Sam Worthington is no Harry Hamlin

Rating: 3/10 (4 April 2010)

In Roger Ebert's review of the original 1981 "Clash of the Titans," he praised the film saying it had "faith in a story-telling tradition that sometimes seems almost forgotten, a tradition depending upon legends and myths." This makes sense considering both film versions of "Clash of the Titans" is loosely based off the Greek myth of Perseus (Greek for "Avenger" apparently) a myth that has been passed down and kicking around since roughly 490 BC. There is no definitive version of the story, and like all good myths and legends, the best parts get added as the story get passed on from generation to generation. When Ebert praised the original 1981 "Clash of the Titans" he was referring to the same mythic storied tradition that the film seemed to be able to maintain with the help of a well developed script and crafty special effects work from Ray Harryhausen, who was one of the best around before computer CGI took care of everything.
But now CGI does take care of everything, so much so that we've also almost forgotten how hard it is to create special effects like the original "Clash of the Titans" did without the aid of computers. You would think then that a film like "Clash of the Titans," which relies so heavily on SFX and mythical gods and creatures, would be perfect to remake in the age of CGI. But in its remake, Hollywood forgot that it's not just about how much CGI you can throw on the screen, but how you use it. It's always ironic when we have the power to visually create whatever our imaginations can dream up, yet once we have this ability we're less creative with how we use it. We treat the technique as the be all and end all, forgetting that, no matter what, the quality and depth of the story should always be the film's foundation. The two things that made the myth of Perseus work so well throughout time were its strong narrative structure and the fantastical nature of the story. Actually, come to think of it, this is true with all storytelling; it's what makes you root for the protagonist, hate the villains, and get swept up in the emotions of the characters. The Greeks knew about this, and it seemed that Hollywood did, too, for a while – but the new version of this film is so befuddled with questionable character motivations and derivative plot twists that the epic tale of Perseus seemed to have gotten lost in a CGI mess.
In the classic Greek myth of Perseus, the son of Zeus (half god, half man) grows up while his mother is exiled on an island after his bastard grandfather sent them away after hearing a prophecy predicting Perseus will one day kill him. Perseus grows up knowing he is half god (demigod) and yearns to become an adult so he can begin his own heroic adventures. In the original myth, Perseus has a single motivation: to seek the adventure and excitement of becoming a hero. In the 1981 film, Perseus does not know he is a demigod until he is an adult, and it is not until he sees the princess Andromeda that he decides his ultimate quest is not for the sake of heroism, but love. In the new film, Perseus' motivation changes one last, complicated time; his adoptive parents are killed by God of the Underworld Hades, and Perseus' sole motivation becomes revenge. I call this the "Gladiator effect," which worked well for Maximus, but not so well for Perseus. This is also the first variation in which Perseus doesn't agree with his real father Zeus, and wants to win his battles not as a god, but as a man. But the problem here isn't Perseus' daddy issues, it's that he becomes a man fueled by revenge against the gods and completely resistant to using his divine abilities. Using these gifts is what makes him so lovable in the original myth and movie, so why abandon it? As far as acting goes, Sam Worthington as Perseus is no Harry Hamlin, and comes across more as an angry Maximus/Russel Crowe archetype rather than an altruistic hero. This combined with the problem of superfluous supporting characters, deus ex machina love interests, and no mechanical owl, this movie is mostly for kids and tweens who will love the computer graphics, but ultimately doesn't leave a lasting impression or has the imagination of a truly epic tale, one that relies on story-telling anyway.
Oh and it wasn't shot in 3D, so don't waste your money seeing it this way.