April 1, 2012 by Vinnie Leduc
The main differences are Sam Worthington’s curly hair (same Aussie accent as always though), Rosamund Pike as Andromeda instead of whoever played her in Clash, cyclopic giants instead of giant scorpions, a lava-spewing Cronos instead of the water-dwelling Kraken, and the impressive 3D. I initially thought that a huge reason Wrath‘s 3D looks so much better is because it was shot in the trendy format, unlike Clash‘s notorious eye-gouging 3D, which tried to bank on Avatar‘s 3D success by post-converting just weeks before release. The surprising and impressive thing is… Wrath‘s 3D was post-converted, too!
But that’s about as excited as I’ll get. Sure, there are different mythical monsters and beasts, and the gods have been reshuffled a bit. However, Wrath of the Titans is still a brainless popcorn flick. It’s most suitable for audiences looking for a quick escape with some good visual effects and some spectacular sequences, notably the Cyclopes battle and the explosive finale. Director Jonathan Liebesman, who previously manned Battle: Los Angeles, clearly shows that action is his game, but without machine guns in Wrath, it seemed like his primary weapon was an ungodly amount of shots of crumbling rubble or smashed rocks thrown in every 20 seconds.
Although the humor fails almost every single time, with perhaps the best post-converted 3D ever, Wrath of the Titans is a technical upgrade to Clash that will please franchise fans (that is, if there are any out there), but I’ll go with Immortals and of course, 300. There are no extra scenes during or after the credits, but there will be a sequel, Revenge of the Titans. You can pray to the movie gods that it’ll be better, but I’ll be praying that Liebesman doesn’t rape my childhood when he directs the upcoming Michael Bay-produced Ninja Turtles reboot. Wrath of the Titans gets 2.5 out of 5 stars or C+ or Okay.