Wrath of the Titans (2012)
When the gods are in danger of being overthrown by the Titans, Perseus bravely embarks on a treacherous quest into the Underworld to rescue Zeus, overthrow the Titans and save mankind.
© 2012 COTT PRODUCTIONS LLC and FURIA DE TITANES II, A.I.E.
- buy from $9.99
Bland fantasy sequel has some scary monsters.
what parents need to know
what families can talk about
Tomatometer®reviews counted: 1see all Wrath of the Titans (2012) reviews
Top Critic Reviews
Fresh: Doesn't drag in doling out familiar sensations.
- William Goss, Film.com, Friday, March 30, 2012
I was thoroughly disappointed with the Clash of the Titans remake. It was a dull, uninteresting slog of endlessly plodding action scenes and tons of unmemorable CG effects being thrown at the viewer from every angle as a poor substitute for excitement. Thankfully, Wrath of the Titans manages to be a better movie than Clash in nearly every area. The story is basic but serviceable, with the father of the gods threatening to escape his prison and take out his vengeance on the earth. The gods themselves, weakened by lack of worship and divided by old conflicts, are powerless to face the danger. It falls to Perseus (Sam Worthington) and a small band or warriors to set things right. The major improvement Wrath makes is that the action scenes and set pieces are much more exciting this time around. Whether chimera attack or the shifting, crushing walls of a labyrinth and the dangerous beast inside, I was never bored by what was happening on the screen. At the very least, this is a watchable fantasy action flick, which puts it above the first film. Greek mythology is so rich and dense that so much more could be done with the gods, monster and locales that Wrath of the Titans mines for material. Even as flawed as Immortals was, it certainly wasn't generic, which even this improved sequel doesn't totally escape until near the end. Still, whether you enjoyed or loathe the Clash of the Titans reboot, this one is better.
- lewiskendell, Monday, October 1, 2012
An obvious made-for-3D form of motion pictures. Wrath of the Titans focuses entirely on the envisioning effects and CGI-improvements. But the nearly chaotic plot and below par acting brings the film further down the trenches. 2/5
- fb1442511448, Monday, August 5, 2013
The 2010 remake of Clash of the Titans was a movie I liked, mostly because it was a lot better than I figured. Now, as for its sequel, which is this movie. I wasn't overly excited to see it, mostly because I dunno, it just didn't seem like it was trying hard to be seen, and it came off as a big after thought. Well, I saw it anyway, and, despite the frosty reception it got, it's actually not terrible, and I did rather enjoy it, which says a lot since I wasn't really expecting anything. It isn't really that good of a movie, but it is watchable, despite being (for me) a step down from its predecessor. It's been 10 years since Perseus defeated the Kraken, but all is not well. Trying to live a quiet life as a fisherman, the widower Perseus has put his sword away and made the choice to instead focus on raising his son. Up in Olympus, trouble is brewing as well. Since people have lost their faith in the gods and stopped praying to them, they are losing their power. There's an internal struggle going on between the gods and the imprisoned Titans, but, with Zeus being weakened, it becomes easier for the Titan leader Kronos to rise up from imprisonment and begin his quest to take over for good. This inevitably leads Perseus to begrudgingly get back into quest mode as he has to travel to the underworld to rescue the captive Zeus, taken by the traitorous Hades and Aries. Perseus isn't alone though. He is joined by Agenor (the son of Poseidon), Andromeda, and the reclusive Hephaestus. Together they have to battle all kinds of neat creatures, including the Minotaur and some cyclopses, and see exotic places like the Labyrinth. There's all kinds of thrilling action and stuff going on, but oddly, this movie didn't really feel as epic as it probably should have. In fact, it's actually rather lackluster and underwhelming. Not sure why, but maybe it's the direction and writing, both of which are rather unremarkable, which is surprising given the set up and possibilities. The film's not really boring, but it's more forgettable than not, and it doesn't really go out of its way to make you care. And when it does, it falls flat. At least Worthington delivers more with the action than he does with his stiff acting. Ramirez is fine as Aries, and Fiennes and Neeson do elevate the filmsome, even if it's obvious their hearts aren't really in it. See it if you want, but it's not really anything special.
- cosmo313, Friday, November 2, 2012