexa Davalos). He just wants to get back at Hades.
The film’s story issues are unfortunate, because the film’s production values deserve a great story for them. Director Louis Leterrier (“The Incredible Hulk”) has made a fantastic-looking film that improves on the clean vision of the ancient world of the original, and goes beyond it, creating a world not unlike Sparta in “300.” And Mount Olympus has never looked so beautiful and yet menacing. Precisely the type of world we would expect to see the likes of Zeus (Liam Neeson, matching Olivier’s performance bluster-for-bluster), Poseidon, and the rest. Unfortunately, we don’t see them much, as the writers have taken away one of the more interesting aspects of the original film, which was seeing the Gods discuss humanity like pieces of a chess game.
In the end, the film’s best parts are too scarce to recommend the film fully- say what you will about the original, but it knew the type of movie it wanted to be and ran with it. Still, I liked many of the performances (including Gemma Arterton as Io, a new character who helps Perseus along the way), and the creatures and action sequences are exceptionally well-done, especially as Perseus and co. go down to the underworld to Medusa’s lair to get her head to destroy the Kraken. Why is it this is the one sequence that both film’s got right? Probably because it’s the most interesting one for our characters to deal with. How do you take the head of a creature you can’t look directly at? The answer both times in imagination. I liked the original film’s sense of imagination more.
(Author’s note: I typically don’t advocate for reader action in these reviews, but in the case of “Clash,” it’s important. Watch the 2-D version of the film. The 3-D conversion (which was done in the past few months after “Avatar” rocked the box-office) is reportedly awful, as both other reviewers and friends who have seen it have mentioned. If you watch the 3-D version and are inclined to complain, bypass the theatre (which is likely already aware of your issues- I know we are) and contact the studio themselves. Implore them to retract the 3-D version and replace it with 2-D digital prints. Or better yet, just advise friends to skip the 3-D version entirely and watch it in 2-D as I did. Show Warner Bros. you’ll only accept the best 3-D presentation, and not just a careless ploy for more money. I assure you that regardless of whether you like the movie or not, at least you’ll be satisfied with the presentation more.)
