I saw Clash of the Titans today, and correct me if I'm wrong, but it had nothing to do with Titans what so ever.
Does it not mention that the Kraken is supposed to be the last of the Titans? They spelled that out pretty plainly in the original.
That's pretty much it in a nutshell. I'm not real big on 3D, although seeing the Tron preview in 3D blew up my geek-o-meter. I think my opinion is changing about that movie.
Cinematical had a good article on Clash of the Titans in 3D entitled:
"Here's How 3-D is Ruining Movies"
This paragraph sums up why Clash doesn't work as well as something like avatar:
But guess what, moviegoers? Someone out in Hollywood figured out a way to "3-D-ize" an already finished film. Yes, a film that was (again) composed, framed, and photographed with a flat surface in mind is now being retrofitted with a gauzy, tacky 3-D "conversion" process that may look great on the marketing materials ... but really suck eggs when it comes to entertaining an audience. Oh, and it's more expensive, too. Suckers.
Avatar: Designed around 3-D. Clash of the Titans: Designed around 2-D with 3-D slapped on as an afterthought.
As for me:
Ghosts of Girlfriends Past (5/10)
OK, I didn't see this one coming. My wife rented it for her fantasy affair with Matthew McConaughey, so I assumed it was just another chick flick. Well, it is, but it sinks to a new low. It is a blatant ripoff of A Christmas Carol. Conner (McConaughey) is a big time womanizer who learned how to woo a woman from his uncle, who is now dead. When he returns home his uncle's ghost visits him to warn him of how that lifestyle turns out and that he will be visited by three spirits. They take the form of pivotal women in his life from the past present, and possible future. There you go. Jennifer Garner is the one that got away and made him become uncaring and you can guess how this ends. Predictable, flat, and boring...mostly. During his trip to the past his uncle, played by Michael Douglass, is a riot. He embodies every stereotype you can pull from the Rat Pack generation. His hair is slicked back, he calls Conner Dutch for no apparent reason, he wears sunglasses 24/7, and he always has a glass of scotch in one hand and a woman in the other. This 30 minutes of the movie was actually entertaining. The rest was predictable and annoying. And it has to be said that no movie should ever put Breckin Meyer and Michael Douglass together ever again. We knew Breckin Meyer was bad before this movie gave us a compare and contrast with someone with talent.
Zombieland - (8.5/10)
I like it!!! It has been a while since I saw a movie that I just truly enjoyed for fun. I liked the style and the constant reminder of the rules. I also loved the concept that the WoW geek with no life is a zombie apocalypse survivor because he had no one close to attack him when they turned. This film does a good job of taking the whole zombie apocalypse concept and making it fun and entertaining while not toning down the horror. I highly recommend this movie. I will likely buy it. And now I want to go play Dead Rising some more.
Sherlock Holmes - (8/10)
If ever Hollywood had a chance to screw something up, this was it. Fortunately, they didn't. It was entertaining and just fun to watch and try to keep up with the connections that Holmes makes out of the tiny details he sees. The problem with this move is that with the information Holmes has for the case itself, any of us could have figured it out. Will I notice dust on a jacket? No. Will I notice the obvious details he picks up in flashbacks that we were never shown? Yes. A good mystery story has all the facts in front of the audience so that they can try to deduce the outcome before it ends. It sucks balls when I get to the end and then Holmes goes on a deductive rant and we get flashes of some stuff we hadn't seen.
And this is clearly ripe for a sequel. Well, it was blatantly set up for one. But if it makes just 5% of the audience pick up Sir Arthur Conan Doyle's books then this is a success.