Clash of the Titans: no contest

1981

Originality              Original (1981) –0

2010

                                Remake (2010)- 0

The answer is no. The above score is not a typo. There is no possible way that either movie can gain points for originality. Not even the Original. I know. I didn’t think that it was possible for both movies to fail in one of the categories. Surely there is something original enough in one of them to earn the points, right? Not in this case. First of all, there is a golden, robotic owl in the 1981 film. Yes, for those of you that stopped and reread that last sentence, a robotic owl! This is not just any owl though. He can communicate through a series of beeps and chirps which only Perseus can understand. Does this sound familure to anyone? If you answered yes, then you must have seen Star Wars. The owl’s chirps and even its movements are a cheap imitation of R2-D2 from George Lucas’ beloved classic. The only reason that I can imagine that the owl even appears is simply the time period of the film 1981 is right in between the release dates of Episode V and Episode VI in the aforementioned trilogy. Because there is absolutely no benefit that the owl brings to the film. I was completely distracted after his appearance. All I could think was, “Why in the world is there a robot in this movie?” However, I do have to admit that it was this owl that caused me to laugh uncontrollably when he appears in the Remake. Judging from the dialogue, Phil Hay shares my distain for the owl. Leaving that aside there is nothing that sets this movie apart from actually reading the Mythological story yourself. As far as the Remake goes…other than some minor storyline changes, including some more background story, there is nothing that the 2010 film had to earn points in this category.

 

 Movement             Original (1981) – 0 

                                Remake (2010)- 2

Frankly, no film has ever bored me like the 1981 Clash of the Titans. It was quite possibly the slowest moving movie I have ever seen. Perhaps if the robotic owl was not introduced the movie would have been shorter. It was long and boring. No Points. The 2010 edition was the exact opposite. The story moved from one action scene to another. No sooner was one monster vanquished than another appeared to challenge our heroes. Although there was nothing original about it I was not bored for a moment, proving that a film does not have to be original to be entertaining.

           Acting                   Original (1981) -0 

                                        Remake (2010)- 3

The Original tried to give the movie a Shakespearian feel. I think Shakespeare would be ill if he knew how his style was defiled in this movie. I will not spend a great deal of time on this movie. Because it is clear that none of the performers did. However, Liam Neeson was an interesting choice to play Zeus. He portrays Zeus as hard-nosed, set in his ways, quick to anger god; who has a soft spot for humans. This portrayal was not unlike Laurence Oliver’s portrayal the king of the gods. In fact Neeson did nothing with the  role that had not already been done. It was a somewhat disappointing performance from an actor who has been excellent in recent years.  However, although no one was truly outstanding there was no one that was terrible either. Even the fisherman and his wife, who were only in the film briefly, played their roles skillfully.  All three points to the Remake because the Original did nothing to earn the points and the Remake did nothing to lose them.

Totals:                  Original (1963)- 0

                                Remake(2006)- 5

In short, if you have not seen the 1981 Clash of the Titans then don’t. If you have seen it then you have my empathy. This was no battle. It was a proverbial slaughter.

Is there anyone out there who liked anything about the Original?