Wrath of the Titans or Wrath of the Reviewers

Is the Wrath of the Titans (Wrath) a well done sequel or just a lousy flop like the Clash of the Titans (Clash)? Wrath of the Titans continues the mythical story of Perseus, son of Zeus. In Clash we learned how Perseus discovered himself; fell in love, killed the Medusa and Kraken to send Hades back to the underworld. In Wrath we find basically the same cast on another Universe saving adventure complete with Gods, Humans, and Monsters and yes tons of special effects.

            At the beginning we see Perseus with his son Helius, his wife is dead, living in a small town when Zeus, played by Liam Nielson, comes to Perseus and warns him of the coming danger from the ancient Gods namely Kronos his father. Zeus asks him for his help but Perseus declines and tells Zeus that his place is next to his son.

            Now most people would think that it would be one or those stories where the main character, that has done great deeds in the past, would jump at the chance to do more. But, against hero movie logic, when he is called into action again he refuses to act and stays with Helius. It’s at this point in the movie that we are wondering what it would take for him to join the fight. Could it be the death of his son, the loss of his father?  No it was when his village gets attacked and he almost losses his son.  This is the experience that makes him go on his quest to save the universe from destruction.         

            Perseus played again by Sam Worthington is best known for his lead role in movies such as Avatar and Terminator Salvation. He was born in England, but couldn’t keep his British accent in check, which seemed a little odd for a movie that took place in the Greek era. In the Clash his portrayal of Perseus was a bit off and didn't look that convincing. It’s the small things that make you not believe what is happening on the screen. For instance in Clash his hair style was to groomed liked a modern soldier, where as in this movie his hair style is more in line with the era.

            Ralph Fiennes, who plays Hades in this movie, is best known for his villainous role in the Harry Potter franchise as Lord Voldemort. In Clash he also played Hades but overacted the part and the evil was not very evil. This time his performance was more subtle and developed, letting his acting ability show through. In the Clash Ralph would always talk in either a raspy or hissing voice and walked while hunching over all the time, which just made him look like a stereotypical villain. Instead of the raspy voice in Wrath Ralph uses a normal voice and doesn't haunch over as he did before. This made the acting more believable and not over the top.

            Andromeda, now Queen, is again played by Rosamund Pike. She is sort of the love interest for Perseus in the movie again. But, this plot relationship seems to be dropped in at the last minute and is not really developed; other than Perseus has a boy who has no mother.

            The predictable comic relief comes from two characters. The first one is Poseidon’s son, Agenor, who starts out as a good natured anti-hero and continues with various boasts, and one liner’s. The other is a quirky cameo by Bill Nighy playing the role of an aging Hephaestus, the God of Weapons.

            One thing that is better in Wrath than the Clash is the costume design. In Clash all the costumes were both brightly colored and flashy, but in Wrath they more realistic and believable. For example the Gods armor was literally shiny with stars in the Clash and looked like they belong in an English fairy tale movie. Whereas in the Wrath they just wear armor that looks more like armor you would find in Greek Mythology. This grittiness holds true for the look of the entire movie.

            Another thing that made this movie interesting was the design for the mythical creatures in this movie. Most of them were creative and didn't seem silly at all, and the way they portray the creatures from ancient Greek mythology seemed believable. However, when the Minotaur comes into battle with Perseus it hardly looked like a Minotaur you would expect from the ancients, a creature with a man’s body and a bull’s head. Instead we get a creature that does have a man’s body but only bull horns, or a head of a Hammerhead shark. They should also work on Pegasus flying. It looked clunky for a big budget film.

                        There are a many themes in the movie; Good vs. Evil with Zeus good vs. Hades evil, Perseus good vs. Ares, his brother evil. The next theme is Father and Son (usually against one another) i.e. Zeus vs. Aries, Zeus vs. Perseus, Kronos vs. Zeus and Hades, Perseus and Helius to name a few. Another theme is Rebellion to Redemption as in Perseus, Agenor, Hades and even Zeus.

            As with all films, especially action ones, we have a list of clichés. A woman giving the “We are only human” speech A constant telling a person not to do something, inevitably someone does it, and they suffer the consequences. Too many “final” battles between rivals. The ever present “We have to work together” speech, love and forgiveness give strength and heal all them. But in the words of another cliché “they live happily ever after”

            In the end Wrath of the Titans is a better movie than Clash of the Titans.  It still has some problems but in the end it is still entertaining and is almost fun to watch.

That Guy with the Glasses with a solid oppion

     When ever you read a review or an article, whether it is on the internet or in the newspaper the critic may give you the information on the subject of the review but in the end they all tend to sound the same. Most main stream reviewers seem to think with one brain and have very narrow ideas of what is good in movies and videos. Independent websites can offer different points of view. One particular independent web site that gives both comedy and information on movies and games, is called That Guy with the Glasses.
     Most of the videos on the web site are done by one guy named Doug Walker and he does various videos, movies from the 1980’s and 1990s. He is best known for reviewing these videos and movies from the past. Most critics would just talk about the movie in general. Doug not only talks about the movie he actually shows most of the movie highlighting the storyline and then reviews the movie from start to finish, showing a clip then reviewing it before going to the next clip. The reason he does this is to help support his opinions of the movie and to show the mistakes the director and editor left in the film.
     When That Guy with the Glasses reviews a movie from the past he will always use clips from other well known movies that either help support the jokes he makes about the film or to help him reinforce his point on the movie. He likes to point out how many movies are just a copy of an earlier movie or movie style. One example of this is in the movie The Haunting, released in the 1950s his opinion is that the movie The Haunting, released in the 1990s was a butchered remake of the original movie, he liked the original but not the remake. Most of his videos are usually a comparison on the remake of movies. For example, he compared the movie Red Dragon with the 1968 release of ‘Manhunter’, both movies deal with the story of introducing us to Hannibal Lechter. He would check the points of the movie, for instance, the characters or the differences in the story line and decided what movie he liked better.
     While Doug Walker and his reviews are the main attraction of That Guy with the Glasses there are other critics he invites on this webpage.They guest critics review different things about media. They review movies they grew up with during their childhood. They review current movies especially things that make them angry, they review video games from the 70’s and 80’s, and sometimes even a music video. If someone wants to make a video about movies, games and such, they can send them to That Guy with the Glasses and Doug Walker may post them on the website. So if you want a good laugh, and are looking for comedy break, if you want to get an idea on what is good and what is bad in the media industry then That Guy with the Glasses is the webpage for you.

South Park is Back! but are the Back?

     South Park is back with all new offensive way to get on everyone’s annoyance and funny bone. In this episode of South Park, they poke fun at women who complain about having the toilet seat up and how both men and women complain on how it is not a big deal weather to put the toilet seat up or down. When a woman died due to someone leaving the toilet seat up, the government set up a security system that makes sure people are safe while they’re going to the bathroom. In doing so the people are losing their privacy and are almost humiliated by the security people. It is similar to when airport security almost strips you down to make sure you do not have anything on you.

In the past episodes of South Park would usually pick on currents events like celebrity accidents, disasters, and even political scandals or elections. But in this season the writers seemed to be making original works with no reference to any events that happen in the world. 

Each season of South Park the creators, Matt Stone and Trey Parker get more and more detailed with their work. When South Park first came out they would have the shapes and take each frame and have a still shot of them. Also, each frame would have as little animation as possible. But now people would see every detail on a character and the animation is smooth and believable. One of the possibilities that south park graphics have become better is that the funding increased and they were able to get more staff to help them make things look better. Another reason is that they got better technology that helps them put everything together. 

As stated before, South Park always find new way to gross out, offend, but can still make us laughed at it. However, in this new season they are not doing as much offensive material and culture references as they did in the past. In a past episode for example, they made fun of the Muhammad cartoon case and almost got canceled because of it. In this episode, celebrities were suing the people of south park because they were angry at them and wanted revenge against them for fun of them. The celebrities said that they will withdraw unless they bring out the prophet Muhammad and give him to them. When this episode was aired Muslim fanatics sent the creators of South Park a warning letter saying if they continued to depict Muhammad, they will probably end up dead. However now that things have changed Comedy Central may be afraid of being shut down. Possibly the studio heads asked Matt Stone and Trey Parker to tone down the offensiveness and stick with original stories. For example, in an episode today they just poke fun at internet memes that most people never even heard of.

So a known possibility is that the graphics of South Park will get better with each season. But the question is, will the story line or plot get weaker and weaker? So far on the episodes in this season, this it might be true. In the future, they might lose their fan base for not being so controversial. As a result, they might lose the funding and the staff that helps them get an episode out each week. If this continues South Park might end up as it started.