Clash of the Titans (spoilers - if it matters)

[Grand Moff Muffin]

My feelings about this film are a bit like my feelings about the Transformers live-action movies. It's great seeing the Greek gods and mythical creatures portrayed photorealistically with no technological limitations to their visualisation, just as it is great with Transformers. It's also great to see bits of the 'proper' Greek mythology transferred to the screen in terms of characters, concepts and plot fragments - as with Transformers. But at the same time, it's frustrating the bits of the story they get 'wrong' or don't think worth putting on screen - as with Transformers. The rationale for the frustration is a bit different, in that with 'Clash of the Titans', modernising the story means lessening the integrity of the classical education that the film-makers give to the audience whilst entertaining them. On the one hand, you could consider the whole thing a bonus - most of the audience will leave the cinema after watching 'Clash' knowing more about Greek mythology than they did when they went in - but they won't know _which_ plot elements are authentic and which are Hollywood, which is a shame.

I mean, the ending of 'Clash' is not an ending you would ever get in Greek mythology. It's pure Hollywood.

So mixed feelings - absolutely beautiful seeing the winged horse Pegasus soaring, diving and galloping. But frustrating in that it's Perseus riding him and not Bellerophon (the hero who rode him in classical mythology). Perseus should be flying around on winged sandals. Good to see Perseus save Andromeda from a sea monster - bad that the sea monster here is sent by Hades when it was sent by Poseidon in the Greek myths. Here the city is Argo, when it was a different city in the myths. Here Perseus saves the city - in the myths he doesn't save it, but rather uses Medusa's head to turn its army to stone and takes Andromeda away.

And what Io is doing in the film as Perseus's love interest I have no idea. I don't think they ever met in classical mythology.

So... the more I think about it, the more annoyed I am that they didn't use the budget to actually film the stories of the Greek myths as handed down from ancient times - which would make just as spectacular a film.

And yet, it looks great, and it may get some people to go and read the classics.

Better than 'Troy', not as good as 'Percy Jackson and the Lightning Thief'.

Martin

[Deleted]

Give me the original 1981 version of the film anyday.

It's interesting that you note that in this new version they used Hades as the person who unleashed the Kraken when I'm sure in the 1981 version it Poseidon that did it as per the original mythology you speak of. I'm not up to scratch on all this ancient greek mythology stuff but I do like a good tale that tells it like a film depicting it. The films may 'sex up' the stories for Hollywood but I think they still do quite a good job of getting the stories about 75% accurate.

[Grand Moff Muffin]

Apr 7, 2010 18:59:00 GMT @zudobug said:

The films may 'sex up' the stories for Hollywood but I think they still do quite a good job of getting the stories about 75% accurate.

Interesting choice of words. Ancient Greek mythology is full of sex. Hollywood versions tend to shy clear and edit those bits out.

I must say, it feels weird coming out of the cinema after seeing a Hollywood movie where all the main characters are lifted from 3,000-year-old stories and have star constellations, moons and planets named after them in the night sky to this day, despite the religion itself being dead. If that's not testament to a good story - still being re-told 3,000 years later and still being used for names of stars, planets, months, etc. - I don't know what is. Totally humbling.

Martin

[jameso]

This film was dreadful, and the 3D effect was pathetic and a massive waste of the extra ticket money.
There was a documentry on the History channel a few weeks ago about if any of the Perseus mythology had any basis in reality which was a million times more entertaining.

[Fortmax2020]

Visually I'll agree with Martin that this looked good and was an ok enough film to chew up a few hours with, but overall disappointing. There is far too much time spent on Perseus which means there is no time to ratchet up the genuine drama of conflict in Olympus and/or a city under threat. You know that Perseus will survive and you can't form any sort of emotional connection with the other characters (let Andromeda hang, I have no reason to care for instance) which left me as a viewer simply being non-bothered by the outcome of the film. Not a good recipe for audiance engagement really.

And advise to Ralph, this film is showing in 2D at your local, but don't go and see it. You will only be upset after.

[Grand Moff Muffin]

Where those Jinn things riding giant scorpions come from I have no idea. I don't recall them from Greek mythology. Also, Medusa didn't live in the Underworld and Perseus never went there.

And despite the title, there were no Titans in the film! But there _was_ a Titan in the traditional Greek myth of Perseus - namely Atlas, the Titan who holds up the world, who Perseus turned into a mountain by showing him Medusa's head.

And the Kraken isn't from Greek mythology. It's from Scandinavian mythology.

Bah!

On the other hand, never seen a better looking winged horse on film...

Martin

[Deleted]

I think the Titans in the film title refers to the Gods themselves. They hold the ultimate power over everybody and are clashing with each other. On one side there are Gods who want Perseus to succeed while the other Gods want him to fail.

I've never seen this new film but I was wondering if certain characters from the original classic turn up in it. Namely Calibos who was turned into a beast for his crimes against the winged horses and the two headed dog Dioskilos whom Perseus faced en route to battling Medusa.

[jameso]

In this one, the Titans were supposed to be Zeus, Hades and Poseidon's 'parents', I think.

[Grand Moff Muffin]

Apr 8, 2010 11:25:57 GMT @zudobug said:

I've never seen this new film but I was wondering if certain characters from the original classic turn up in it. Namely Calibos who was turned into a beast for his crimes against the winged horses and the two headed dog Dioskilos whom Perseus faced en route to battling Medusa.

Not as I recall.

Apr 8, 2010 16:10:16 GMT jameso said:

In this one, the Titans were supposed to be Zeus, Hades and Poseidon's 'parents', I think.

Yes, that's correct, and consistent with ancient Greek mythology. But they don't appear in the film.

Martin

[The Doctor]

As soon as it was announced this was in 3-D I lost interest in going to see it.

-Ralph

[Deleted]

Apr 8, 2010 17:08:44 GMT Grand Moff Muffin said:

Apr 8, 2010 11:25:57 GMT @zudobug said:

I've never seen this new film but I was wondering if certain characters from the original classic turn up in it. Namely Calibos who was turned into a beast for his crimes against the winged horses and the two headed dog Dioskilos whom Perseus faced en route to battling Medusa.

Not as I recall.

Apr 8, 2010 16:10:16 GMT jameso said:

In this one, the Titans were supposed to be Zeus, Hades and Poseidon's 'parents', I think.

Yes, that's correct, and consistent with ancient Greek mythology. But they don't appear in the film.

Martin

So you're saying that some of the characters from the original 1981 film don't appear? Calibos was a central character in the original while the battle between Perseus and Dioskilos was a good scene. Also in the original all of the gods were featured although some were featured more than others.

I think I'll stick to the original version. At least Ray Harryhausen and the Charles H Schneer knew how to make an excellent fantasy epic.

[jameso]

Yeah, they don't appear, but the Titans are mentioned in Io's prologue at the start.

Ralph, the 3d effects are so neglible that I would say it's fine to watch the 2d version without any worries about missing stuff.

[Grand Moff Muffin]

I understand the 3D elements were put on at the end as an afterthought.

I fear that boycotting the 2D version of every film that is also available in 3D is going to seriously limit your cinema-going choices in future, Ralph.

Martin

[The Doctor]

I'll vote with my wallet. Seeing a 2D version of a film that's meant to be in 3D seems spectacularly pointless to me.

-Ralph

[Deleted]

A run through of the creatures that appeared in the original film.

[grahamthomson]

I went to see this last night with some mates. Not my choice, I hasten to add.

Apparently it was 3D. I must have had duff glasses on as the effect barely registered. Most of the creatures were well designed but the CGI was so ropey (particularly on Medusa) it was painful to watch at times.

Sam Worthington's acting range so far; In Terminator: gritted teeth, Avatar: gritted teeth, Clash: gritted teeth.

Awful.

[Deleted]

I'm not going to waste my time watching it but thats only because I'm a massive fan of the original and I can't see the point in re-making a film that was already excellent in the first place. strangely though, a workmate was telling me today that it was one of the best films he's seen in a long while.