Sunday, April 11, 2010

Review: "Clash of the Titans" (2010)

- Posted by Rusty

Note: Sorry for missing the “What’s on the Menu” column again. To make up for that, I’ll have a review of last week’s only major release, the funny and surprisingly pleasant Date Night, very soon.


Guide to the Bite Ratings: I realize it’s been a (once again, super embarrassingly) long time since my last review. So, for anyone new to our ratings system, or for just a nice refresher, here’s a quick breakdown:

1 bite = terrible; an absolute waste of time (ie, Fantastic Four, Gamer, Friday the 13th, Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen)
2 bites = mediocre; almost good; decent, but not quite strong enough to recommend (ie, 9, Troy, Step Up 2: The Streets, G.I. Joe)
3 bites = a good film, if not necessarily a great one (ie, Tim Burton’s Alice in Wonderland, The Hurt Locker, Sherlock Holmes, Star Trek, Iron Man)
4 bites = a great film; pretty much an instant classic (ie, Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban, Inglourious Basterds, Matchstick Men, Avatar)
5 bites = a masterpiece; a perfect film (ie, Lost in Translation, Almost Famous, Lawrence of Arabia, Ratatouille, The Incredibles); I’m very stingy with this one, but I think many 4-bite movies, with time, graduate to this level

Review: Clash of the Titans

My Rating: 2 ½ bites [out of 5]

In Short: Ridiculous and occasionally just plain stupid, this is still a lot of fun to watch thanks to the actors and the overall entertainment value. Check it out for the awesome visuals and great action, if not necessarily the dramatic arcs or character development (of which the less said about, the better). [full review after the jump]

Full Review: Clash of the Titans is exactly the movie it promises to be. The action is all-out, the Greek mythological world is represented here with all the best that modern movie magic could produce, and the entire experience is just plain fun.

It’s just not a very good movie, as much as I enjoyed it.

So, I’ll make this a cautious recommendation: the entertainment value is definitely here, as is some good acting (for a movie of this type) and a more-or-less faithful approach to the original myth of Perseus and Medusa.

In this version of the story, demi-god Perseus (Avatar’s Sam Worthington, in crew-cut, manly-stubbled, glowering good-guy perfection), the son of Zeus (Liam Neeson, always good), vows to take down the gods for the pain they’ve brought him (revealing any more would be too much spoiler territory—suffice to say that Perseus’ motivation is more effective here than the simple “Let’s go out and do this!” attitude he showed in the myth). As such, his journey has him facing off against giant scorpions (a great sequence), the Gorgon Medusa, the lizard-ified witch who turns men to stone with one look into her eyes (an even better sequence), the wrath of Underworld god, Hades, with his giant serpent beast, The Kraken (the show-stopper, with the Kraken better used here than in Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Man’s Chest), and, in the process, hopefully saving the city of Argos (which, like all Hollywood period pieces, is populated only by Brits…and one Australian), whose citizens have stirred the ire of the gods with their selfish and impious ways.

If it sounds silly, it occasionally is. But the filmmakers, particularly director Louis Letterier, know what type of film they’re dealing with here, and they never try to be anything more (or less, for that matter) than just delivering a good, rollicking, adventurous time at the movies. With that, you might be willing to forgive the terrible supporting character development of Perseus’ fellow warriors (they might as well have been called Expendable Good Guys #’s 1-5).

Or the ridiculous creature design of Perseus’ ally, who comes off as a less articulate version of Treebeard from Lord of the Rings.

Or the fact that Hades (played with lots of scenery-chewing, slimy fun by the great Ralph Fiennes, who we’ll see again in villain mode in Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows later this year) has a takeover plan that barely makes any sense. Why does Zeus even listen to him? Or, better yet, why can’t Zeus just stop him when it becomes obvious that he's been betrayed? Well, maybe it’s best not to think about that…

Like I said, if you go with the spirit of the film, you might be willing to overlook all of those problems, just like me. Director Louis Leterrier (The Incredible Hulk with Edward Norton, The Transporter 2 with my man, Jason Statham) stages terrific action sequences, like always, and shows a sly command with the tone of the picture as well, one that never quite veers into camp, but still manages to not take everything too seriously. I wish he showed the strong sense of story that he did with Hulk, but he keeps the pacing zippy and the action plentiful enough that I didn’t mind all that terribly.

More than that, the picture is cast just right. On the gods side, you could not do better than having Liam Neeson as Zeus, using that booming, commanding, and (yep) still pretty wise voice of his to maximum effect (despite the fact that this film retains Zeus’ stints as a part-time mortal rapist). Same with Ralph Fiennes, who’s clearly relishing playing over-the-top and irredeemably evil. And, on the virtuous side, we have Sam Worthington demonstrating once again why he’s so in-demand, and how well and comfortably he plays the reluctant hero.

--A note on Sam Worthington: I know a lot of people criticize his impossible-to-hide Australian accent (which, yes, still comes and goes here) or his lack of versatility. Fair enough, but, despite that, I find him an impressive young actor, one who should have a very bright future if he’s careful about his project choices. He might not necessarily become a respected character actor, but he certainly has the talent, and, like fellow Aussie Russell Crowe, he has the natural screen presence and charisma to hold your attention in a film of this scope. Look at him in his scenes with Neeson—he easily holds his own, and, throughout the entire film (even with minimal dialogue), you believe in his quest and in his ability to come out victorious. As he did with Terminator: Salvation and even Avatar, Worthington brings more depth than expected to this type of "conflicted" hero role. He has a straight-up drama coming up later this year, and I’m pretty sure he'll surprise more people once you get him out of the company of robots, gods, and giant blue aliens. Or, of course, he could always play Perseus again in a Clash of the Titans sequel (which just might happen, since the film’s a hit), something I wouldn’t object to at all!--

I also want to point out British actress Gemma Arterton (who will next be seen in May's Price of Persia opposite Jake Gyllenhaal), here playing Io, a slightly rejiggered version of the mythological heroine who caught Zeus’ eye. She mostly has to explain stuff to our hero, though she does it with aplomb, and she’s a very good, spunky foil for our straight-laced hero. Plus, the film nicely handles the would-be romance between Perseus and Princess Andromeda (Alexa Davalos), the woman who must be sacrificed to the Kraken if she wishes to save Argos, especially given that Sam Worthington has more screen time – and, really, chemistry – with Gemma Arterton. The film might veer off from the original myth to include more scorpions and special effects, but it keeps the story points that matter, and I very much liked that the script made Andromeda a strong woman with some actual agency over her fate, and not the boring damsel-in-distress (and prize for our hero) that she was in the myth.

All in all, if you can look past the many flaws, what we have here is an enjoyable film that just seeks to entertain. The effects are all amazing (well, maybe not the Treebeard…but the Kraken alone makes this worth seeing in theaters), the actors game to go with the tone, no matter how ridiculous things become, and, mostly, it’s just great to see the world of Greek mythology make such a huge return to theaters. If this gets kids excited to read up on Perseus and all his larger-than-life, horny, bizarre, yet always interesting fellow heroes, then, by all means, this is not a bad introduction.

So, if this type of adventure film is up your alley (it definitely goes with my ultra-geeky preference, that for old-school heroes vs. great, insurmountable odds), then you might come out with a smile on your face, just like I did.

P.S. I mentioned this before in the What’s on the Menu column last week, but I want to stress again that the 3D is not necessary for this film. As much as the advertising wants you to think so, the effect was added late in the process, so by no means was this movie shot with the intention of the extra dimension. With the exception of one axe flying at you, nothing here makes the extra $5 worthwhile. Unlike How to Train Your Dragon (the best film out right now—review also coming in a bit!), this wasn’t designed for the depth of 3D, so the world here just looks a little stretched out and poppy, nothing more. If you see it, save the money and just go for good old cheaper 2D.

4 comments:

  1. Did you watch in 3D? If so, what did you think? I haven't seen it, but read many negative reviews about the 3D conversion work...

    ReplyDelete
  2. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Yep, we saw it in 3D (it sounded too cool to resist). It wasn't so much awful, as it just didn't add anything to the experience. It wasn't like "Avatar" or "How to Train Your Dragon" (you saw that, right? I love that movie!), where you could tell they were designed to immerse you with the 3D effects. Here, it was just...some stuff flies at you every once in a while. I didn't find it a huge distraction like a lot of the reviews (since the film was still a lot of fun), but it's definitely not worth the higher ticket price.

    ReplyDelete
  4. you're a bit too generous with you review here

    ReplyDelete

LinkWithin

Related Posts with Thumbnails