पर्सस को राजकुमारी एंड्रोमेडा को बचाने के लिए मेडुसा और क्रैकेन से युद्ध करना है.पर्सस को राजकुमारी एंड्रोमेडा को बचाने के लिए मेडुसा और क्रैकेन से युद्ध करना है.पर्सस को राजकुमारी एंड्रोमेडा को बचाने के लिए मेडुसा और क्रैकेन से युद्ध करना है.
- पुरस्कार
- 2 जीत और कुल 6 नामांकन
फ़ीचर्ड समीक्षाएं
One of the all time great sword-n-scorcery movies. All star cast. And to top it all off Ray Harryhausen effects.
When most modern people hear the word "myth", they often "translate" it into the word "lies". To my way of thinking, that accounts for the radical differences in how this film has been evaluated by various viewers. Here is my view and I speak as a casual student of psychologist Carl Jung.
The story line is--not surprisingly--mythic. It is a grand story told on a grand scale with the best tools which were available in 1981. Note the differing ways in which Caliban and Perseus handle misfortune--how many ordinary mortals become so sorry for themselves that they much worsen their own condition? To be sure, it is an invented tale, but it is a myth, not a pack of lies.
It is hard not to like Ray Harryhausen's superior special effects. The technology is better today, but Harryhausen was and is unsurpassed at getting his "mythologicals" to act and interact with the cast.
Oddly enough, Laurence Rosenthal's score--which recently became available on CD--isn't given the attention which it deserves. The music which he composed is spirited, unique and utterly supports whatever is happening on the screen--from the seemingly careless destruction of an entire city to Perseus' "love at first sight" when he sees the sleeping Princess Andromeda.
If you have the gift of mythological consciousness, this is a "10" film for sure. If not, I feel sorry for you. Read some Jung.
The story line is--not surprisingly--mythic. It is a grand story told on a grand scale with the best tools which were available in 1981. Note the differing ways in which Caliban and Perseus handle misfortune--how many ordinary mortals become so sorry for themselves that they much worsen their own condition? To be sure, it is an invented tale, but it is a myth, not a pack of lies.
It is hard not to like Ray Harryhausen's superior special effects. The technology is better today, but Harryhausen was and is unsurpassed at getting his "mythologicals" to act and interact with the cast.
Oddly enough, Laurence Rosenthal's score--which recently became available on CD--isn't given the attention which it deserves. The music which he composed is spirited, unique and utterly supports whatever is happening on the screen--from the seemingly careless destruction of an entire city to Perseus' "love at first sight" when he sees the sleeping Princess Andromeda.
If you have the gift of mythological consciousness, this is a "10" film for sure. If not, I feel sorry for you. Read some Jung.
This movie has been a favorite of mine since i was a kid--i was very into Greek mythology during grade school, so i loved this film, even though i've seen it about two dozen times (it continues to be a Sunday-afternoon staple on TV). There are a number of mythological inaccuracies in this film (the Kraken wasn't a mythological monster; Perseus didn't have Pegasus, but actually borrowed Hermes' winged sandals, etc.), but it's still a good kids' introduction to ancient mythology. While the actors playing the "mortals" are definitely inferior to those playing the Gods, i suppose it works in the sense of their being the Olympians' puppets and, well, a little limpness in the thespian department is somewhat de rigeur (as is the wise/comic sidekick of Burgess Meredith and the 'little and cute' factor of the mechanical owl) for the kind of classic matinee swashbuckler that "Clash of the Titans" is.
But all these complaints that the Harryhausen effects are crap and it would be so much better done with CGI... well, that's pure craziness. Sure, the monsters don't look convincing, but they look a hell of a lot more convincing then they would as cheap computer animation--can you honestly imagine the Medusa sequence being done any better with some cartoon computer program? (Why? So it could look like the crap in "Phantom Menace"?) I've always felt that Harryhausen's stop-motion technique and the resultant odd way in which the monsters moved added to the sense of their mythic status, their unreality, the sense that these are creatures from another world, another plane. (The recent Asian fantasy/action film "Onmyoji" paid tribute to the master by having a CGI demon army move in Harryhausen stop-motion style and damn me if they didn't look scarier, more unearthly for it.) In my opinion, CGI looks even less "real," more like a painted-on cartoon. There's a depth and detail to creatures that have actually been created in the three-dimensional real world that those who have only existed on a computer screen don't have. Also, no matter how good an actor is, there's a difference between someone who's in the same room with the monster he's fighting, or who at least knows what it looks like, and someone who's just trying to "act scared" in the general direction where something will be inserted later. (Imagine the "Alien" movies made with a hyped-up animated creature: you know that even motionless and plastic squeezed between light stands, that giant H.R. Geiger monster gave everyone on set the creeps.) Maybe people like CGI because they feel safer with obviously fake monsters, things that never even existed as a three-foot high model next to the ham sandwich in someone's shop.
But all these complaints that the Harryhausen effects are crap and it would be so much better done with CGI... well, that's pure craziness. Sure, the monsters don't look convincing, but they look a hell of a lot more convincing then they would as cheap computer animation--can you honestly imagine the Medusa sequence being done any better with some cartoon computer program? (Why? So it could look like the crap in "Phantom Menace"?) I've always felt that Harryhausen's stop-motion technique and the resultant odd way in which the monsters moved added to the sense of their mythic status, their unreality, the sense that these are creatures from another world, another plane. (The recent Asian fantasy/action film "Onmyoji" paid tribute to the master by having a CGI demon army move in Harryhausen stop-motion style and damn me if they didn't look scarier, more unearthly for it.) In my opinion, CGI looks even less "real," more like a painted-on cartoon. There's a depth and detail to creatures that have actually been created in the three-dimensional real world that those who have only existed on a computer screen don't have. Also, no matter how good an actor is, there's a difference between someone who's in the same room with the monster he's fighting, or who at least knows what it looks like, and someone who's just trying to "act scared" in the general direction where something will be inserted later. (Imagine the "Alien" movies made with a hyped-up animated creature: you know that even motionless and plastic squeezed between light stands, that giant H.R. Geiger monster gave everyone on set the creeps.) Maybe people like CGI because they feel safer with obviously fake monsters, things that never even existed as a three-foot high model next to the ham sandwich in someone's shop.
This film is one of the reasons for my being a student of the classical world! After being spoiled by the talents of Harryhausen, I just do not get excited about today's CGI effects... Not quite accurate portrayal of Perseus, but that just doesn't affect the enjoyment of this film. Fantastic film, fantastic cast!
This movie used to be on tv all the time. I can't tell you how many times I've seen the battles with Medusa, Calibos, and the Kraken. However, it was only recently that I went back and watched it start to finish. The first act is a little slower, as it turns out. However, once the quest begins, it's non stop fantasy action. Of course, the animation is legendary, with some great character designs. Overall, I have no real criticisms other than the slow start. And be sure not to let the deviations from traditional mythology spoil the fun. That would just be wrong.
क्या आपको पता है
- ट्रिवियाDespite being listed on posters and having main title billing, Ursula Andress only has one line in the entire film.
- गूफ़As the destruction of Argos begins, heavy winds blow the tunic of a man pulling a donkey on a rope to reveal a pair of modern-day gym shorts underneath.
- क्रेज़ी क्रेडिटIn the closing credits, the cast is divided into three categories: The Immortals (for the gods of Olympus), The Mortals (humans, etc.), and The Mythologicals (As Themselves) (In Alphabetical Order) Bubo, Charon, Dioskilos, Kraken, Medusa, Pegasus, Scorpions, Vulture. Those 8 are the non-human animated characters supplied by special effects.
- इसके अलावा अन्य वर्जनThe UK cinema release was cut by the BBFC to secure an 'A' rating and removed the closeup shot of Calibos' trident-hand piercing a man's back, as well as shortening the prolonged shots of Calibos on his knees writhing in agony after a sword has been thrown into his stomach. The cuts were restored in all video/DVD releases and the certificate upgraded to a 15 (12 for the DVD).
- कनेक्शनEdited into Malcolm in the Middle (2000)
टॉप पसंद
रेटिंग देने के लिए साइन-इन करें और वैयक्तिकृत सुझावों के लिए वॉचलिस्ट करें
विवरण
- रिलीज़ की तारीख़
- कंट्री ऑफ़ ओरिजिन
- आधिकारिक साइट
- भाषा
- इस रूप में भी जाना जाता है
- Furia de titanes
- फ़िल्माने की जगहें
- Azure Window, Gozo Island, माल्टा(final scene with the Kraken)
- उत्पादन कंपनियां
- IMDbPro पर और कंपनी क्रेडिट देखें
बॉक्स ऑफ़िस
- बजट
- $1,50,00,000(अनुमानित)
- US और कनाडा में सकल
- $4,10,92,328
- दुनिया भर में सकल
- $4,10,92,328
- चलने की अवधि
- 1 घं 58 मि(118 min)
- रंग
- पक्ष अनुपात
- 1.85 : 1
इस पेज में योगदान दें
किसी बदलाव का सुझाव दें या अनुपलब्ध कॉन्टेंट जोड़ें