DVD Talk
Wrath of the Titans (Liebesman, 2012) — The Reviews Thread [Archive] - DVD Talk Forum
 
Best Sellers
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
The Longest Day
Buy: $54.99 $24.99
9.
10.
DVD Blowouts
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
Alien [Blu-ray]
Buy: $19.99 $9.99
8.
9.
10.

PDA
DVD Reviews

View Full Version : Wrath of the Titans (Liebesman, 2012) — The Reviews Thread


OldBoy
03-26-12, 03:56 PM
Please continue pre-release discussion here. (http://forum.dvdtalk.com/movie-talk/583140-wrath-titans-2012-sequel-clash-5.html)

Movie:
"Wrath of the Titans" (Starring: Sam Worthington, Liam Neeson, Ralph Fiennes, Édgar Ramírez, Rosamund Pike, Bill Nighy, Danny Huston)

Release Date:
3/30/2012

Rating:
PG-13 (for intense sequences of fantasy violence, action, some disturbing images, and screams of “no Gemma Arterton or Alexa Davalos!” throughout)

Running Time:
99min. (1h. 39m.)

Budget:
$125 million (estimated)

IMDb Synopsis:
A decade after his heroic defeat of the monstrous Kraken, Perseus-the demigod son of Zeus-is attempting to live a quieter life as a village fisherman and the sole parent to his 10-year old son, Helius. Meanwhile, a struggle for supremacy rages between the gods and the Titans. Dangerously weakened by humanity's lack of devotion, the gods are losing control of the imprisoned Titans and their ferocious leader, Kronos, father of the long-ruling brothers Zeus, Hades and Poseidon. The triumvirate had overthrown their powerful father long ago, leaving him to rot in the gloomy abyss of Tartarus, a dungeon that lies deep within the cavernous underworld. Perseus cannot ignore his true calling when Hades, along with Zeus' godly son, Ares (Edgar Ramírez), switch loyalty and make a deal with Kronos to capture Zeus. The Titans' strength grows stronger as Zeus' remaining godly powers are siphoned.

IMDb Info and Rating:
0.0 (0 votes as of 3/27/12) (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1646987/)

Rotten Tomatoes:
Fresh:00 Rotten:00 (00% as of 3/27/12) (http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/clash_of_the_titans_2/)

Metacritic:
00 metascore ('Generally favorable reviews' as of 3/27/12) (http://www.metacritic.com/movie/clash-of-the-titans-2)

Trailer:
<object width="720" height="349"><param name="movie" value="http://www.traileraddict.com/emd/50229"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><param name="allowfullscreen" value="true"></param><embed src="http://www.traileraddict.com/emd/50229" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" wmode="transparent" allowfullscreen="true" width="720" height="349"></embed></object>

Poster Art:
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v648/scott1598/Movie%20Posters/wrath.jpg

TomOpus
03-26-12, 04:06 PM
I'd give it 3 stars right now based solely on the trailer being so much better than the entire first movie :)

OldBoy
03-26-12, 04:10 PM
i thought the first was hokey, but fun.

Why So Blu?
03-26-12, 04:27 PM
Only 99 minutes?

Matthew Chmiel
03-26-12, 04:29 PM
I bought the BD+DVD+DC combo pack of the first film when it came out as Best Buy's pre-order had an incorrect price.

I still haven't even watched it.

I guess I'll put that as a to do this week.

Dr. DVD
03-26-12, 05:08 PM
I think this will be a case of a sequel being made to a movie that despite doing good box-office, was more or less disliked. I also think it's obvious that WB didn't think Hunger Games would prove as popular with the masses as it did, and that they would be releasing this movie with no credible competition. In short, I think this one will flop, even though it looks better than the first.

mdc3000
03-28-12, 10:59 PM
I posted this in the other thread before I saw the reviews thread:

While not a homerun, Wrath of the Titans was a LOT OF FUN. It does still suffer a few of the problems of Clash (flimsy plot, eye rolling dialogue and hulking cg characters dispatched way too easily) but they nailed the tone, moreso than the last outting. I hated Perseus' kid though and really wish they could find a few better actors in a few instances.

That said, the action delivers (although the 3D was disappointing - lots of smoke, fog and haze, which doesn't help the 3D much), Bill Nighy was great (love his 'advisor') and giving Neeson and Fiennes more to do was a big plus, even if I wish they had been utilized even more. If you're looking for a fun movie, this is it - especially if you sort of dug the first one - this is more of the same but done a little bit better. I would be interested in a third go round if they keep the fun level amped up like they did in this one. 3.5/5 and the first movie Liebsman has made that I can tolerate.

fumanstan
03-28-12, 11:12 PM
I think this will be a case of a sequel being made to a movie that despite doing good box-office, was more or less disliked. I also think it's obvious that WB didn't think Hunger Games would prove as popular with the masses as it did, and that they would be releasing this movie with no credible competition. In short, I think this one will flop, even though it looks better than the first.

Clash made $163 million domestic, and while I don't think Wrath will top that I think it will still make over $100 million here and won't necessarily be a flop.

Mr. Cinema
03-29-12, 08:57 PM
Boxoffice.com is predicting $37.5 million for the weekend. The 2010 film opened to $61 million.

Wrath is getting rave reviews however. The Rotten Tomatoes score is up to 28%.

covenant
03-29-12, 10:49 PM
Only 99 minutes?

And no R rating...so much fail.

Supermallet
03-30-12, 12:08 AM
As anyone who can read the previous thread can attest to, I hated the first movie. But you know what? This one was fun. It moved at a brisk pace and had a lot more stuff with the Olympians that worked. The Labyrinth section is very weak, mainly because you never get the sense the group is lost, and they find their way far too quickly. Not only that, but the minotaur is even dumber in context than he looks in the trailer.

That aside, the movie manages to be enjoyable almost in spite of itself.

Why So Blu?
03-30-12, 03:47 PM
Just came back from the screening and thought it was okay. I hated the first film, but liked this one. The Blu-ray should look and sound phenomenal!


Ah, and I wouldn't say that the Minotaur looks "dumb" but he was totally underused which knocks my personal rating way down. Still, it's silly-cheesy fun.

Supermallet
03-30-12, 06:19 PM
Well, I think that not only did the Minotaur look dumb, but it was used poorly and presented no threat.

Giles
03-30-12, 09:42 PM
Just came back from the screening and thought it was okay. I hated the first film, but liked this one. The Blu-ray should look and sound phenomenal!


Ah, and I wouldn't say that the Minotaur looks "dumb" but he was totally underused which knocks my personal rating way down. Still, it's silly-cheesy fun.

interesting...

I really liked the first film, but this one was disappointing. Most of the plot was predictable and some of the dialogue was really bad. They made a huge point of some of the soldiers adding mud and crap onto their bodies and face for the final battle and nothing came out of that fact.

I don't know if Warner's altered the aspect ratio for the IMAX 15/70 version but for IMAX-Digital the 2.35 was changed to 1.78 to be full screen (no black borders above and below the image) - although in the scene with the two headed beast, the attack of the tail did a quick reveal of the 2.35 AR - very odd.

I thought the 3D was very hit and miss, for the most part the fast paced action couldn't deliver any depth.

Why So Blu?
03-30-12, 11:21 PM
interesting...

I really liked the first film, but this one was disappointing. Most of the plot was predictable and some of the dialogue was really bad. They made a huge point of some of the soldiers adding mud and crap onto their bodies and face for the final battle and nothing came out of that fact.

I don't know if Warner's altered the aspect ratio for the IMAX 15/70 version but for IMAX-Digital the 2.35 was changed to 1.78 to be full screen (no black borders above and below the image) - although in the scene with the two headed beast, the attack of the tail did a quick reveal of the 2.35 AR - very odd.

I thought the 3D was very hit and miss, for the most part the fast paced action couldn't deliver any depth.



I saw this in 2-D. I never see flicks in 3-D or IMAX unless they're 3-D or contain actual scenes filmed in IMAX. It's a waste of money, IMO.

mdc3000
03-30-12, 11:25 PM
I saw it in normal Real D 3D and the aspect was 1.78:1, with that one shot of the Chimera tail going down to 2.35 - Is this playing in 2.35:1 in 2D theatres?!

Why So Blu?
03-30-12, 11:28 PM
I saw it in normal Real D 3D and the aspect was 1.78:1, with that one shot of the Chimera tail going down to 2.35 - Is this playing in 2.35:1 in 2D theatres?!


Ha, I don't remember. I think it was in 1.85:1, but can't be sure. It didn't look weird or anything, though.

Giles
03-31-12, 12:08 AM
the trailer in post #1 is in 2.35 - that's why the sudden shift to 2.35 during the Chimera attack was a jarring "oh... what the hell was that??" moment.

Matthew Chmiel
03-31-12, 02:23 AM
I don't know if Warner's altered the aspect ratio for the IMAX 15/70 version but for IMAX-Digital the 2.35 was changed to 1.78 to be full screen (no black borders above and below the image) - although in the scene with the two headed beast, the attack of the tail did a quick reveal of the 2.35 AR - very odd.
All of Warner's IMAX releases have always retained their OARs.

According to Film Tech, both 2D and 3D versions have a 1.85:1 aspect ratio. :shrug:

Was the entire scene 2.35:1 or just a shot?

Giles
03-31-12, 02:28 AM
^ just a shot of the Chimera's tail jutted towards the viewer.

Supermallet
03-31-12, 02:38 AM
That was done for the "jump out of the screen" 3D effect.

Matthew Chmiel
03-31-12, 02:44 AM
That was done for the "jump out of the screen" 3D effect.
Well at least they have the balls to do a "coming at ya" gag for a film shot in 2D. ;)

Burnt Thru
03-31-12, 06:32 AM
This 3D malarkey really is a waste of time isn't it. There were a whole bunch of "point a sharp stick out of the screen" shots in this movie just to make use of the 3D effect, which was pointless and stupid. The only 3D moment which really worked was Zeus' decent to the underworld through a fissure in the ground.

TheMovieman
03-31-12, 11:40 AM
Clash made $163 million domestic, and while I don't think Wrath will top that I think it will still make over $100 million here and won't necessarily be a flop.

Well, Clash pulled in $330 million overseas which is no doubt why a sequel was greenlit in the first place.

Mike86
03-31-12, 12:53 PM
Went to it last night and I enjoyed it. I also didn't think the first one was that bad either though for what it was. People just like to over-analyze everything to death when a movie like this isn't trying to be much more than just a decent fun popcorn movie nothing more, nothing less. I do think I liked Wrath slightly more than I liked Clash though.

Dr. DVD
03-31-12, 05:43 PM
Well, I think that not only did the Minotaur look dumb, but it was used poorly and presented no threat.

He needed to look more like the one in Your Highness, anatomy details and all...:D



Saw it.

Pros

-Story was more interesting and the characters more likeable this time around, especially Perseus

-Love anything with giant creatures on the loose.

-Bill Nighy

-Ralph Fiennes no longer talking with that annoying whisper


-Perseus and Andromeda finally becoming a couple.


Cons

- Still felt underwhelming

-The off-screen explanation for not having Gemma Arterton .

-Lots of shaky camera work. The style for Battle:Los Angeles is not good for an epic in ancient greece.

-After the Muttations in Hunger Games last week, watching the new version of The Thing this week, and then this movie, I think it's time to tone down CG FX work. I would have loved to see these creatures rendered in a style reminiscent of Harryhausen.

-Really felt like a video game at times. When will the God of War people sue already?

DJariya
03-31-12, 07:07 PM
Saw it last night in 3D and I liked it alot better than the 1st movie. It had brisk pacing and some good direction.

However, I didn't think the 3D effects were that impressive. I should have saved the extra $4. Like a few already said, alot of scenes it was really hit or miss.

I haven't seen the 1st movie since theaters. Refresh my memory, who was Perseus' wife? For some reason I don't remember her.

:thumbsup: I really liked the special effects on Kronos. And I also liked the 2-headed fire breathing monster in the beginning. Also, I thought the battle sequence at the end was pretty impressive. I agree with an earlier comment that the Minotaur sucked. The movie was only 99 minutes, but this was a case where I thought less is more. You don't need a 140-150 minute movie to tell a story everytime.

It was kind of weird seeing Danny Huston as Poseidon on here and then later in the evening he was playing a Miami mobster on the premiere of Magic City on Starz.

fumanstan
03-31-12, 08:47 PM
I watched Clash last night on Blu-ray before watching this one in the afternoon. I hadn't seen Clash since the theaters either, and still enjoyed it this time around. I liked Wrath overall a bit more, with some disappointment in the change in actresses of Andromeda and the way Io was written out. Also could have done without the son, but I guess it made sense in how they kept pushing the Zeus/Perseus relationship. Some good action, some cool effects, which was all I was really looking for.

I saw it in 2D as well, since I hate movies in 3D. My theater only had 2 showings in 2D.

DJariya, Perseus' wife Io was Gemma Arterton's charachter in the first movie, who goes with him on his journey and was cursed to be ageless.

Patman
04-01-12, 11:24 AM
Overall, this followup is briskly paced, featuring quite a lot of action, mythological creatures reigning fire on humans, while the gods find themselves at critical time in their own existence. While the film plays out familial relationships between fathers and sons (gods and half-gods/half-humans), it doesn't quite flesh out Perseus's half-brother Ares (Zeus being their father) in this story, while also introducing us to Agenor (son of Poseidon) and Andromeda. With the rumblings of the chief Titan, Cronos, threatening to lay waste to humanity, as it were, the gods were the ones who held the Titans in check, but humanity's need for self-reliance provided a double-edge sword in weakening the gods and allowing the titans rise in power once more. Humanity's hopes lie in Perseus and other half-gods/half-humans to ward off such major threats.

The film doesn't really allow the story to breathe, as it moves quickly from one set piece to another as the plot has Perseus and the gang to retrieve the parts needed to ward a defense against Cronos and his wrath. There are some column-bruising fight scenes that seem to play out far longer than necessary at times, and a lot of chaos comes from the creatures set loose by Cronos on the humans. The dialogue is clunky, but they do a decent job of reminding us that Perseus's greatest strength is his courage under fire as he suffers wounds quite easily as a normal human, but presses on the fight.

The door is open for a sequel, but it wouldn't surprise me if it did happen.

I give it 2.5 stars, or a grade of C+.

Dr. DVD
04-01-12, 12:28 PM
^ I kind of got the vibe that this one didn't leave the door open for a sequel as much as the first.

mdc3000
04-01-12, 12:44 PM
with some disappointment in the change in actresses of Andromeda

I thought Rosamund Pike was a HUGE improvement.

Patman
04-01-12, 01:43 PM
I found Rosamund Pike really hot in her role, and it was the attitude she brought to the role.

Giles
04-01-12, 01:59 PM
so what IS the film's aspect ratio - 2.35 or 1.85??

RocShemp
04-02-12, 07:52 AM
The aspect ratio is 1.85:1, Giles.

I really enjoyed the flick but, like the first film, the title is misleading (there's only one titan and it only shows up at the very end) and the film feels like it was cut down by a lot. The labrynth felt rushed, given all the build up about it, and Zeus and Hades reconciled far too quickly.

Still, I had a lot of un with this.

Also, although I missed Alexa Davalos and Gemma Arterton, Rosamund Pike was hot as hell and the chick playing Korrina was cute.

bluetoast
04-02-12, 01:06 PM
I wasn't a fan of the first film, but I felt that the world they created had a lot of potential and so I was looking forward to this. I ended up liking it less than the first one, although I will say that the 3D was not bad.

Solid Snake
04-02-12, 06:15 PM
So when is Sony going to onto to God Of War? Cuz you know.,...rated R Greek Mythology will bank heavily for them.

EdTheRipper
04-04-12, 02:16 PM
Saw this today. It was alright...nothing special IMO. In spite of the 99 minute run-time, it felt slow to me. And as was said earlier in the thread, the kid playing Perseus' son was pretty bad.

RocShemp
04-04-12, 02:18 PM
Mercifully the kid was in all of three scenes and barely spoke. Made him tolerable to me.

Hated the Minotaur fight. People who complain about the fights in Batman Begins and The Dark Knight would go into a murderous rage over how poorly shot that whole fight was.

hasslein
04-04-12, 05:02 PM
I just wish they'd stop the shakey cam & quick cuts long enough so we could see what the creatures look like.

TimeandTide
04-04-12, 11:05 PM
Saw it this afternoon and while I liked it (not as good as the first), my nine-year old loved it. He's read all the Percy Jackson books, so it was a treat for him to put some faces to names like Hades, Poseidon, Ares, and the cyclopes.

Loved Rosamund Pike in that role and really dug the cyclops bit (a ton of briskly paced action and humor), but felt the Hades/Ares/Zeus scenes really dragged.

Uneven overall, but fun enough where I'll probably buy the Blu at some point.

asianxcore
04-08-12, 01:54 PM
Hated the Minotaur fight. People who complain about the fights in Batman Begins and The Dark Knight would go into a murderous rage over how poorly shot that whole fight was.

Agreed! Probably one of my least favorite scenes in the film. The maze was pretty cool looking though.

Saw this yesterday. Surprised the 3-D didn't bother me, since I've had a problem getting my eyes to adjust to the films I have seen in 3-D.

Fun film, liked the first film a little bit more.

TGM
08-25-12, 09:34 AM
caught this last night, and liked it more than Clash. any word on a potential third? (doubtful)

K&AJones
08-25-12, 10:42 AM
I picked up the two-disc version on Amazon last week when they had it for $9.98 one day. Got around to watching it the other night and it was ok but could've been so much better in several areas....

-more of the "Gods" . It was basiclly a quicky of Poseidon and almost too much of Aries and that was it.

-in the end, could've been more between Hades and Perseus. Almost like a "oh...well" moment and no-one had a clue what to say or do.

-the Minotaur fight. Think it's well known it didn't fit, done right and something missing on it.

-The Gods Blacksmith...Hephaestus played by Bill Nighly....Like Bill but the British accent was completely out-of-place. He uses...."bloody" in a sentence that's common British term when upset.

-the fight between Perseus and Aries. It wasn't that bad but would've like to seen Perseus get a bit more upset and show some "Godly Powers".

-when Zeus and Hades have their "fun" it seemed a bit to quick. Liked to seen a bit more. Also would've been a good spot for one or two other Gods to jump in much like in "The Imortals"