Featured Audience Ratings

• John M

  
  This was a fun movie. Watching it on a big drive in screen was interesting and fun. It really did hearken back to the old movie. I can def see that 3d would have been worthless.

• Chris W

  
  Although it diverts from the original story and the original film version, this newer take on the story of Perseus is still pretty entertaining and decent in its own right. The effects are better, and the overall look is sleeker and sharper, but there's no charm to any of this.… More
  Although it diverts from the original story and the original film version, this newer take on the story of Perseus is still pretty entertaining and decent in its own right. The effects are better, and the overall look is sleeker and sharper, but there's no charm to any of this. Even though the old version's effects look cheesy, they were awesome because it took more effort to do them, and they had a certain charm to them. The effects here are suitably creepy and cool, but they don't wow me. Aside from these quibbles (and the liberties), it kind of bugged me that Worthington didn't cover up his Aussie accent, and that he uses "hell" and "bitch" in an out of place modern context. I get why it's there, but it doesn't really fit and kind of shakes one out of the story for a bit. The action scens are great, and are very well done, but they all seemed rather rushed to me, and didn't radiate with as much intensity and tension as they should. The casting and performances are all pretty good and, accent aside, Worthington has really become an amazing and credible action star thanks to his last few roles (this included). He's a great choice for Perseus, even if he seems lacking in the department of human emotions and depth. Fiennes is good as always, but his casting as Hades reeks of obviousness. Good job anyways though. Neeson is good as Zeus, and I can't think of a better choice, but I felt underwhelmed ofr some reason. Actually, that's kind of how I felt about the whole movie. It was fun and entertaining, and a remake was probably not a bad idea, but things just feel a bit more artifical and cold, and that's not cool. I did like a certain cameo appearance of a character from the original film though- that was certainly a nice touch. I'm okay with some of the CGI even though I would have preferred more practical stuff, but I kind of wished the film was loinger so the action scenes wouldn't have to feel so rushed and so some more depth could be given all around to the characters and story. So yeah, this isn't a great film, and the original is better, but it's a fine enough remake, and it's worth at least a watch or two.

• Christopher H

  
  This movie costed 125 million dollars to make, which begs the question: Where the heck did all that money go? The settings look cheap, which makes the film look like a community theatre production. The costumes are bland and the over-use of makeup makes everybody look like a clown.… More
  This movie costed 125 million dollars to make, which begs the question: Where the heck did all that money go? The settings look cheap, which makes the film look like a community theatre production. The costumes are bland and the over-use of makeup makes everybody look like a clown. The filmmakers removed all the substance and depth from the original. This leaves the film's plot to be extremely thin and meaningless. The visuals offer little to counter the film's vacuous plot. Compared to the Ray Harryhausen's brilliant stop-motion effects, the film's CGI looks terrible. The characters are one-dimensional, giving the actors very little to work with. Sam Worthington seems bored and Ralph Fiennes talks in his "Lord Voldemort" voice. Not even Liam Neeson can make the thin material work. This remake lacks the sense of adventure or excitement of the original.

• Everett J

  
  When I first watched this, I thought it was pretty bad. Now a couple years later, in anticipation for the sequel, I decided to revisit and see if it is as bad as I originally thought. Time has been good to this remake, and I actually dig it more now. It's the story of… More
  When I first watched this, I thought it was pretty bad. Now a couple years later, in anticipation for the sequel, I decided to revisit and see if it is as bad as I originally thought. Time has been good to this remake, and I actually dig it more now. It's the story of mankind's revolution against the gods head by Zeus(Liam Neeson). Perseus(Sam Worthington) a demigod leads the revolution as he attempts to save a princess from Hades(Ralph Fiennes) who threatens to unleash the Krakken, a beast that could destroy mankind. The special effects are amazing, the story is just ok, and the performances are decent(at best). But it's a good dumb action flick, that is big on spectacle and low on substance. Which is fine, because sometimes you just need a movie like that every now and then. It'll never be considered a classic, but it'll be known as a fun movie, that is good for a couple hours of popcorn entertainment.

• KJ P

  
  Clash of the Titans, has great characters, and a really good story that would grab a lot of people's attention, but that doesn't change the fact that it was rehashed from the 80's and tried to change a few things to make it inventive, while failing at that. It is… More
  Clash of the Titans, has great characters, and a really good story that would grab a lot of people's attention, but that doesn't change the fact that it was rehashed from the 80's and tried to change a few things to make it inventive, while failing at that. It is surrounded by a lot of poor executions that bring my overall rating down. Sam Worthington does a decent job as Perceus, but the rest of the cast sort of fell flat. The visual effects were very average and albeit laughable at points, except for some reason at the end, it seemed as though they spent most of the budget on making the Kraken look good, which in both films has very little screen time. It does pay a few little homages to the original, poking fun at the 1981 version for about half of the film, but the fun quickly turns you off once you realize that they are only picking fun to let you know that they have changed the events and the way the story will play out. As enjoyable as this film is, it is almost an insult to the original. I kind of liked this movie at times, but there are many flaws that I have no problem complaining about. Infact, it really is not that good of a film at all, but it is nice to see the gods back on screen. To conclude, the effects are weak, the editing is awful, the score is very random and out of place, but the story is fun to see, and the characters are great! The 2010 version of "Clash of the Titans" is a very mixed bag. It's the type of movies that you will shrug your shoulders and forget about.

• Scott G

  
  Although this an adventure film with enemies i think its basic, the allies die to soon, it could have lasted so much longerand theres a very minimalistic amount of mythical monsters that used which ruined it badly and the whole film just seems like it is hurried.

• xGary X

  
  A warrior with the blood of Zeus running through his veins is charged with defeating a fearsome creature who is set to be unleashed on the city of Argos if its princess is not sacrificed. I wasn't a big fan of the original film so I went into Clash Of The titans with low… More
  A warrior with the blood of Zeus running through his veins is charged with defeating a fearsome creature who is set to be unleashed on the city of Argos if its princess is not sacrificed. I wasn't a big fan of the original film so I went into Clash Of The titans with low expectations and surprise, surprise. Even they weren't met. It's just another example of the kind of poorly scripted CGI fests that plague modern cinema featuring dialogue that's all sound bites, characterisation by montage and battle sequences that look more like Transformers than Jason And The Argonauts. As always seems to be the case when hack directors are given a 3D project, Leterrier seemed far more interested in showing various objects spinning into camera than telling a coherent story and there are a host of horrible performances on display; Sam Worthington is as wooden as his ship and plays Perseus like a Mitchell brother and Ralph Fiennes' Hades is similarly bad, seeming more Harry Potter than Homer. Some of the visual effects are quite impressive and Gemma Arterton is very easy on the eye but otherwise there's very little to commend this episodic, weakly plotted and strangely dull swords and sandal version of Lord Of the Rings. A bit of a Greek tragedy really.

• Anthony L

  
  I'm going to have to go against the grain on this one and declare that I actually really enjoyed this version of Clash of the Titans. OK, so it is CGI heavy and I didn't like the Kraken at all but I thought the rest of the film bought the characters from Greek mythology to… More
  I'm going to have to go against the grain on this one and declare that I actually really enjoyed this version of Clash of the Titans. OK, so it is CGI heavy and I didn't like the Kraken at all but I thought the rest of the film bought the characters from Greek mythology to life quite admirably. As a kid I was really into Greek mythology so although it was likely I was always going to be pleased I was also always going to be a harsh critic on this one but Leterrier did a good job I thought. I think the negative backlash it received is a little unfair, as entertaining action films goes I thought it was fantastic! I have to say though, I find it odd that Jason Flemyng has become the go-to man for disfigured monsters, how did that happen?

• Adam K

  
  Clash of the Titans was a movie which critics hate and despise and the viewing public seem to love. Although I am the public I hated this film as much as teh critics and fellow RT's seem to agree. BAD BAD BAD * 1 Star

• Alexander D

  
  Bad

• Jim C

  
  Cheesy visuals and boring story make a okay movie that you will only remember some action scenes

• Wildaly M

  
  It's not the best it could've been but it kinda works for me.

• Bruce B

  
  This one is easy to review, everyone else has done that already. All I will say the original was much better, I am not much for computer graphics in order to enhance a movie and lots of scenes were far from the original, it was actually down graded by some of the adult only lines.… More
  This one is easy to review, everyone else has done that already. All I will say the original was much better, I am not much for computer graphics in order to enhance a movie and lots of scenes were far from the original, it was actually down graded by some of the adult only lines. This should have carried a different title. 2 1/2 stars

• Coxxie M

  
  probably the dumbest thing so far this year. will be remembered only by this line: " i know youre part man and part god, but you got the best of both worlds. " I believe that in about 50 years, we will start to hear dialogue a little like this: "Eh... that a… More
  probably the dumbest thing so far this year. will be remembered only by this line: " i know youre part man and part god, but you got the best of both worlds. " I believe that in about 50 years, we will start to hear dialogue a little like this: "Eh... that a banana?" "No. bananas are yellow. this is also yellow, but its not a banana." "oh... thats a french fry, huh?" "yep. theyre both food and yellow!" "How romantic.... wanna fuck?" "ok! quick, get the banana!"

• Jameson W

  
  Very flawed, but the special effects were great. Also, casting Liam Neeson and Ralph Fiennes as important characters was a great choice. A decent film. This film could have been better, but it sounds like the sequel is on a better track. I probably wouldn't have been… More
  Very flawed, but the special effects were great. Also, casting Liam Neeson and Ralph Fiennes as important characters was a great choice. A decent film. This film could have been better, but it sounds like the sequel is on a better track. I probably wouldn't have been interested in a sequel, but I think I will give a second one a shot.

• James A

  
  In this movie some good actors and Sam Worthington demonstrate style over substance.

• Michael E

  
  i had no care to see it but i was forced too for my dads birhtday, and i really had no expectations for this movie and i was expecting it too suck, and what do you know it did, the action was terrible and about 95% of the time it was so dark i couldn't tell what was going on, im… More
  i had no care to see it but i was forced too for my dads birhtday, and i really had no expectations for this movie and i was expecting it too suck, and what do you know it did, the action was terrible and about 95% of the time it was so dark i couldn't tell what was going on, im not lying.

• Sanjaya &

  
  Really good actually, even with all the changes they made in the movie, but it still nice to be watched... The story was okay, even the changes they made in this movie was way too far especially because they change the ending from Perseus marrying Andromeda by Perseus in love with… More
  Really good actually, even with all the changes they made in the movie, but it still nice to be watched... The story was okay, even the changes they made in this movie was way too far especially because they change the ending from Perseus marrying Andromeda by Perseus in love with Io... The cast did a good job, especially because they have three big names in here : Sam Worthington, Liam Neeson, and Ralph Fiennes... Overall, it's a really good remake with a pretty different story from the original, with a lousier effects, especially for the Medusa...

• Candy R

  
  Remake of myth of Perseus, son of Zeus. Hades kills Perseus mortal family. Perseus seeks revenge and is on a quest to rescue a princess. Good cast and special effects. Not as good as Troy but better than 300 and Alexander. Sam is the only hot guy!

• Summer W

  
  Just because a film can outdo its predecessor with special effects, doesn't make it better. It strayed so far from the original (a film that happens to be close to my heart) as to be barely recognizable. What's with Hades? Whats with this anti-gods theme? Um....why… More
  Just because a film can outdo its predecessor with special effects, doesn't make it better. It strayed so far from the original (a film that happens to be close to my heart) as to be barely recognizable. What's with Hades? Whats with this anti-gods theme? Um....why isn't Perseus in love with Andromeda? What's with the daddy angst? Pegasus is BLACK?! The film was all flash and no substance, which was hugely disappointing. In the original, the characters are interesting and you care about them. In this one, the character development is so brief (if it exists at all) that you keep asking yourself, "who are you, anyway?" Aside from a funny cameo by Bubo, and a *relatively* faithful recreation of the Stygian witches, this movie shouldn't be considered the same story at all.

Read all 20 featured audience ratings