The Energon Pub

...was kinda meh. honestly it wasn't the worst thing ever, but it was far from great. The special effects on the pegasus were BETTER IN THE ORIGINAL!! and thats sad when "go-motion" (it wasn't "stop motion") is more convincing than cgi. and WTF was that "kraken" ? it looked like 90s american gozilla, cloverfield monster and a squid are havin a 3-way.

the plot was decent, and maybe the visuals look better in 3d, but i'm really disappointed.

Of course i saw the 10:something showing last night, and was almost expecting them to play the original as an April fools joke.

I still plan on seeing it but I don't feel the rush to go to it right away. If nothing else, it looks like it would be a good popcorn movie. I'll probably wait until spring break is over around here so I can go to a matinee without having to listen to countless kids talking during the film.

I really liked this movie, me and some friends saw it at a matinee and it was awesome. I haven't seen the original, so I can't compare the two, but in terms of adventure movies I give it a thumbs up.

I'd say the effects were good, and I loved the fight scenes. The final battle against the Kraken was pretty epic imho.

My only real disappointment was the lack of god power, Zeus and Hades were the only ones that really did anything. I was wanting Apollo or Poseidon to join in a fight or something but they just said one or two things.

All in all, this movie is Armorock approved.

Name_Violation wrote:and WTF was that "kraken" ? it looked like 90s american gozilla, cloverfield monster and a squid are havin a 3-way.

I would actually pay to see that.

Haven't seen it and not planning to, but mostly just wondering why this movie needed to be remade in the first place.

The Happy Locust wrote:Haven't seen it and not planning to, but mostly just wondering why this movie needed to be remade in the first place.

Because Hollywood is run by number crunchers who don't care a **** about original ideas. They look at how much interest there is in a brand or previous version of a story and think 'okay, we have X amount of people who will spend money to see this remake/adaptation/sequel, even if it's **** X people will drop their cash on it'. Original ideas are too much of a risk to invest in now.

It certainly wasn't the worst film I've seen. Although, I found it lagged a bit in a few parts.

I did expect more from the Krackin though, and was rather dissapointed at how easily it was to kill.

As long as you turn your brain off it works just fine.

Just Negare wrote:It certainly wasn't the worst film I've seen. Although, I found it lagged a bit in a few parts.

I did expect more from the Krackin though, and was rather dissapointed at how easily it was to kill.

As long as you turn your brain off it works just fine.

That's more or less the truth. I really liked it, and wish I'd seen it in 3D, but my big complaint is with the Kraken, as in "Kraken, not enough of"
It took him six hundred minutes to unfurl himself and then was dead in seconds, which was bogus. I liked the look of it though, for as little of it as we saw.
But all in all, fun movie, and I was glad to have seen it.

I saw this yesterday and wow was I disappointed.

The 3D was horrible, it hurt my eyes and head so much that I actually started watching parts of it without the glasses.
The film just feels wrong to me, I don't know why and I can't put my finger on it but there is something wrong with it. Apart from that I somehow had the feeling this was originally meant to be somewhat of a comedy, and was filmed as such just that the actors decided to take it seriously. I mean really, the dialogue and everything sounded as if it was meant to be funny, but the actors just went and has this serious tone and look that it#s just confusing.

But overall, I would have enjoyed it more if I hadn't seen it in 3D.

And the look of the Kraken was awesome!

Ok, I saw it and this is what I think, It is not so much a remake as it is a "re-telling" of the story.
It was ok, not the best but it was ok.
I liked the bubo reference too.

I haven't seen it except for the "RELEASE THE KRAKEN!!!" clip on youtube...
From the previews what I can see is
ScifiOriginal level graphics
Semi-Uncreative Kraken(That thing just doesn't look like a KRAKEN)

Even though I haven't seen it...the previews make it not seem...like it's actually based on greek stuff, it looks more Knight-ish.

zenosaurus_x wrote:Semi-Uncreative Kraken(That thing just doesn't look like a KRAKEN)

So exactly what does a real Kraken look like?

Also it sounds like they used the same women's voices from the original movie for the Stygian Witches.

Well, you know, I see them all the time, I'm a complete expert!
But you're right, that was a bit of a dumb point....

zenosaurus_x wrote:Well, you know, I see them all the time, I'm a complete expert!
But you're right, that was a bit of a dumb point....

LMAO!

I get what you were saying, it does not look like the Kraken of old.

Oh yea, why is this movie even called clash of the titans? The only time the Titans are even mentioned is in the beginning of the movie telling us the back-story of Greek mythology. I mean the main character is a half god and his enemies are creatures and gods.

Cyber Bishop wrote:

zenosaurus_x wrote:Well, you know, I see them all the time, I'm a complete expert!
But you're right, that was a bit of a dumb point....

LMAO!

I get what you were saying, it does not look like the Kraken of old.

Nah, just ever since I saw Dead Man's Chest, that's pretty much been my image of Kraken, actually before that even, I saw it more of a squid than a turtle with tentacles.

zenosaurus_x wrote:Even though I haven't seen it...the previews make it not seem...like it's actually based on greek stuff, it looks more Knight-ish.

That's because you've only seen previews. Right now, you're complaining about a movie you haven't seen. You're basing an opinion of a movie on about two and a half minutes. Of course, that's what the trailer is meant to do but you can't actually comment on set or costume design that you haven't seen.

Dead Metal wrote:Oh yea, why is this movie even called clash of the titans? The only time the Titans are even mentioned is in the beginning of the movie telling us the back-story of Greek mythology. I mean the main character is a half god and his enemies are creatures and gods.

The original didn't involve the Titans either. It doesn't have to make sense. Star Wars doesn't involve actual Stars, does it?

Shadowman wrote:

zenosaurus_x wrote:Even though I haven't seen it...the previews make it not seem...like it's actually based on greek stuff, it looks more Knight-ish.

That's because you've only seen previews. Right now, you're complaining about a movie you haven't seen. You're basing an opinion of a movie on about two and a half minutes. Of course, that's what the trailer is meant to do but you can't actually comment on set or costume design that you haven't seen.

Dead Metal wrote:Oh yea, why is this movie even called clash of the titans? The only time the Titans are even mentioned is in the beginning of the movie telling us the back-story of Greek mythology. I mean the main character is a half god and his enemies are creatures and gods.

The original didn't involve the Titans either. It doesn't have to make sense. Star Wars doesn't involve actual Stars, does it?

It's still about war in space, or in other words a war among the stars.
The title of this movie makes about as much sense as calling Ghostbusters "Clash of the floating books", sure you get to see floating books at the beginning but they aren't part of the actual movie plot.

A better title would be "Perseus" or "Perseus revenge" or "Wrath of Perseus" or even "Stupid ass story about why Perseus wants to kill Zeus(his own father) and the other gods while they try to do the same with him and his friends but both end-up saving each other from Hades and save the city".

Seriously.

Shadowman wrote:
That's because you've only seen previews. Right now, you're complaining about a movie you haven't seen. You're basing an opinion of a movie on about two and a half minutes. Of course, that's what the trailer is meant to do but you can't actually comment on set or costume design that you haven't seen.

WHAAAT? you mean jumping to conclusions isn't totally intelligent and perfect for judging things?
My life's been ruined....

But seriously, true but aren't commercials at least a LITTLE accurate for judging things like graphics?

zenosaurus_x wrote:But seriously, true but aren't commercials at least a LITTLE accurate for judging things like graphics?

No, it really isn't. In trailers you rarely ever get a good look at anything, maybe a second or two, but there's never any really drawn-out shots for you to get a good look at whatever the trailer is showing. And context is completely different story.

Shadowman wrote:The original didn't involve the Titans either. It doesn't have to make sense. Star Wars doesn't involve actual Stars, does it?

Um, are you going so far as to not recognize Mark Hamill as a legitemate star?
I am outraged.

Dead Metal wrote:Oh yea, why is this movie even called clash of the titans? The only time the Titans are even mentioned is in the beginning of the movie telling us the back-story of Greek mythology. I mean the main character is a half god and his enemies are creatures and gods.

If I remember correctly It is referring to the Kraken vs Medusa's head, the witches in the original even say "A titan against a titan".
In the original both were referred to as titans, this one not so much.

Dead Metal wrote:A better title would be "Perseus" or "Perseus revenge" or "Wrath of Perseus" or even "Stupid ass story about why Perseus wants to kill Zeus(his own father) and the other gods while they try to do the same with him and his friends but both end-up saving each other from Hades and save the city".

Seriously.

A little bitter about this are we? Sorry but movies are not made to please everyone.

Cyber Bishop wrote:

zenosaurus_x wrote:Semi-Uncreative Kraken(That thing just doesn't look like a KRAKEN)

So exactly what does a real Kraken look like?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kraken wrote:

Cyber Bishop wrote:

Dead Metal wrote:Oh yea, why is this movie even called clash of the titans? The only time the Titans are even mentioned is in the beginning of the movie telling us the back-story of Greek mythology. I mean the main character is a half god and his enemies are creatures and gods.

If I remember correctly It is referring to the Kraken vs Medusa's head, the witches in the original even say "A titan against a titan".
In the original both were referred to as titans, this one not so much.

Oh so that's where the title comes from, strange as thsoe two aren't actually titans in the mythology but now the title makes a bit sense. But it's still strange kinda like that advertisement campaign for the remake for "The day the earth stood still" constantly using the sentence that saved the world in the original, although those words where never uttered in the remake.

Dead Metal wrote:A better title would be "Perseus" or "Perseus revenge" or "Wrath of Perseus" or even "Stupid ass story about why Perseus wants to kill Zeus(his own father) and the other gods while they try to do the same with him and his friends but both end-up saving each other from Hades and save the city".

Seriously.

A little bitter about this are we? Sorry but movies are not made to please everyone.[/quote]
I know, but this movie was a bit of a let down, I love Greek mythology and I was expecting this to be like those old Harryhausen classics just with more realistic effects and maybe even a better script altogether due to the higher budget. But instead I got a stupid movie that didn't seem to respect the source-material or it's audience with stupid 3D effects thrown in (god I hate 3D). If only it would have decided on what it wanted to be, a comedy or an epic.
It just seems like they tied two different movies together, the first half was pretty good the movie just wen downhill near the middle and had a few moments in the last half.

I will agree that it is not a classic like the original but it did keep my interest to see what changes and direction they were going to go.

I am starting to no like this 3D ****, they intentionally do stupid scenes where things are thrown at the camera and sometimes it feels "unnatural" to me..
If that makes any sense.

I will agree that it is not a classic like the original but it did keep my interest to see what changes and direction they were going to go.

I am starting to no like this 3D ****, they intentionally do stupid scenes where things are thrown at the camera and sometimes it feels "unnatural" to me..
If that makes any sense.

It is, especially in the upcoming Resident Evil movie, judging by the trailer the only reason it has 3D is to throw shite at us and to offend our eyes.


Just found out that the movie actually got butchered, re-shot and rewritten while they where shooting it, which is why Zeus seems to schizophrenic and it feels like it's two different movies tacked together.
Basically all the scenes that show zeus as a good guy are re-shots.

It's unlikely we will ever see the original version of this remake as the scenes that where cut out didn't have their special effects put in yet. So this is kinda like Superman II.