|
Post by jainitai on Mar 12, 2010 9:29:52 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by godless on Mar 12, 2010 10:04:47 GMT -5
It looks pretty good. Some people just get upset about ANY 'classic'/fondly remembered film being remade, regardless of comparative quality. I will admit there is a certain primitive charm to the stop-motion animation of old but we have to be honest; CGI just looks way better(when done well...not that sci-fi or 'Sy-Fy' channel nonsense).
|
|
|
Post by ChaosReaver on Mar 13, 2010 2:27:16 GMT -5
It looks pretty good. Some people just get upset about ANY 'classic'/fondly remembered film being remade, regardless of comparative quality. I will admit there is a certain primitive charm to the stop-motion animation of old but we have to be honest; CGI just looks way better(when done well...not that sci-fi or 'Sy-Fy' channel nonsense). Alright, I think the movie looks pretty good special effects wise. But it would be hard to watch the movie and keep me interested for one good reason. I know how it ends and I know what's going to happen. They'll be some changes. But the overall plot will still be the same. I think that's why Wolfman was terrible. Sure, there's movies that prove me wrong. Like Texas Chainsaw and Dawn of the Dead. (Man, I remember hard-core horror fans hated to see Hollywood remake the Dawn of the Dawn.) Those were good remakes. But Clash of the Titans is a movie you can't really deviate much from the original source material. I'm still going to see it because I want to see the new Kraken and Medusa but I'm not going to expect anything new or innovated. The movie I'm excited about is KICK-ASS. That looks funny as hell.
|
|
|
Post by godless on Mar 13, 2010 10:03:20 GMT -5
It looks pretty good. Some people just get upset about ANY 'classic'/fondly remembered film being remade, regardless of comparative quality. I will admit there is a certain primitive charm to the stop-motion animation of old but we have to be honest; CGI just looks way better(when done well...not that sci-fi or 'Sy-Fy' channel nonsense). Alright, I think the movie looks pretty good special effects wise. But it would be hard to watch the movie and keep me interested for one good reason. I know how it ends and I know what's going to happen. They'll be some changes. But the overall plot will still be the same. I think that's why Wolfman was terrible. Sure, there's movies that prove me wrong. Like Texas Chainsaw and Dawn of the Dead. (Man, I remember hard-core horror fans hated to see Hollywood remake the Dawn of the Dawn.) Those were good remakes. But Clash of the Titans is a movie you can't really deviate much from the original source material. I'm still going to see it because I want to see the new Kraken and Medusa but I'm not going to expect anything new or innovated. The movie I'm excited about is KICK-ASS. That looks funny as hell. I don't know... Taste is subjective I guess. I thought the Texas Chainsaw remake was one of the worst movies I had seen in some time when I saw it. And that one too had no surprises in terms of plot, story-progression and ending(and that crap with Jessica Biel's character mumbling "You're going the wrong way..." was so forced, wanna be 1980s Alan Moore/Frank Miller I burst out laughing in the theater!). In fact I think Clash of the Titans has far MORE room for deviation than horror classics do. I do not think ANYONE really expects strict adherence to the original since the story/plot of the original is not it's strong point and that movie deviated from Greek Mythology to great extent itself. Let's face it, if this new version keeps the fight with Medusa, the battle at the end with the Kraken(using the Medusa's head in some way to defeat it) and the Pegasus stuff then they really have few obligations to stick to the original in terms of the movie being considered a success. Same way the Texas Chainsaw remake only had to feature Leatherface swinging his chainsaw in a bizarre death-dance at the end, cannibal rednecks and the John Larroquette voice over at the beginning. We shall see. The movie could be terrible(ala anything directed by Michael Bay IMO) and it could be great(most likely somewhere in between those two extremes).
|
|
|
Post by ChaosReaver on Mar 13, 2010 14:50:33 GMT -5
Alright, I think the movie looks pretty good special effects wise. But it would be hard to watch the movie and keep me interested for one good reason. I know how it ends and I know what's going to happen. They'll be some changes. But the overall plot will still be the same. I think that's why Wolfman was terrible. Sure, there's movies that prove me wrong. Like Texas Chainsaw and Dawn of the Dead. (Man, I remember hard-core horror fans hated to see Hollywood remake the Dawn of the Dawn.) Those were good remakes. But Clash of the Titans is a movie you can't really deviate much from the original source material. I'm still going to see it because I want to see the new Kraken and Medusa but I'm not going to expect anything new or innovated. The movie I'm excited about is KICK-ASS. That looks funny as hell. I don't know... Taste is subjective I guess. I thought the Texas Chainsaw remake was one of the worst movies I had seen in some time when I saw it. And that one too had no surprises in terms of plot, story-progression and ending(and that crap with Jessica Biel's character mumbling "You're going the wrong way..." was so forced, wanna be 1980s Alan Moore/Frank Miller I burst out laughing in the theater!). In fact I think Clash of the Titans has far MORE room for deviation than horror classics do. I do not think ANYONE really expects strict adherence to the original since the story/plot of the original is not it's strong point and that movie deviated from Greek Mythology to great extent itself. Let's face it, if this new version keeps the fight with Medusa, the battle at the end with the Kraken(using the Medusa's head in some way to defeat it) and the Pegasus stuff then they really have few obligations to stick to the original in terms of the movie being considered a success. Same way the Texas Chainsaw remake only had to feature Leatherface swinging his chainsaw in a bizarre death-dance at the end, cannibal rednecks and the John Larroquette voice over at the beginning. We shall see. The movie could be terrible(ala anything directed by Michael Bay IMO) and it could be great(most likely somewhere in between those two extremes). I'll watch it. Hopefully, Michael Bay paid a little more attention to the script and story.
|
|
|
Post by godless on Mar 14, 2010 23:08:18 GMT -5
I don't know... Taste is subjective I guess. I thought the Texas Chainsaw remake was one of the worst movies I had seen in some time when I saw it. And that one too had no surprises in terms of plot, story-progression and ending(and that crap with Jessica Biel's character mumbling "You're going the wrong way..." was so forced, wanna be 1980s Alan Moore/Frank Miller I burst out laughing in the theater!). In fact I think Clash of the Titans has far MORE room for deviation than horror classics do. I do not think ANYONE really expects strict adherence to the original since the story/plot of the original is not it's strong point and that movie deviated from Greek Mythology to great extent itself. Let's face it, if this new version keeps the fight with Medusa, the battle at the end with the Kraken(using the Medusa's head in some way to defeat it) and the Pegasus stuff then they really have few obligations to stick to the original in terms of the movie being considered a success. Same way the Texas Chainsaw remake only had to feature Leatherface swinging his chainsaw in a bizarre death-dance at the end, cannibal rednecks and the John Larroquette voice over at the beginning. We shall see. The movie could be terrible(ala anything directed by Michael Bay IMO) and it could be great(most likely somewhere in between those two extremes). I'll watch it. Hopefully, Michael Bay paid a little more attention to the script and story. I don't think Bay is attached to Clash of the Titans(I could be wrong though). If he is I won't be seeing it, even on DVD. My comment above was in reference to how every movie Bay is attached to ends up being a suck-fest in my opinion(and he is the one behind many of these horror remakes like Texas Chainsaw, Friday the 13th, etc.) and Clash could turn out to be just as bad for all I know. But I think it looks good judging by the trailer.
|
|
|
Post by ChaosReaver on Mar 15, 2010 0:48:24 GMT -5
I'll watch it. Hopefully, Michael Bay paid a little more attention to the script and story. I don't think Bay is attached to Clash of the Titans(I could be wrong though). If he is I won't be seeing it, even on DVD. My comment above was in reference to how every movie Bay is attached to ends up being a suck-fest in my opinion(and he is the one behind many of these horror remakes like Texas Chainsaw, Friday the 13th, etc.) and Clash could turn out to be just as bad for all I know. But I think it looks good judging by the trailer. Whoa! You scared me there for a minute. I misread your comment. Thank god Bay has nothing to do with this film. I'm going to still watch it. Clash brought a lot of childhood memories when I was growing up. So like you said, the trailer should be a good indication.
|
|
|
Post by ChaosReaver on Mar 22, 2010 0:48:07 GMT -5
Here's 10 Preview Clips from Clash of the Titans. I didn't watch them all. But after watching the second clip, I was thinking of the Star Wars "lightsaber" and Xena "acrobatics". I'm going to take my little cousin. He's really excited about this movie. www.bloody-disgusting.com/news/19532
|
|
|
Post by jainitai on Apr 3, 2010 8:43:01 GMT -5
Saw this yesterday. I really enjoyed it, in spite of all the bad reviews it's been getting from the critics. Some of the criticism's on Rotten Tomatoes are just silly though, like people nit picking stupid stuff, like the fact that Sam Worthington as an Australian accent and that Zeus's armor is too shiny.
Most of the criticism's though are because of the plot (or non-existent plot, which many seem to agree upon). I didn't see anything wrong with the plot at all. I mean, you're going into it knowing it's a movie about Greek gods and monsters for fuck's sake! What do you expect? And I wouldn't even say the plot is all that bad. It's a very linear story line, but it moves at a quick pace and it all makes sense as to why one event leads to the next. I don't know why everyone is bitching about it.
They complain about one-dimensional acting and not being able to connect with the characters on an emotional level, but again, this is mostly an action/adventure movie, not a romance film!
I saw if you enjoyed the original film you'll enjoy seeing all of those classic scenes re-made and modernized. You just have to go into it to have fun, not analyze it and pick it apart.
|
|
|
Post by ChaosReaver on Apr 3, 2010 22:08:11 GMT -5
I agree with Jai on the movie. I liked the movie and so did my little cousin. This is an action movie, so don't expect Shakespeare.
I watched the movie in 3D. I think that's the only way to watch it. Otherwise you can't appreciate the CG. The plot is pretty much the same with the original movie. But like any remake the new director puts his own twist on it.
The only thing I can criticize was how fast the scene moved with Medusa. The was no pacing or drama. If you seen the original movie you will know what I mean. Also, the dialogue was kinda of corny. I don't think the acting was bad, it was just the dialogue.
As for Zeus with the shiny armor, it made sense to me. Zeus is a god so he's supposed to look divine and majestic. I didn't even notice Sam Worthington's accent. Although, Sam reminded me of Russel Crowe in Gladiator. So it worked for me.
Other than that, watch the movie. It kinda of cool to see how the monsters were revisioned in this new movie.
|
|
|
Post by godless on Apr 7, 2010 13:27:20 GMT -5
Well, I have not seen it yet and...judging by those reviews, I probably won't spend money on it. Not that critics are never wrong. Of course they sometimes are(sometimes VERY wrong) but this is actually somewhat rare(taking into account all factors) that they are and even more so when you have a very large consensus pointing out the same flaws.
Some exceptions:
The 13th Warrior - Critics largely panned this one but the dialog is brilliant, the cinematography very good, the story(by the late Michael Crieghton(spelling?) unique and engaging and the acting surprisingly good.
Chronicles of Riddick - This was one of those exceptionally rare occurrences when the critics were en masse wrong about a film. The initial reviews being from a wave of people unfamiliar with the science fiction genre(s) that the movie is rooted in(people like Leonard Malten repeatedly bashed the sci-fi conventions themselves which was akin to reviewing Batman and complaining about how unlikely it is that someone would wear a cape to fight crime) and these guys were followed by 2,000 hacks all going "me too!" sensing another Gigli in their wake.
Reign of Fire - This was another that deserved better than the '2 stars' ratings it consistently gets in papers and magazines.
I also have never been fond of the "it's only an action movie. Who cares if the acting is bad/plot has holes/etc.?" defense of movies. Transformers was "only an action movie" but this is a bad film for all the reasons that The A-Team was bad television. There is no reason at all that action movies should be held to lower standards than any other film. Michael Mann does not include crappy action scenes/sequences in his dramas saying "It's only a drama! It does not need believable gunfire/choreography/etc.!".
The Road Warrior was one of the most visionary films ever made. It defined a whole sub-genre of action-drama stories and did so with very good acting, decent dialog, mostly good directing(the movie is not perfect).
So if it is indeed true what all the critics are saying about Clash of the Titans in terms of story-execution, acting etc. then then I will grant it no more slack than I would a sequel to Titanic featuring former porn stars and directed by Michael Bay. Of course I would still like to see those special effects in IMAX but not if it is an otherwise bad movie.
|
|