Clash of the Titans - released 02/04/2010
Last night, my lovely boyfriend and I saw Clash of the Titans, in 2D, rather than the apparently somewhat infectious 3D people seem to be raving about these days, because we both stand firm that 3D gives us a headache. Upon leaving, we both had the same kind of puzzled expression on our faces and decided that if we had to describe what we’d just seen in one word, we’d go for “misleading”.
Not that Clash of the Titans was a bad film, by any means.
Directed by Louis Leterrier, who, to be honest, I’ve never heard of before (although I don’t pretend to be anything much of a film buff), the cast was more British than I would have expected following such delights as Troy, which I STILL cannot stay awake through no matter how hard I try. Liam Neeson as Zeus, who looks, perhaps deliberately, remarkably similar to Ralph Fiennes as Hades, plus Gemma Anderton as Io and a somewhat interestingly cast appearance from Nicholas Hoult as one of the soldiers made for a pleasantly surprising cast. Not at all what I was expecting.
So that’s misleading element number one. On to number two. The film was actually rather funny. There was a degree of humour in the film that I certainly didn’t expect from a tale about a bloke who, after learning that he’s the son of Zeus, goes off on a bit of a rampage to avenge the Gods for killing his adoptive parents in a shipwreck. Whether the humour was appropriate to the film or not is arguable - I for one would rather have seen it taken seriously and not liable to go down the same “unintentionally hilarious” path taken by the 1981 film of the same name on which this remake was based.
Misleading element number 3 - the film was considerably less violent than I would have expected. Films of this nature have a general tendancy to be, while often subtle, quite gory. They always have at least one good quality battle scene in which you see a few entrails, the odd beheading, someone dying in quite a graphic, bleeding from every orifice kind of way. There was none of this. How disappointing.
Misleading, or perhaps more aptly named, frustrating element number 4 - absolutely no romance at all. None. Not a sausage. There was the hint of it, between Perseus and Io, but nothing that ever materialised. I fully expected to see them at least kiss at the poignant moment where Perseus has to go off and face it all alone, but no. There wasn’t even a light peck when they’re reunited at the end of the film. My limited knowledge of films of this vein had led me to expect at least a subtle sex scene. Insinuation, while clever, just isn’t enough.
I suppose this, with the lack of violence, is all one can come to expect of a film certified 12A. Had it been a 15, I daresay my expectations would have been fulfilled. Call this justification of why I dislike and will never have children. Their influence has now softened the film industry. And that is bad times. Very, very bad times.
Misleading element number five and final: Where were the Titans? The Titans were, to the best of my knowledge, four beasts each derived from one of the four elements - fire, water, earth and air. Unless they were very well hidden, there were no Titans in Clash of the Titans. I don’t think you can really name a film “Clash of the Titans” if it has no actual Titans in it. Especially not if it’s about Greek mythology. Epic fail.
So that’s it. Clash of the Titans. Distinctly minus Titans. Voila.
