Clash of the Titans

Clash of the Titans - Danny Danger Oz

dalekboy

[	userinfo	\|	livejournal userinfo	]
[	archive	\|	journal archive	]

Clash of the Titans	[Apr. 8th, 2010\|12:19 am] dalekboy
Saw this in glorious 2D, and suspect that if I'd seen it in 3D the effects would have annoyed the hell out of me. As it was, a reasonable enough flick. I haven't seen the original in some years, but remember it as being fun. This was less fun, but still enjoyable. Don't think it was worth $17, so very glad I didn't pay $21 to see it in 3D. That said, I don't think most movies are worth $17, given that many only spend $2.50 on the script. 7/10 I think some of the action scenes suffered a bit because you couldn't always tell what was happening, and the effects were of varying quality. That said, I loved the two hunting characters that join the group, and the scene with the pimped out scorpions was inspired. I do think for all the great big massive effects shots, the missed the shot that, if done well, would have the money shot of the flick - the pegasus running along the shore. If they'd continued that shot and shown it lifting off, it would have been amazing.
link	Reply

Comments:

From:

fuschia17
2010-04-07 03:09 pm (UTC)

Apart from the added logistics of having to find a babysitter, these days I haven't really made the trek to the movies to see a film unless it is something that I really *know* and trust that there would be more than $2.50 worth of script. I've been a whole three times - Star Trek, Harry Potter and Avatar - in the past two and a half years.

Unlike with the general population, the supposed stars don't make me want to see a film and in some cases - like where Tom Cruise is in it for example - shudder - it can actually turn me *off* a movie. We just saw Avatar for the first time the other week at the movies! I'm not sure I'd go out of my way to repeat seeing it at the movies, but I do have to admit the effects were kinda awesome.

That being said, and slightly contrary to what was just stated, as in most cases, Johnny Depp is usually the exception to the rule. And when he is teamed with Tim Burton and Helena Bonham Carter I would be curious enough to experience the film at the movies. However, Tim Burton was slightly disappointing the last few movies and I am not anxious to have my hopes dashed again.

(Reply) (Thread)

From:

cheshirenoir
2010-04-07 10:51 pm (UTC)

Do NOT, I repeat, Do NOT see this in 3D. I liked Avatar in 3D. I liked Alice in Wonderland in 3D. In those two the 3D very very rarely "got in my way". (Interestingly it got in my way more in Avatar than in Alice)

THIS movie, the 3D would regularly get in my way. Examples:
*An 8 legged Pegasus. (Bad interframe effect I guess)
*Hades and his twin brother, who was standing just behind him.
*Perseus and his strangely wandering ears, which would bounce in and out on his head.
*Cardboard cutout cities, made up of thin layers stacked behind each other.

Bleah! 3D done badly sucks. I am glad I didn't have to pay for it.

(Reply) (Thread)

From:

dalekboy
2010-04-08 12:20 am (UTC)

I wasn't planning to. I'm not planing on seeing the 3D version of any film shot in 2D. Hell, I probably won't bother with most 3D films anyway.

I actually thought a chunk of the effects work was a bit ordinary. There was one shot of a city where I thought, "Wow, that looks really flat."

(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)

From:

gutter_monkey
2010-04-08 11:35 am (UTC)

I was somewhat miffed that out of all the legends on the origin of Medusa they had to choose from they ended up using the one which casts her as a man-hating rape victim who deserves to die.

Yeah we don't need to demonize rape victims any more, Hollywood.

(Reply) (Thread)

Log in