Search
Emma @ The Movies (1786 KP) rated Venom (2018) in Movies
Sep 25, 2019
I went into the screen with wildly low expectations for Venom, nothing in the trailer had me on the edge of my seat. In the run up to me going there were more and more reviews appearing saying that it was bad, not that I read any of them. So many people just felt the need to put it right in the title... yes, yes, but much more obvious than mine!!
But you know what? It wasn't bad. That's not to say it was good, but it wasn't bad. I didn't laugh anywhere near as much as everyone else did, but it did have some funny bits in it. I'm sorry though, "blowing like a turd in the wind"? Not funny. Wasn't funny in the trailer, not funny in the film.
Full disclosure, I've booked to see this again. Not because I enjoyed it so much but because the people who were watching it in the screen with me were the noisiest people on the planet.
I understand that they couldn't accurately do Venom's origin story as it invilves Spider-man but I'm not sure how I felt about this version of events. Also, if a super nerd out there could help me out... I thought that Venom was the name for the combined host and symbiote, but in the film the symbiote is called Venom... which way is correct?
There are some great bits between Eddie and Venom. Venom obviously thinks Eddie is a bit of a wimp and doesn't mind pointing it out. He's embarrassed by him putting his hands up in surrender and by him being unwilling to jump out of an upper floor window. Both bring amusing exchanges.
When we see the duo fighting and evading the tac team in the early part of the film all I could think was how reminiscent of Upgrade it was when he was being controlled by Venom. I also got flashes of other Marvel offerings, specifically Hulk. Venom tossing people around by their feet, then witnessing him fight Riot gave me flashbacks of Hulk and The Abomination. The latter was a lot easier to watch than the fight between this new pair though. It was way too chaotic, and almost impossible to figure out exactly what was happening.
In general I'm not a fan of the CGI symbiotes, they look a lot more cartoony and feel slightly unfinished, like there's a layer missing to make them more realistic. I also wasn't overly keen on much of the acting, I found Tom Hardy to be lacking and didn't find Eddie Brock to be very dynamic for an investigative journalist.
The first of the credit scenes lines us up with a potential sequel with a quick appearence by Woody Harrelson as Cletus Kasady who historically was the original host for Carnage. Harrelson has grown on me immensely in recent years with his acting and it would be a shame not to see him given this serial killers' role in the Universe... but with a film that feels like it fits more in the Maguire era of Spider-man movies I personally can't see a sequel from Venom doing him justice.
The second credit scene felt a little like a cheat to me as it wasn't anything to do with the film. It was entertaining despite that though. A little lighthearted humour but it felt completely out of place, it was much more like a short you would watch before the main event. Perhaps it would have been better as a "feature length" trailer than a credit scene.
What should you do?
You should probably see it. In my opinion it doesn't compare to any of the other "super" movies, and he isn't going to become my favourite anti-hero, but it is a reasonable diversion and the humour that's there isn't that bad.
Movie thing you wish you could take home
If I could have a symbiote that won't kill be and wouldn't look so crazy then I think I'd probably see where it took me.
But you know what? It wasn't bad. That's not to say it was good, but it wasn't bad. I didn't laugh anywhere near as much as everyone else did, but it did have some funny bits in it. I'm sorry though, "blowing like a turd in the wind"? Not funny. Wasn't funny in the trailer, not funny in the film.
Full disclosure, I've booked to see this again. Not because I enjoyed it so much but because the people who were watching it in the screen with me were the noisiest people on the planet.
I understand that they couldn't accurately do Venom's origin story as it invilves Spider-man but I'm not sure how I felt about this version of events. Also, if a super nerd out there could help me out... I thought that Venom was the name for the combined host and symbiote, but in the film the symbiote is called Venom... which way is correct?
There are some great bits between Eddie and Venom. Venom obviously thinks Eddie is a bit of a wimp and doesn't mind pointing it out. He's embarrassed by him putting his hands up in surrender and by him being unwilling to jump out of an upper floor window. Both bring amusing exchanges.
When we see the duo fighting and evading the tac team in the early part of the film all I could think was how reminiscent of Upgrade it was when he was being controlled by Venom. I also got flashes of other Marvel offerings, specifically Hulk. Venom tossing people around by their feet, then witnessing him fight Riot gave me flashbacks of Hulk and The Abomination. The latter was a lot easier to watch than the fight between this new pair though. It was way too chaotic, and almost impossible to figure out exactly what was happening.
In general I'm not a fan of the CGI symbiotes, they look a lot more cartoony and feel slightly unfinished, like there's a layer missing to make them more realistic. I also wasn't overly keen on much of the acting, I found Tom Hardy to be lacking and didn't find Eddie Brock to be very dynamic for an investigative journalist.
The first of the credit scenes lines us up with a potential sequel with a quick appearence by Woody Harrelson as Cletus Kasady who historically was the original host for Carnage. Harrelson has grown on me immensely in recent years with his acting and it would be a shame not to see him given this serial killers' role in the Universe... but with a film that feels like it fits more in the Maguire era of Spider-man movies I personally can't see a sequel from Venom doing him justice.
The second credit scene felt a little like a cheat to me as it wasn't anything to do with the film. It was entertaining despite that though. A little lighthearted humour but it felt completely out of place, it was much more like a short you would watch before the main event. Perhaps it would have been better as a "feature length" trailer than a credit scene.
What should you do?
You should probably see it. In my opinion it doesn't compare to any of the other "super" movies, and he isn't going to become my favourite anti-hero, but it is a reasonable diversion and the humour that's there isn't that bad.
Movie thing you wish you could take home
If I could have a symbiote that won't kill be and wouldn't look so crazy then I think I'd probably see where it took me.
Benedick Lewis (3001 KP) rated the PlayStation 4 version of Marvel's Avengers in Video Games
Sep 21, 2020 (Updated Sep 21, 2020)
Great introduction to Ms Marvel (3 more)
Voice acting is great
Certain moments are very exciting to play as certain characters
DLC could be promising
Combat is very shoddy (3 more)
Lot of bugs
Upgrade system confusing
Campaign very short
Hidden under a cash grab is a good story
Unfortunately nothing new is going to be added here that game critic sites haven’t already covered but here is the review anyway.
It will come as no surprise that Marvel Avengers is nothing special. It is in fact a pretty poor game at launch - full of bugs and essentially a very short story. The story is good as is the voice acting (except for one major niggle which will be gotten to later) but the game promised the Avengers and what was given was perhaps maybe the Av part of the name - essentially a small part.
It’s difficult to envision how a Avengers game could work and what genre it would fall into. What is presented is probably the best way to portray an array of Marvel characters but it is dangerously close to mimicking the LEGO videogames. Certain parts can only be played by certain heroes, areas can only be accessed by certain heroes, etc etc.
You build up the Avengers one by one and unfortunately, this won’t give anything away, when you have established your roster of superheroes, the game essentially is finished. There is the endgame content, which personally hasn’t been explored yet, but overall it felt a little underwhelming.
The upgrade system was initially comparable to Assassin’s Creed Odyssey but what is actually is is just loot crates and different resources that you just boost to power up four different tiers. This system barely scratches the surface before the campaign is over so this may improve in the endgame but it is disappointing to see little needs to be done to tweak your hero the way you want him/her to be tweaked.
The combat system is ok. Kamala/ms Marvel, hulk, black widow and Thor feel good to handle as you smash through wave after wave of enemies but Captain America and in particular Iron Man both feel a little clunky. Cappy is way too weak initially to play with and you heavily rely on defending rather than attacking to survive. Iron Man’s flight controls and the way he ‘sprints’ are laughable. It doesn’t feel as badass as it should to play Iron Man and all his technological capabilities.
The voice acting is fantastic. The only issue is that veterans like Troy Baker (Bruce Banner) and Nolan North (Iron Man) are a little too recognisable now. Baker and North worked on the Uncharted series together as well as The Last of Us (the latter is really commendable as they really were unrecognisable in their roles). They have individually worked on a plethora of voice acting jobs yet here, because they are so well known, it takes you out of the moment from time to time. Is that Tony Stark or Nathan Drake? Banner or Joel? This observation is not a discredit to their talent but a mere unfortunate side effect to being so well known.
The biggest disappointment is, while micro transactions won’t involve power up capabilities- because of how clumsy the upgrade system is, it is more desirable to get outfits for your hero and in some cases it can be £15.99/$20.72 for one outfit. Given it is an aesthetic that seems pretty pathetic but there must be some people out there who just have the money to spare.
The prospect of DLC which will be free when it becomes available is attractive. With the likes of Hawkeye and Spider-Man already confirmed, it is with hope, the campaign story gets more fleshed out and gameplay will improve, certainly with regards to the upgrade system and making that properly work.
This game could have been more but it sadly falls into the cash cow category for now
Play this if you can get it on the cheap and wouldn’t mind playing one of the Avengers. It’s nothing special but it could have potential to grow.
It will come as no surprise that Marvel Avengers is nothing special. It is in fact a pretty poor game at launch - full of bugs and essentially a very short story. The story is good as is the voice acting (except for one major niggle which will be gotten to later) but the game promised the Avengers and what was given was perhaps maybe the Av part of the name - essentially a small part.
It’s difficult to envision how a Avengers game could work and what genre it would fall into. What is presented is probably the best way to portray an array of Marvel characters but it is dangerously close to mimicking the LEGO videogames. Certain parts can only be played by certain heroes, areas can only be accessed by certain heroes, etc etc.
You build up the Avengers one by one and unfortunately, this won’t give anything away, when you have established your roster of superheroes, the game essentially is finished. There is the endgame content, which personally hasn’t been explored yet, but overall it felt a little underwhelming.
The upgrade system was initially comparable to Assassin’s Creed Odyssey but what is actually is is just loot crates and different resources that you just boost to power up four different tiers. This system barely scratches the surface before the campaign is over so this may improve in the endgame but it is disappointing to see little needs to be done to tweak your hero the way you want him/her to be tweaked.
The combat system is ok. Kamala/ms Marvel, hulk, black widow and Thor feel good to handle as you smash through wave after wave of enemies but Captain America and in particular Iron Man both feel a little clunky. Cappy is way too weak initially to play with and you heavily rely on defending rather than attacking to survive. Iron Man’s flight controls and the way he ‘sprints’ are laughable. It doesn’t feel as badass as it should to play Iron Man and all his technological capabilities.
The voice acting is fantastic. The only issue is that veterans like Troy Baker (Bruce Banner) and Nolan North (Iron Man) are a little too recognisable now. Baker and North worked on the Uncharted series together as well as The Last of Us (the latter is really commendable as they really were unrecognisable in their roles). They have individually worked on a plethora of voice acting jobs yet here, because they are so well known, it takes you out of the moment from time to time. Is that Tony Stark or Nathan Drake? Banner or Joel? This observation is not a discredit to their talent but a mere unfortunate side effect to being so well known.
The biggest disappointment is, while micro transactions won’t involve power up capabilities- because of how clumsy the upgrade system is, it is more desirable to get outfits for your hero and in some cases it can be £15.99/$20.72 for one outfit. Given it is an aesthetic that seems pretty pathetic but there must be some people out there who just have the money to spare.
The prospect of DLC which will be free when it becomes available is attractive. With the likes of Hawkeye and Spider-Man already confirmed, it is with hope, the campaign story gets more fleshed out and gameplay will improve, certainly with regards to the upgrade system and making that properly work.
This game could have been more but it sadly falls into the cash cow category for now
Play this if you can get it on the cheap and wouldn’t mind playing one of the Avengers. It’s nothing special but it could have potential to grow.
Chris Sawin (602 KP) rated 127 Hours (2010) in Movies
Jun 23, 2019
127 Hours is based on the true story of Aron Ralston, a mountain climber who was trapped under a rock for five days only to amputate his own arm to survive. Directed by Danny Boyle (Slumdog Millionaire, 28 Days Later) and starring James Franco (Pineapple Express, Spider-Man), 127 Hours sucker punches you with its ability to be both absorbing and compelling.
The first thing to notice about 127 Hours is that it contains excellent editing. The opening credits illustrate this to a certain extent, but the best example comes at the peak of Aron's struggle once he's trapped and fighting for his life. His delusions begin overlapping with his memories as the screen is divided into three separate vertical segments representing how desperate and how dangerously close Aron has come to the brink of insanity.
127 Hours looks spectacular, as well. The desert is a mostly dry and bleak place that no one would want to visit, but it's shown in a light here that makes it makes it look both appealing and beautiful in a way that almost makes you forget that it lacks civilization. The film does an incredible job of making you feel like you're right there in these crevices with Aron without giving the overbearing sensation of claustrophobia. Captivating cinematography makes even the most simple things like a dripping faucet and air bubbles settling in a water bottle appear like more of a spectacle than they really are.
James Franco is also quite impressive. He is the only one on-screen for the majority of the film and has no one to play off of but himself. Events of his life flashing before his eyes and the decisions he should've but didn't make, Scooby Doo hallucinations, and premonitions of the future on top of his uphill battle to survive aren't only incredibly engaging but arguably some of the best scenes in the film.
127 Hours is enthralling, incredibly powerful, and easily one of the best films of the year. James Franco delivers what is quite possibly his strongest and most intriguing performance to date while Danny Boyle adds another visually brilliant and superbly written film to his repertoire that is a potential award winner.
The first thing to notice about 127 Hours is that it contains excellent editing. The opening credits illustrate this to a certain extent, but the best example comes at the peak of Aron's struggle once he's trapped and fighting for his life. His delusions begin overlapping with his memories as the screen is divided into three separate vertical segments representing how desperate and how dangerously close Aron has come to the brink of insanity.
127 Hours looks spectacular, as well. The desert is a mostly dry and bleak place that no one would want to visit, but it's shown in a light here that makes it makes it look both appealing and beautiful in a way that almost makes you forget that it lacks civilization. The film does an incredible job of making you feel like you're right there in these crevices with Aron without giving the overbearing sensation of claustrophobia. Captivating cinematography makes even the most simple things like a dripping faucet and air bubbles settling in a water bottle appear like more of a spectacle than they really are.
James Franco is also quite impressive. He is the only one on-screen for the majority of the film and has no one to play off of but himself. Events of his life flashing before his eyes and the decisions he should've but didn't make, Scooby Doo hallucinations, and premonitions of the future on top of his uphill battle to survive aren't only incredibly engaging but arguably some of the best scenes in the film.
127 Hours is enthralling, incredibly powerful, and easily one of the best films of the year. James Franco delivers what is quite possibly his strongest and most intriguing performance to date while Danny Boyle adds another visually brilliant and superbly written film to his repertoire that is a potential award winner.
Lenard (726 KP) rated Spider-Man: Far From Home (2019) in Movies
Jul 28, 2019
John Hughes Film Inside a Superhero Cartoon
Spider-Man: Far From Home is the prototypical teen film from the eighties that was not written with the keen insight of John Hughes or one of his proteges. There is the teen girl who kind of likes this boy, but they are friends and she is afraid of losing him as a friend if they start to date. She doesn't flirt with embarrassingly tossed off factoids that only attract him more. There is also a dorky guy who is in love with a girl in his school so instead of directly asking her out he comes up with an elaborate plot to win her over. But at least the plan doesn't end in rape where the sex causes the dream girl to fall head over heels in love. In addition to our lovers, there is a romantic rival who blackmails the guy so he can't attempt wooing the girl. There is a horndog best friend who tries to convince the guy to give up a monogamous relationship for casual sex with multiple partners on an European vacation. There is the bully who hates the dorky guy, but is smitten with the hero who is the dorky guy in disguise, i.e., Teen Wolf. There is a second milquetoast girl who makes occasional appearances in the film so it is not some sausage fest with one female character in search of love. Then, there are a lot of ineffectual adults in the film except for one sympathetic adult who serves as a mentor. The mentor tries to help out teen to win the love of his life and figure out his path in life. And, there is also a heartless boss the teen has to work with who rides his ass and makes him want to quit, but he needs the money. Against all odds, the dorky guy succeeds and transitions into a functional adult male of some character.
Overall, the movie is extremely satisfactory and sets up a whole new set of Marvel movies. But it leaves several huge questions due to the credit cookies, one of which is Where is Maria Hill? (not really a spoiler)
Overall, the movie is extremely satisfactory and sets up a whole new set of Marvel movies. But it leaves several huge questions due to the credit cookies, one of which is Where is Maria Hill? (not really a spoiler)
Natasha Khan recommended Negro Prison Blues and Songs by Alan Lomax in Music (curated)
DisneyNOW – Shows & Live TV
Entertainment and Photo & Video
App
-WATCH FULL EPISODES: Watch your favorite Disney Channel, Disney XD and Disney Junior shows,...
Kids Song -Over 160 English Kids Song With Lyrics
Education and Music
6.0
Rate It
App
- Over 160+ English Kids Song. - 11 Disc Catalogue, 16 Songs each Disc. Over 160 Songs. - Random...
RəX Regent (349 KP) rated Batman Begins (2005) in Movies
Feb 19, 2019
Batman has always seemed to make great viewing and with the darker takes on him of the past to decades, great movies. This was a real treat though. It’s almost a rational take on an irrational super hero. Christopher Nolan has managed to give Batman a human face and the world he inhabits a sense of scale and realism. But that’s not to say that it is lacking in the sense of the theatrical.
Back in 2005, the hype for this film was building, with a new take on the old comic hero taking shape. Though I must admit that the design of the new Batmobile didn’t look cool to me, but I loved the concept of rooting him in a real world. The other questionable point was that lack of the big hitters in terms of the villains. The Joker, Penguin, Riddler and Catwomen were dumped in favour of The Scarecrow and Ra’s al Ghul, with only one that I, as the un-indoctrinated in comic book lore, that I had heard of being The Scarecrow.
But this was not to be a typical Batman film in any sense of the word. In June 2005, Batman was reborn and not only had the career of an independently styled filmmaker, Christopher Nolan blown into the big leagues but Blockbusters had just been redefined, an event not dis-similar in effect t those of Jaws and Star Wars in the 1970’s.
Batman, a Warner Bros. cash cow for decades, was about to cross all the main lines within the industry and a blockbuster with art house sensibilities and real intelligence was about to born. It’s not the first, but it opened the door for Nolan and his like to change the way we think about movies of this kind. It doesn’t seem to be that long ago that Marvel was dominating cinemas was some first-rate adaptations such as X-Men, Spider-man and the underrated Hulk, which in many ways may be classed as a prototype for this, with art house direction from Ang Lee.
The plot of Batman Begins isn’t really that important though that’s not to sell it short. It’s a highly developed and conceived story, packed from the opening frame to the 140th minute, but it’s simply the perfect blend of the evolution of Bruce Wayne into Batman, and the usual diabolical plans of the super-villain, only it doesn’t feel like that when you’re watching it. It feels like a well judged story about a traumatised young man, struggling to come terms with his parents murder, and his place in the world.
Luckily for him, his family are billionaires and his butler is Alfred, or more importantly, Michael Caine! There are of course a whole host of contrivances to explain how Batman’s image was forged, how the Batcave was created and where the Batmobile came from, but no-one’s suggesting that this a documentary. This is a more grounded and psychological approach to the story of a nutcase who dressed up like a bat and fights crime without a single superpower to his aid.
But it’s how Nolan brings all this together that works so well. He addresses things so subtly that you can end up missing them if you blink, or at least fail to see them coming. Wayne is turned into a flamboyant excentric to maintain a distance from his friends, if he even has any. The Batcave never ends up looking how we’d expect either, but it is full of bats if that helps and he does park his car there.
It is not until The Dark Knight that we see a Batcave of sorts and that isn’t even in the grounds of Wayne Manor. So, the direction, conception and writing are great, what about the casting? Christian Bale is Wayne/Batman for me, though the animatistic tone to his voice maybe a little overdone, but I do get it. Katie Holmes is the weakest link and am glad that she was recast for the sequel. The rest of the players are first-rate and this may well be on of the best casts ever assembled for a single film in my opinion.
Gary Oldman, so understated as Lt. Gordon, Caine as Alfred is perfect; Liam Neeson is on top form, which he isn’t always, let’s face it and Morgan Freeman, like Oldman and Caine can seemingly do no wrong. Then there’s Hans Zimmer‘s collaboration with James Newton Howard for the score which is one of Zimmer’s best. Howard is an able composer and he clearly provided many of the excellent emotional riffs, but it was Zimmer who brought this together with his dominant, strident style, colossal beats and pacing.
The look and sound of this film sets it apart from so many of its brethren. Batman Begins is a truly original, relentless and groundbreaking movie that is the best of the comic book movies by a mile, but not necessarily the best comic book adaptation. Spider-man or Watchmen for example, may qualify for the fact that they more literally reflect their respective sources but Nolan’s masterpiece is a blueprint as to how film should tackle such adaptations.
And yes, that’s right; Batman Begins is a masterpiece if ever there was one, though a slightly lesser one in comparison to its own sequel, The Dark Knight which may have completely rewritten the handbook.
Back in 2005, the hype for this film was building, with a new take on the old comic hero taking shape. Though I must admit that the design of the new Batmobile didn’t look cool to me, but I loved the concept of rooting him in a real world. The other questionable point was that lack of the big hitters in terms of the villains. The Joker, Penguin, Riddler and Catwomen were dumped in favour of The Scarecrow and Ra’s al Ghul, with only one that I, as the un-indoctrinated in comic book lore, that I had heard of being The Scarecrow.
But this was not to be a typical Batman film in any sense of the word. In June 2005, Batman was reborn and not only had the career of an independently styled filmmaker, Christopher Nolan blown into the big leagues but Blockbusters had just been redefined, an event not dis-similar in effect t those of Jaws and Star Wars in the 1970’s.
Batman, a Warner Bros. cash cow for decades, was about to cross all the main lines within the industry and a blockbuster with art house sensibilities and real intelligence was about to born. It’s not the first, but it opened the door for Nolan and his like to change the way we think about movies of this kind. It doesn’t seem to be that long ago that Marvel was dominating cinemas was some first-rate adaptations such as X-Men, Spider-man and the underrated Hulk, which in many ways may be classed as a prototype for this, with art house direction from Ang Lee.
The plot of Batman Begins isn’t really that important though that’s not to sell it short. It’s a highly developed and conceived story, packed from the opening frame to the 140th minute, but it’s simply the perfect blend of the evolution of Bruce Wayne into Batman, and the usual diabolical plans of the super-villain, only it doesn’t feel like that when you’re watching it. It feels like a well judged story about a traumatised young man, struggling to come terms with his parents murder, and his place in the world.
Luckily for him, his family are billionaires and his butler is Alfred, or more importantly, Michael Caine! There are of course a whole host of contrivances to explain how Batman’s image was forged, how the Batcave was created and where the Batmobile came from, but no-one’s suggesting that this a documentary. This is a more grounded and psychological approach to the story of a nutcase who dressed up like a bat and fights crime without a single superpower to his aid.
But it’s how Nolan brings all this together that works so well. He addresses things so subtly that you can end up missing them if you blink, or at least fail to see them coming. Wayne is turned into a flamboyant excentric to maintain a distance from his friends, if he even has any. The Batcave never ends up looking how we’d expect either, but it is full of bats if that helps and he does park his car there.
It is not until The Dark Knight that we see a Batcave of sorts and that isn’t even in the grounds of Wayne Manor. So, the direction, conception and writing are great, what about the casting? Christian Bale is Wayne/Batman for me, though the animatistic tone to his voice maybe a little overdone, but I do get it. Katie Holmes is the weakest link and am glad that she was recast for the sequel. The rest of the players are first-rate and this may well be on of the best casts ever assembled for a single film in my opinion.
Gary Oldman, so understated as Lt. Gordon, Caine as Alfred is perfect; Liam Neeson is on top form, which he isn’t always, let’s face it and Morgan Freeman, like Oldman and Caine can seemingly do no wrong. Then there’s Hans Zimmer‘s collaboration with James Newton Howard for the score which is one of Zimmer’s best. Howard is an able composer and he clearly provided many of the excellent emotional riffs, but it was Zimmer who brought this together with his dominant, strident style, colossal beats and pacing.
The look and sound of this film sets it apart from so many of its brethren. Batman Begins is a truly original, relentless and groundbreaking movie that is the best of the comic book movies by a mile, but not necessarily the best comic book adaptation. Spider-man or Watchmen for example, may qualify for the fact that they more literally reflect their respective sources but Nolan’s masterpiece is a blueprint as to how film should tackle such adaptations.
And yes, that’s right; Batman Begins is a masterpiece if ever there was one, though a slightly lesser one in comparison to its own sequel, The Dark Knight which may have completely rewritten the handbook.
Chris Sawin (602 KP) rated Clash of the Titans (2010) in Movies
Jun 22, 2019 (Updated Jun 23, 2019)
Clash of the Titans tells the story of men turning their backs on the gods. The gods grow weaker as men refuse to pay worship to them and neither side will budge. That's where Perseus (Sam Worthington) comes in. Perseus is a demigod, half man and half god. Zeus (Liam Neeson) is his father, but Perseus was raised as a fisherman. As the gods grow desperate, they turn to Zeus' brother who was banished to the underworld, Hades (Ralph Fiennes) to hopefully scare them into realizing "the order of things." When Hades onslaught kills Perseus' family, Perseus vows revenge against him and will do everything within his power to destroy the god of the underworld. Perseus' journey will not be easy as several ungodly beasts stand in the way of him reaching his goal as he struggles with accepting sanctuary as a god or continuing on this journey as a man.
Clash of the Titans was highly anticipated on my end for quite some time. The trailers were pretty fantastic and everything seemed to point to the film being epic. Directed by Louis Leterrier (Unleashed, The Incredible Hulk) and starring Sam Worthington (Avatar, Terminator: Salvation), Liam Neeson (Taken, Batman Begins), and Ralph Fiennes (In Bruges, The Hurt Locker), this film had a solid cast and a director with some pretty great films under his belt. It had all the elements to make a fantastic film and yet it somehow managed to fail.
The film felt like a watered down version of what a film based on the God of War video game could potentially be. All the same gods are there, the Medusa character is in there, there's a character battling against the gods, the similarities are pretty obvious. The only thing that is different is that the main character is named Perseus instead of Kratos. On one hand, it may not be a bad thing comparing the film to God of War. If they do decide to make a God of War film down the road though, it seems like it'll be way too similar to this film unless they go full-blown, balls out rated R with it. That's the route they should go anyway, but Clash of the Titans basically feels like a censored version of God of War.
Certain other things about the film really bugged me. The main one being that the two main female characters Io (Gemma Arterton) and Andromeda (Alexa Davalos) cried at EVERYTHING. Every time they spoke it was like they started getting teary eyed. "Oh Perseus, I can't follow you into Medusa's lair since I'm not a big strong man like you are. *sob*" Just made me want to slap them and go, "GET A GRIP, LADY! SHEESH!" The biggest pet peeve of mine lies in the finale of the film. Everything regarding Hades and the kraken are dealt with so quickly. The film makes a huge deal about both of them only to have everything wrapped up in less than five minutes when the time finally comes. It just wound up feeling very rushed and anticlimactic. Also, what was the deal with the prophecy the witches gave Perseus? Was the explanation of getting around that because Perseus was half god? That's pretty weak. Instead, we're going to go with this ending that's completely open-ended and leaves massive room for a potential sequel. Lame.
Despite all of the things I found wrong with the film, there were some high points. The CG seemed very all or nothing to me. At times, the effects were fantastic. The giant scorpions scene and the kraken being the best examples. Pegasus is also a great example. The winged horses looked fairly genuine, but they looked kind of odd when they flew. Other times though, it seemed way too obvious that the characters were standing in front of a green screen and fighting with creatures that weren't actually there. There's a scene near the beginning where we first see Perseus as an adult where his father is talking to him and a thunderstorm is beginning to brew. The sky was obviously CG. There were just several moments like that that brought me out of the film.
Ralph Fiennes as Hades was easily the high point for me as far as acting goes. Fiennes was most impressive in David Cronenberg's Spider and has been on my radar for actors to keep an eye on ever since. He doesn't disappoint here. His smarminess as Hades spoke volumes. The ferry scene is also pretty amazing, at least until Perseus and Io begin their Medusa training. Ugh.
A few humorous points, the South Park fan in me chimed in when Io told Perseus "You're more than half man half god." I thought she was going to follow up with, "You're actually half man, half bear, half pig. Or maybe you're actually half bear half man-pig." Still laughing about that one. The scene where Perseus emerges from Medusa's lair and Io is waiting for him, she's wearing this really weird outfit. I heard the guy next to me say, "What the...is she wearing a mop?!" and it made me laugh out loud. Best part of the whole film though, at the end, when everything had been resolved somebody yelled at the top of their lungs, "I AM A GOD!!!!!!" After a brief silence, everyone in the theater started laughing. Kinda sad that the most entertaining part of the film wasn't actually a part of the film itself.
Clash of the Titans was one of the most anticipated blockbusters of the year, but fell short and wound up being one of the most disappointing. With mediocre special effects, a sloppy finale, and female characters that will get on your last nerve, the action film fails to live up to expectations. At the end of the day, Clash of the Titans is basically just a glorified Xena: Warrior Princess.
Clash of the Titans was highly anticipated on my end for quite some time. The trailers were pretty fantastic and everything seemed to point to the film being epic. Directed by Louis Leterrier (Unleashed, The Incredible Hulk) and starring Sam Worthington (Avatar, Terminator: Salvation), Liam Neeson (Taken, Batman Begins), and Ralph Fiennes (In Bruges, The Hurt Locker), this film had a solid cast and a director with some pretty great films under his belt. It had all the elements to make a fantastic film and yet it somehow managed to fail.
The film felt like a watered down version of what a film based on the God of War video game could potentially be. All the same gods are there, the Medusa character is in there, there's a character battling against the gods, the similarities are pretty obvious. The only thing that is different is that the main character is named Perseus instead of Kratos. On one hand, it may not be a bad thing comparing the film to God of War. If they do decide to make a God of War film down the road though, it seems like it'll be way too similar to this film unless they go full-blown, balls out rated R with it. That's the route they should go anyway, but Clash of the Titans basically feels like a censored version of God of War.
Certain other things about the film really bugged me. The main one being that the two main female characters Io (Gemma Arterton) and Andromeda (Alexa Davalos) cried at EVERYTHING. Every time they spoke it was like they started getting teary eyed. "Oh Perseus, I can't follow you into Medusa's lair since I'm not a big strong man like you are. *sob*" Just made me want to slap them and go, "GET A GRIP, LADY! SHEESH!" The biggest pet peeve of mine lies in the finale of the film. Everything regarding Hades and the kraken are dealt with so quickly. The film makes a huge deal about both of them only to have everything wrapped up in less than five minutes when the time finally comes. It just wound up feeling very rushed and anticlimactic. Also, what was the deal with the prophecy the witches gave Perseus? Was the explanation of getting around that because Perseus was half god? That's pretty weak. Instead, we're going to go with this ending that's completely open-ended and leaves massive room for a potential sequel. Lame.
Despite all of the things I found wrong with the film, there were some high points. The CG seemed very all or nothing to me. At times, the effects were fantastic. The giant scorpions scene and the kraken being the best examples. Pegasus is also a great example. The winged horses looked fairly genuine, but they looked kind of odd when they flew. Other times though, it seemed way too obvious that the characters were standing in front of a green screen and fighting with creatures that weren't actually there. There's a scene near the beginning where we first see Perseus as an adult where his father is talking to him and a thunderstorm is beginning to brew. The sky was obviously CG. There were just several moments like that that brought me out of the film.
Ralph Fiennes as Hades was easily the high point for me as far as acting goes. Fiennes was most impressive in David Cronenberg's Spider and has been on my radar for actors to keep an eye on ever since. He doesn't disappoint here. His smarminess as Hades spoke volumes. The ferry scene is also pretty amazing, at least until Perseus and Io begin their Medusa training. Ugh.
A few humorous points, the South Park fan in me chimed in when Io told Perseus "You're more than half man half god." I thought she was going to follow up with, "You're actually half man, half bear, half pig. Or maybe you're actually half bear half man-pig." Still laughing about that one. The scene where Perseus emerges from Medusa's lair and Io is waiting for him, she's wearing this really weird outfit. I heard the guy next to me say, "What the...is she wearing a mop?!" and it made me laugh out loud. Best part of the whole film though, at the end, when everything had been resolved somebody yelled at the top of their lungs, "I AM A GOD!!!!!!" After a brief silence, everyone in the theater started laughing. Kinda sad that the most entertaining part of the film wasn't actually a part of the film itself.
Clash of the Titans was one of the most anticipated blockbusters of the year, but fell short and wound up being one of the most disappointing. With mediocre special effects, a sloppy finale, and female characters that will get on your last nerve, the action film fails to live up to expectations. At the end of the day, Clash of the Titans is basically just a glorified Xena: Warrior Princess.
Legendary: A Marvel Deck Building Game
8.9
Rate It
Tabletop Game
Legendary: A Marvel Deck Building Game is set in the Marvel Comics universe. To set up the game,...