CLASH OF THE TITANS remake of the the original classic
#61
Posted 04 April 2010 - 02:26 PM
Oh, it looked good, I'm not disputing that. It's the 3D part that left me going meh. I just didn't feel it - it would have been the same experience without the glasses.
The fact that I had to wear those glasses over my normal glasses didn't help (or the monster line I had to wait at).
The fact that I had to wear those glasses over my normal glasses didn't help (or the monster line I had to wait at).
The meaning of life is BOOM!!!
#62
Posted 04 April 2010 - 03:07 PM
Just saw it (2D). Nothing to get excited about. A nice time-waster, solid B grade.
Actually, aside from the cinematography, it could have been a swords-and-sandals flick from the 50s.
Actually, aside from the cinematography, it could have been a swords-and-sandals flick from the 50s.
"Fortune favors the bold, though statistics favor the cautious." - Indomitable Courteous (Icy) Fist, The Palace Job - Patrick Weekes
"Well well well ... if it ain't The Invisible C**t." - Billy Butcher, The Boys
"I have strong views about not tempting providence and, as a wise man once said, the difference between luck and a wheelbarrow is, luck doesn’t work if you push it." - Colonel Orhan, Sixteen Ways to Defend a Walled City - KJ Parker
"Well well well ... if it ain't The Invisible C**t." - Billy Butcher, The Boys
"I have strong views about not tempting providence and, as a wise man once said, the difference between luck and a wheelbarrow is, luck doesn’t work if you push it." - Colonel Orhan, Sixteen Ways to Defend a Walled City - KJ Parker
#63
Posted 04 April 2010 - 04:01 PM
If I'm in the mood for an action flick with swords, monsters and whatnot (and not plot to speak of) - will Clash satisfy those needs?
The meaning of life is BOOM!!!
#64
Posted 04 April 2010 - 05:37 PM
I loved the old one of this, and I was supremely disappointed by it. Like Sombra said, good to while away the hours, but don't go in expecting anything great.
@Garak, I guess, it's ok.
@Garak, I guess, it's ok.
Antiquis temporibus, nati tibi similes in rupibus ventosissimis exponebantur ad necem.
Si hoc adfixum in obice legere potes, et liberaliter educatus et nimis propinquus ades.
Si hoc adfixum in obice legere potes, et liberaliter educatus et nimis propinquus ades.
#65
Posted 04 April 2010 - 06:42 PM
I might go to see it. But only the rest of my gang are in a mood. Weak movies should be seen in group. It makes it easier to bash them

The meaning of life is BOOM!!!
#66
Posted 04 April 2010 - 08:22 PM
Probably head in to watch it tomorrow. I don't mind seeing bad movies as I have an unlimited cinema card so I try and go as much as possible.

A Haunting Poem
I Scream
You Scream
We all Scream
For I Scream.
I Scream
You Scream
We all Scream
For I Scream.
#67
Posted 04 April 2010 - 11:10 PM
I saw the 2D version and loved it. Great fun. Classic old school hack and slash film.
#68
Posted 05 April 2010 - 12:41 AM
I saw this in 2D because I'd heard bad things about the 3D conversion. It was okay, not life changing in any way, shape or form. The whole thing is just extraordinarily camp, even more so than the original and that's saying something. It's a B-movie that happens to have had a lavish budget spent on it.
The main cast also seem to have been fashioned almost entirely from wood; Gemma Arterton as Io, in particular, is quite startlingly bad. Only Ralph Fiennes acquits himself well. He seems to have realised exactly what kind of film he's in and totally goes for it; I think he probably left his bite marks all over pieces of the scenery. Liam Neeson appears to be having a bit of fun too. The two of them are proficient enough actors to know that the material should not be taken even remotely seriously.
As a piece of film it is diverting enough for the 2 or so hours it's on but it is utterly disposable.
The main cast also seem to have been fashioned almost entirely from wood; Gemma Arterton as Io, in particular, is quite startlingly bad. Only Ralph Fiennes acquits himself well. He seems to have realised exactly what kind of film he's in and totally goes for it; I think he probably left his bite marks all over pieces of the scenery. Liam Neeson appears to be having a bit of fun too. The two of them are proficient enough actors to know that the material should not be taken even remotely seriously.
As a piece of film it is diverting enough for the 2 or so hours it's on but it is utterly disposable.
If an opinion contrary to your own makes you angry, that is a sign that you are subconsciously aware of having no good reason for thinking as you do. If some one maintains that two and two are five, or that Iceland is on the equator, you feel pity rather than anger, unless you know so little of arithmetic or geography that his opinion shakes your own contrary conviction. … So whenever you find yourself getting angry about a difference of opinion, be on your guard; you will probably find, on examination, that your belief is going beyond what the evidence warrants. Bertrand Russell
#69
Posted 14 April 2010 - 07:42 PM
We went to see this in 3D tonight. Would have gone with 2D, but the cinema don't show it in 2D most nights (forcing you to pay extra for the 3D, which was shit by the way).
This is a poor, poor film. I don't think it had a single redeeming quality - even the fight scenes were stupid and boring. Just rubbish. I wouldn't recommend it to anyone.
There was a scene near the end where Liam Neeson and Ralph Fiennes were hamming it up at each other, and it occurred to me that these guys were in Schindler's List together. What on earth were they doing in this film? Fiennes in particular must have been paid a fortune to appear in this.
This is a poor, poor film. I don't think it had a single redeeming quality - even the fight scenes were stupid and boring. Just rubbish. I wouldn't recommend it to anyone.
There was a scene near the end where Liam Neeson and Ralph Fiennes were hamming it up at each other, and it occurred to me that these guys were in Schindler's List together. What on earth were they doing in this film? Fiennes in particular must have been paid a fortune to appear in this.
This post has been edited by Yellow: 14 April 2010 - 07:44 PM
Don't fuck with the Culture.
#70
Posted 03 May 2010 - 07:56 AM
I love any movie that doesn't actually contain what the title says it does - Titans? What Titans?

Wry, on 29 February 2012 - 10:50 AM, said:
And you're not complaining, you're criticizing. It's a side-effect of being better than everyone else, I get it sometimes too.
~TQB~
#71
Posted 03 May 2010 - 01:57 PM
It was ok.
The lead actor is the australian keanu reeves. HE CAN'T ACT. Same asstard that was inPocahontisAvatar.
The lead actor is the australian keanu reeves. HE CAN'T ACT. Same asstard that was in
Monster Hunter World Iceborne: It's like hunting monsters, but on crack, but the monsters are also on crack.
#72
Posted 03 May 2010 - 03:10 PM
There was one scene though that truly shone with its brilliance. When the king storms into hos bedchamber to find Zeus just finished ravishing the queen: Neeson's grin in that scene had us in stitches.
Take good care to keep relations civil
It's decent in the first of gentlemen
To speak friendly, Even to the devil
It's decent in the first of gentlemen
To speak friendly, Even to the devil
#73
Posted 04 May 2010 - 02:14 PM
steaming pile of turd this movie. i couldnt help but marvel at how poor the costume and set design was. the gods looked like a bunch of drag queens ffs. also when you actually know that gods exist and they come down and do things on a regular basis why would you ever intentionally fuck them off? it seems to have just skipped over the whole plot thing. i know its a popcorn movie but please. poor acting. woeful dialouge. boring action. crap movie.