Scontro di titani

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.

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 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.

Clash of the Titans! A story of daring adventurers, on the spot romance and cheesy dialogue can be considered a classic but is very much flawed both for better and worse.The setting of Greek mythology opens up a gateway to a whole cast of "epic" stop-motion creatures which is Ray Harryhausen's specialty but if you've never tried stop-motion before it may be harder to appreciate his great work which is the best part of this film As for the films weaknesses, it has many. However my biggest complaint is just how dated it feels. It looks and sounds like a film from the 1960's, like another Hausen picture "Jason and the Argonauts". The characters are fairly 2-dimensional and the romance sub-plot is a bit confusing with just how silly it is but at the same time it works to the films advantage. Its silly but entertaining, sometimes you'll be laughing your arse off but in a good way. The film doesn't exactly take its self seriously. When it comes down to it the films at its best when there's monsters on the screen, especially one fight with a medusa which blew me away but I won't spoil it, but besides that its not particularly strong in the other categories. I give a strong recommendation nonetheless for just how entertaining it is. If you see it in a shop, don't hesitate to pick it up.

This movie is a wonderful showcase for stop-motion modeling mixed with live-action. By 2005 CGI standards things look a little jerky and unfinished, but this does not distract from drawing the viewer into the world of Greek mythology (commercialized).

The Greek gods are butting their jealous heads together and it is up to the pawn in their game, Perseus, to save the day. This is not a movie that will evoke any sort of overwhelming emotional reactions, but it is a competent damsel-in-distress action flick with handsome heroes and ugly bad guys. The lines between good and evil are distinct and predictable.