SJ Reviews: 'Clash of the Titans 3-D'...The Gods werent kind to boring re-make (2)

[SouthernJet]

Clash of the Titans 3D 2010 isnt a sequel to 1981s original. Its a remake and that was a mistake. The original had a retro feel even back in 1981 that made it the cult classic it remains. Maybe doing a sequel would have been better than attempting a re-make.

This 2010 version i n3D is boring, repetitive and brings nothing original or catchy like the 1981 version. Its the same story with 3D and 2 big stars in Liam Neeson and Ralph Fiennes.

Killing monsters and chasing evil doers is boring here and I was thinking how the cartoon of Train Your Dragon was soooo much better last week. Dont get me wrong, this will entertain you somewhat and the younger kids will probably like, but it doesnt stack up against other action flicks/fantasy genres of recent memory. Sadly the film never really had me enthralled or deeply paying attention. It just didnt grab you. The 3D effects are really not WOW and I think the 2D would probably suffice here. Train Dragon on other hand, see in 3D and bypass this snoozer.

2 's

[Falcon63]

It wasn't as good as I thought, but it doesn't deserve 2 stars in my opinion (it's out of 4, or 5?).

[Thai Jet]

Clash of the Titans 3D 2010 isnt a sequel to 1981s original. Its a remake and that was a mistake. The original had a retro feel even back in 1981 that made it the cult classic it remains. Maybe doing a sequel would have been better than attempting a re-make.

This 2010 version i n3D is boring, repetitive and brings nothing original or catchy like the 1981 version. Its the same story with 3D and 2 big stars in Liam Neeson and Ralph Fiennes.

Thanks SJ. I kinda figured the special effects were the only thing it had going for it.

[The Crusher]

What a damn shame. Harry Hamlin should piss on this film in disgust.

[Sharrow]

I had a feeling about this after I saw the giant scorpions that were as big as a house. Do they actually show a man as being able to kill one of those in the movie?

[SouthernJet]

It wasn't as good as I thought, but it doesn't deserve 2 stars in my opinion (it's out of 4, or 5?).

It was bad, pure money maker aimed at teen audience..

And my 2 stars out of 4, is MUCH better than the average reviewers (nationwide, its averaging 2 out of 5, aka 40)...I was kind

[SouthernJet]

I had a feeling about this after I saw the giant scorpions that were as big as a house. Do they actually show a man as being able to kill one of those in the movie?

Try killing 3 of them, and then training the other 3 to be thier 'pets'..pretty freakin absurd..

[124]

I'm surprised you didn't give this a -2.

[SouthernJet]

I'm surprised you didn't give this a -2.

I was tempted, trust me. But I also think that some teens (actually almost teens) may get off on it and I almost always give stuff 1 1/2 cause I like alot .

But you are right, I was kind

I picked wrong Liam Neeson flick. I knew I should have seen Chloe. Next screen over in cinema to boot.

http://www.metacritic.com/film/titles/chloe