Clash of the Titans movie

[VBBN]

I saw book of Eli yesterday. An awwsome movie. But I also saw a trailer for a movie called clash of thetitans. Is anyone else lookig forward to it. It seems like the next biggest thing I have been excited about besides iron man 2.

[YG-49]

At least now we have another use for the new Atlantis giant Scorpion!

[Dunjohn]

... "Titans will clash?" Now THAT's an inspired tagline

[hollisbrick]

I saw he trailer a month back I got to say, it looks awesome!

I used to love all the oldskool greek myth stories as a kid

[Forresto]

I hope it's great because it is remaking a classic. It looks like it's going to be pretty spectacular however!

Too bad Lego had to go for POP instead of this. This seemslike it would be able to use many of the same elements as POP but also add the Greek twist into it.

[VBBN]

Actually, YG-49, there is a new trailer out, and if you watch it to the end, you will see thw Kraken.

And holy crap is that a crazy creature. It's Huge, And a mix between a squid nd CLoverfield.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qpZ5D_Wc4cA

[Zarkan]

*sigh* remakes, remakes, remakes - can't Hollywood come out with any original movies these days? Yes, this is an exaggeration, but I'm still not happy about how many reboots we're getting this year.

Actually, YG-49, there is a new trailer out, and if you watch it to the end, you will see thw Kraken.

And holy crap is that a crazy creature. It's Huge, And a mix between a squid nd CLoverfield.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qpZ5D_Wc4cA

So, in that sense, it's not like the PoTC Kraken at all, which was basically just a really ugly squid.

Edited January 19, 2010 by Grevious

[WesternOutlaw]

Wow! Neat trailer, and a great movie to remake.

Clash of the Titans from 1981 was a Ray Harryhausen film. He created the movie magic for the Sinbad movies, as well as films like Jason and the Argonauts and Valley of the Gwangi. To todays standards, many may not be real impressed, but his stop-motion effects were state of the art at the time, and he helped create stop-motion filming (with dinos and other mythical creatures).

To see a new remake of a great story with computer graphics and modern movie magic will be awesome. Thanks for sharing the news - I look forward to seeing this movie.

[Batbrick]

I'm sort of looking forward to this despite my personal investment in the original. The effects look good, but two things are bugging me;

1. Kraken. Dear grief the Kraken isn't even in Greek mythology!

2. The real bug though is that I hear Hades is being the villain. How very original. I mean c'mon, I know it's easy to write a villain who already has a dark look and motif (the dead) but I much preferred the idea of that being someone else not as obvious.

Batbrick Away!

[NorthernKnight]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qpZ5D_Wc4cA

Wow, that's a trailer full of spoilers if i ever saw one.

[YG-49]

Actually, YG-49, there is a new trailer out, and if you watch it to the end, you will see thw Kraken.

And holy crap is that a crazy creature. It's Huge, And a mix between a squid nd CLoverfield.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qpZ5D_Wc4cA

Needs more Pan and less Medusa. Scorpions are still as epic. I don't like how man-like they made the Kraken. It's supposed to be a giant squid.

[Forresto]

I just saw the movie and I came out of it pretty happy. It had a lot of great action especially the fight with the scorpians, which made me sort've nostalgic for the older Ray Harryhousen animated films (Jason & the argonauts, Sinbad, Original Clash of the Titans, Etc....). I loved the overall feel the film had and love all the little things they had in it that were different from the original like the desert people and the scorpian riding . I deffinantly know what that atlantis scorpian and those POP hassasins are going to be used for. I also like how theyhad the mechanical owl from the first movie and the one guy say "Leave it" .

I wonder though who in the end is the real victem, the kraken or the city of Argos? I mean the kraken must have been asleep for how long? A million years, a billion years? When he lashed out his tentacles hitting the city, all it really was doing was stretching. I mean come on would'nt you be stretching after sleeping in a small crevice for a billion years? Also does'nt he have the right to eat a couple humans, it's not like he gets to eat the muchthat often.

I don't like how man-like they made the Kraken. It's supposed to be a giant squid.

Actually that's only the western conception of it (still personally my favorite however ). I think that the greeks idea of it was more like the one in this movie and I know that another belief on what it looks like is a giant snake like creature.

[dragonboy79]

Yea, the kraken in Clash of the Titans is more true to the Greek version, while the kraken in Pirates of the Caribbean is the Western version.

Anyway, I really enjoyed the movie. I thought the trailer looked kind of cheesy, especially with the rock music, but it felt very mythological. The sisters/fates remind me of Pan's Labyrinth, and the desert people... they look like the "Persians" in 300.

Clash of the Titans - 300 desert people - people who compare it to the 1980s versoin = epic

[RileyC]

Meh it just seems like another Avatar movie to me. Lots of special effects and fighting and no real story behind it. It seems to be a bit of a trend lately.

[SWMAN]

Meh it just seems like another Avatar movie to me. Lots of special effects and fighting and no real story behind it. It seems to be a bit of a trend lately.

From both a special effects and a story perspective I think that they are two completely different films. Avatar has revolutionized the film industry and how computers and technology can be use. While I admit that the story for Avatar borrowed quite a bit from previous films and ideas it was still a very original story. I feel like Clash of the Titans is playing off of Avatars success so it is not revolutionary. Plus it is a remake so the story is recycled and kind of run-of-the-mill.

[Tyrant]

From both a special effects and a story perspective I think that they are two completely different films. Avatar has revolutionized the film industry and how computers and technology can be use. While I admit that the story for Avatar borrowed quite a bit from previous films and ideas it was still a very original story. I feel like Clash of the Titans is playing off of Avatars success so it is not revolutionary. Plus it is a remake so the story is recycled and kind of run-of-the-mill.

Can you elaborate on how you think this is playing off the success of Avatar? That seems nearly impossible to me unless I missed the previews claiming that it's 3D is on par with Avatar (and I have seen no such previews, unlike with another movie, How To Train Your Dragon) or holding up Sam Worthington as the "the star of Avatar" (which I also have not seen in a preview for this movie). The timetable to borrow anything at all from Avatar doesn't work because both movies would have been in production at the same time. If you mean "fantasy story, big budget effects, borrowing pretty well the entire plot from elsewhere", Avatar didn't invent any of that. I'm truly curious because I see no way that this movie is playing off of Avatar's success beyond being a movie with special effects which is so broad as to be useless (and very innacurate as Avatar did not invent special effects).

As for the movie, I was entertained. It was a departure from the 80s version in several ways and it was interesting to see how they kept using various elements of the original in different ways while adding in new things like the Djinn (I am pretty sure that was what they called the desert guys and if so I am fairly certain that is how it is spelled if they are what I think they are supposed to be, in name anyway). It did feel a little on the "soulless" side to me but I'm not sure why. Maybe because Zeus seemed like he couldn't decide which side to cheer for. Or because Persius seemed to just need to get angry to go from a fisherman to a professional soldier. I did love the short but comical cameo in the armory though and I was glad that Medusa didn't have a ruined face.

[dragonboy79]

One reason Clash of the Titans tried to ride off the success of Avatar was that the movie was hastily converted into 3D after the movie-makers saw the success of Avatar. Not surprisingly, people complained about the 3D version...

Does anyone know why they called it Clash of the Titans, but there are no Titans at all? I think Olympians make more sense.

[Batbrick]

Does anyone know why they called it Clash of the Titans, but there are no Titans at all? I think Olympians make more sense.

This is a film that made Hades the villain because the writers were too lazy to even be original or look up the actual mythology, probably both actually. At this point the title is a moot point

Batbrick Away!

[dragonboy79]

This is a film that made Hades the villain because the writers were too lazy to even be original or look up the actual mythology, probably both actually. At this point the title is a moot point

Batbrick Away!

Thanks! Aw, poor Hades, always given the role of the bad guy. Even in the Percy Jackson and the Olympians movie, they replaced Chronos with Hades as the villain.

[hollisbrick]

Man I can't wait to see this film!

I saw the original when I was a kid, and I thought it was awesome!

[Batbrick]

Thanks! Aw, poor Hades, always given the role of the bad guy. Even in the Percy Jackson and the Olympians movie, they replaced Chronos with Hades as the villain.

What? Really? Now I am literally angry with rage! That is so stupid and cliche and Hollywood and audience insulting and grarble barble arg arg! Argh!

Batbrick Away!

[Tyrant]

One reason Clash of the Titans tried to ride off the success of Avatar was that the movie was hastily converted into 3D after the movie-makers saw the success of Avatar. Not surprisingly, people complained about the 3D version...

Does anyone know why they called it Clash of the Titans, but there are no Titans at all? I think Olympians make more sense.

Was it the success of Avatar or 3D in general? The planned 3rd Halloween movie (3rd in the new series anyway) is going to be 3D because of the success of Final Destination in 3D, which was released several months before Avatar. Saw 7 is supposed to be in 3D because the makers saw a redone version of the first one in 3D and were really impressed. Avatar did not begin the current trend of 3D movies. While I believe it to be possible that this was made 3D because of the success of Avatar, unless I were to hear that from someone working on the movie I can very easily assume it was done due to the success of 3D in general which may be highlighted by Avatar but did not start with Avatar. I have heard that it was done fairly last minute though.

As for the title, who knows? It's a remake, so I would wonder why the original had that name. Perhaps they meant the clashing of titanic forces (the gods) but didn't consider the fact that the word Titan already has a specific meaning in Greek mythology? That would be my best guess.

Thanks! Aw, poor Hades, always given the role of the bad guy. Even in the Percy Jackson and the Olympians movie, they replaced Chronos with Hades as the villain.

How was Hades the villain? Sure he had plans to use the lightning bolt once he got it, but he didn't take it to begin with. I thought

Luke

was clearly the villain for trying to overthrow the gods and take their place. Hades didn't seem to be any more villainous than the gods normally come across in mythology (my limited knowledge of it anyway).

Edited April 4, 2010 by Tyrant

[posades]

For anyone who has seen both versions, is it anything like the old movie? I remember watching parts of it way back when in my Latin class and thinking it couldn't have been anymore cheesier. Granted the trailer for the new one looked pretty epic, I'm just not sure how much of a "remake" it really is.

[Sandy]

What? Really? Now I am literally angry with rage! That is so stupid and cliche and Hollywood and audience insulting and grarble barble arg arg! Argh!

Batbrick Away!

Adding insult to the fact, the Percy Jackson movie also portrayed the realm of Hades as a fiery pit of eternal suffering (ie. Christian Hell). The movie managed to spoil everything that was good in the books, anyway.

As for this "Titans. Will. Clash" movie, I have zero interest in seeing it. I was really into the Greek mythology as a kid, and I hate to see it raped like that. Plus I hear it's all action and zero plot, so there.

[dragonboy79]

Tyrant, I meant Clash of the Titans rode off the success of Avatar being in 3D, as you suggested. Other than that, Avatar and Clash of the Titans are very different films, so I agree with you.

"Clash of the Titans" -- a remake of a cult-favorite film that was released in 1981 -- was originally not envisioned as a 3D film. But then James Cameron's "Avatar," which also starred Sam Worthington, set box-office records worldwide. The success was based in part on its 3D effects, and Warner Bros. announced the already-completed "Clash of the Titans" would be converted to 3D. "Avatar," however, was filmed using special 3D cameras."

http://movies.yahoo.com/feature/movie-talk...-titans-3D.html

As for Percy Jackson, I think Hades was still villainous, although not the main antagonist. He showed up at camp in his satanic form and demanded the lightning bolt from Percy. I'm just saying he was portrayed as more "evil" than he deserved.

To Sandy, yep, the underworld looked a lot like Dante's Inferno. There was no Cerberus, Elysium, or Fields of Asphodel.

Edited April 5, 2010 by dragonboy79