|Oggetto: ‘Titans’ Only Inspires Boredom(Menzionano Xena e Hercules) Ven Apr 02, 2010 10:29 am|| |
Questo articolo è una review del film: Clash of the Titans, che è stato trovato piuttosto noioso, nonostante gli effetti in 3d.
Menziona Xena e Hercules dicendo che almeno in questi due telefilm c'erano scene d'azione migliori.
Sottolineo la parte che riguarda Xena e Hercules
- Citazione :
Welcome, mortals, to the epic and mystical world of “Clash of the Titans.” Witness the majestic journey of an epic hero. Tremble at the glorious power of the gods. Feel the thrill of battle as you...Zzzzzzzzzzzz.
Sorry, dozed off for a second. But you probably get the picture.
A remake of the classic-yet-campy 1981 film of the same name, “Clash of the Titans,” makes an honest attempt for blockbuster grandiosity. Boasting a feast of CGI-infused action set pieces and the sort of accuracy to the Greek myths that would give any classics professor a massive coronary, the film seems ripe for the sort of mindless, thrill-ride pleasures that characterize the best sort of summer movies.
Instead, what we get is a muddled action film that drowns under the weight of its own banality.
Set in the universe of Greek mythology, the film chronicles the myth of the legendary demi-god Perseus (Sam Worthington, “Avatar”). Born the bastard child of Zeus (Liam Neeson, “Taken”) and a mortal woman Danae, Perseus is tossed to sea as an infant by Danae’s angry husband and rescued by a family of kindly fishermen who raise him as their own son.
Meanwhile, up on Mount Olympus, Zeus watches angrily as the human race begins rebelling against the authority of the gods, tearing down temples and refusing to pray. As punishment for their insolence, Zeus enlists the services of his brother/God of the Underworld Hades (Ralph Fiennes, “Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince”).
Deceitful and cunning, Hades convinces Zeus to grant him permission to wreak havoc on Earth. One such attack results in the death of Perseus’ surrogate family.
Through a series of events, Perseus becomes involved in a dangerous expedition to help fight back against Hades and his underworld minions. The journey includes run-ins with giant scorpions, Medusa and — in the film’s climatic battle scene — a massive sea monster known as the Kraken.
When viewed today, the original 1981 film — with a beautifully hammy performance from Laurence Olivier as Zeus and a stop-motion style Kraken that resembles early “South Park” animation — is irresistible in its dated campiness. The film may not be good, but it certainly is a lot of fun.
The same cannot be said for this newer version. Director Louis Leterrier (“The Incredible Hulk”) does his best to pump up the action, using all the latest technology to endow the film with a larger, more epic feel. The film relies too much on visual effects, however, which ends up giving the action scenes a muted, stagnated feel.
After a while, it begins to resemble what would happen if Michael Bay decided to try his hand at a period piece.
Although performances tend not to be a typical staple of sword-and-sand epics, the acting in this film borders on the laughable. As the heroic Perseus, Worthington is given little to do outside his fight scenes aside from sounding gruff and delivering surly looks to the camera.
Likewise, as Perseus’ guardian and potential love interest Io, Gemma Arterton’s (“Quantum of Solace”) role in the film seems confined to providing exposition, delivering stilted aphorisms and looking perfectly immaculate in a white tunic even while she struts around the dirt-filled locations. At least she does one out of three of those well enough.
However, the biggest failure in the acting department comes with the portrayal of the Greek gods. Although it has always been a difficult task to film a mythological story, “Titans” does little to break this tradition.
Even the combined dramatic talents of Neeson and Fiennes are not enough to redeem the film’s cornball screenplay. Neeson, in particular, is not helped by the choice of wardrobe: a sparkling suit of armor that appears to come straight out of a Greek-themed Elton John party.
Adding insult to injury, the film’s highly advertised 3D imagery proves completely irrelevant. With the exception of a visually arresting opening sequence, the 3D is practically non-existent.
At its best, the images end up looking more like cardboard cutouts that just slightly jut out of the frame. Whereas in “Avatar” the 3D acted as a tool of immersion into the world of the film, the 3D in “Titans” seems tacked on, added purely to cash in on the recent trend of 3D movies.
In the end, the film makes no attempt to disguise its intent to become a potential franchise. The actual ending of the film effectively leaves many loose threads, making the whole film feel more like a two-hour TV pilot than a fully developed movie.
Despite its high budget, “Clash of the Titans” somehow manages to always look cheap. One would be just as happy watching reruns of “Hercules” and “Xena: Warrior Princess,” both of which contain better action and more interesting characters in their weaker moments than “Titans” does in its entire running time.
Even when viewed in context as a dumb summer action movie, “Titans” falls incredibly flat.