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.