There's one really important point that nobody seems to have picked up on and is the casting of Worthington for Perseus.
It's the equivalent of picking a squat rugby full back to model for Yves Saint Laurent.
Not ohnly does he look (and sound) like a squaddie in everything he does he is FAR from GREEK.
Perseus was a stunning example of Greek mythologistic fantasy.
There is a whole plethora of actors who could have more than matched up to that role -Ben Barnes anyone?
Yet they picked a short knuckle dragger who looked even more ridiculous in a skirt. The two leading ladies were taller.
The other thing I noticed that irked me a little was although WE know it's a fantasy the characters don't. In the original they truly felt their world was going to be destroyed and that Perseus was their only chance at surviving.
In this remake the banter, the jokes and the flippancy with how they went about their mission made it un-convincing.
Never once for one minute was it believable that their whole world was under threat because they just didn't seem serious enough about the whole thing.
As for the effects, brilliant. One should use whatever technology is available at the time and although CGI isn't as 'real' as using a hard copy or a scale model the end result is the same. only slicker these days obviously.
Back to the drawing board if they ever DARE to ruin, sorry remake Jason and Argonauts...
I bought the original recently, and oh dear does it look ropey.
It was never one of Harryhausens best efforts, the stop-motion animation was rather shoddy compared to some of the classic earlier SM movies like Jason and the Argonauts.
Even on blu ray, the picture looks pretty dreadful...as with a lot of movies using stop-motion, matte's and blue/green screen techniques, the enhanced picture quality actually shows up the flaws and imperfections even more.
Agree!...good film but Jason And the Argonauts is my favourite!...perhaps they will do a remake of JATA as well ! would be good!
I am so angry that I wasted my hard earned cash and paid extra for the 3D and it was rubbish. Most of it looked 2D and had a slight depth of field but not coming out of the screen like Avatar.
If I purchased a blu-ray disc and it said it was 1080p and I find it was upscaled I would say this was false advertising. Why should this be any different? They should have been honest about it.
the article link above is what i was thinking - the 3d version of this is going to kill off 3d! why waste your money again on another 3d movie?!
because of the bad reviews, i saw this movie in 2d. a friend of mine was boosting on her FaceBook on how she was seeing Clash the other night in 3d. i warned her not to! but was actually looking forward to hearing the reaction afterwards. it certainly wasnt a pleasent review!!
Especially as the type of 3d used is called Real 3d and that is what comes up at the start of the film.
I understand they are doing the same to the next Potter film as in film in 2d then convert. To me it reeks of oh look a new format has come out and we want to jump on the band wagon and make more money without spending to re do stuff grrr @ them.
Saw this in Tuesday, thought the film was ok and my 7yo son loved it.
Have to say that the 3D is totally pointless, i've seen loads of 3D films and this is by far and away the worst 3D effect i've seen, other the the opening heavens/universe scene it added nothing to the film and as several others have said, you could watch huge sections without glasses as there was no effect added.
To date i've enjoyed most of the 3D films i've seen, but this whole film in 2D then reformatting into 3D doesn't work. Films should only be released in 3D if the original intent is to film in 3D.
Waste of my time. Story drags, its a CGI fest and the 3D was pants. I didn't care about the characters.
Someone mentioned Hades sounded like Voldermort - true. And Dan Bryan made a very good point - in this film, we know its fantasy but the characters do not. I mean, I know Perseus is the hero but never once did I feel he was in ANY danger and I didnt give a shit about his friends or the other characters.
They were obviously trying for a Rings vibe with the narration (and failing).
There was NO CGI in the original, nor any skeletons, that would have been Jason and the Argonauts and 7th Voyage of Sinbad.
Further more, the Stop Motion Animation was done by Ray Harryhausen, and this was the first film he actually had any assistance, the man is a genius, proper!
Jeez!:eek:
So what's this then? At about 8:45 on the counter ...
I was very disappointed by the new version. The stop-frame animation in the original is much better than the dark CGI of the new version, and the shots were too zoomed in so that we could only see small segments of things flailing about.
I thought it was very good i really enjoyed it.
However i do agree about the 3d...totally pointless and i'd have been very annoyed if i had been charged more for it but 3d in my cinema is just the same as a normal cinema ticket.
There's one really important point that nobody seems to have picked up on and is the casting of Worthington for Perseus.
It's the equivalent of picking a squat rugby full back to model for Yves Saint Laurent.
Not ohnly does he look (and sound) like a squaddie in everything he does he is FAR from GREEK.
Perseus was a stunning example of Greek mythologistic fantasy.
There is a whole plethora of actors who could have more than matched up to that role -Ben Barnes anyone?
Yet they picked a short knuckle dragger who looked even more ridiculous in a skirt. The two leading ladies were taller.
Have to agree with you, like watching a plastic Action Man - I was waiting for a giant hand to come down and yank the switch that makes his eyes move from side to side.
I hate it when they think the film is so expensive they can cast any old dullard in the lead role, what happened to star quality?
I actually quite enjoyed it!
I wasn't expecting much after some of the reviews, which I think actually worked a little in it's favour.
True an awful lot of this could have been better and I'm very glad that I didn't see it in 3D.
I think this film needed to be about half an hour longer (whic is a rarity for this kind of film) as most bits just seemed far too rushed.
Gemma Arterton was better than I thought she'd be The 'ethereal' voice did get a bit on my wick though, so I don't think I'll be seeing Prince of Persia at the cinema.
Comments
It's the equivalent of picking a squat rugby full back to model for Yves Saint Laurent.
Not ohnly does he look (and sound) like a squaddie in everything he does he is FAR from GREEK.
Perseus was a stunning example of Greek mythologistic fantasy.
There is a whole plethora of actors who could have more than matched up to that role -Ben Barnes anyone?
Yet they picked a short knuckle dragger who looked even more ridiculous in a skirt. The two leading ladies were taller.
The other thing I noticed that irked me a little was although WE know it's a fantasy the characters don't. In the original they truly felt their world was going to be destroyed and that Perseus was their only chance at surviving.
In this remake the banter, the jokes and the flippancy with how they went about their mission made it un-convincing.
Never once for one minute was it believable that their whole world was under threat because they just didn't seem serious enough about the whole thing.
As for the effects, brilliant. One should use whatever technology is available at the time and although CGI isn't as 'real' as using a hard copy or a scale model the end result is the same. only slicker these days obviously.
Back to the drawing board if they ever DARE to ruin, sorry remake Jason and Argonauts...
Agree!...good film but Jason And the Argonauts is my favourite!...perhaps they will do a remake of JATA as well ! would be good!
Sure, 3d wasn't up to Avatar standards, still enjoyable nonetheless
3d showing was fairly full
I am so angry that I wasted my hard earned cash and paid extra for the 3D and it was rubbish. Most of it looked 2D and had a slight depth of field but not coming out of the screen like Avatar.
If I purchased a blu-ray disc and it said it was 1080p and I find it was upscaled I would say this was false advertising. Why should this be any different? They should have been honest about it.
PJ
because of the bad reviews, i saw this movie in 2d. a friend of mine was boosting on her FaceBook on how she was seeing Clash the other night in 3d. i warned her not to! but was actually looking forward to hearing the reaction afterwards. it certainly wasnt a pleasent review!!
N
I understand they are doing the same to the next Potter film as in film in 2d then convert. To me it reeks of oh look a new format has come out and we want to jump on the band wagon and make more money without spending to re do stuff grrr @ them.
Have to say that the 3D is totally pointless, i've seen loads of 3D films and this is by far and away the worst 3D effect i've seen, other the the opening heavens/universe scene it added nothing to the film and as several others have said, you could watch huge sections without glasses as there was no effect added.
To date i've enjoyed most of the 3D films i've seen, but this whole film in 2D then reformatting into 3D doesn't work. Films should only be released in 3D if the original intent is to film in 3D.
Waste of my time. Story drags, its a CGI fest and the 3D was pants. I didn't care about the characters.
Someone mentioned Hades sounded like Voldermort - true. And Dan Bryan made a very good point - in this film, we know its fantasy but the characters do not. I mean, I know Perseus is the hero but never once did I feel he was in ANY danger and I didnt give a shit about his friends or the other characters.
They were obviously trying for a Rings vibe with the narration (and failing).
So what's this then? At about 8:45 on the counter ...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jrHA120h2LU
That's stop-frame animation, and matt filling caboodle-grinding, not CGI.
However i do agree about the 3d...totally pointless and i'd have been very annoyed if i had been charged more for it but 3d in my cinema is just the same as a normal cinema ticket.
Have to agree with you, like watching a plastic Action Man - I was waiting for a giant hand to come down and yank the switch that makes his eyes move from side to side.
I hate it when they think the film is so expensive they can cast any old dullard in the lead role, what happened to star quality?
I wasn't expecting much after some of the reviews, which I think actually worked a little in it's favour.
True an awful lot of this could have been better and I'm very glad that I didn't see it in 3D.
I think this film needed to be about half an hour longer (whic is a rarity for this kind of film) as most bits just seemed far too rushed.
Gemma Arterton was better than I thought she'd be
his view was, the 3d was the best thing about the film!