Who would star?
Would you put Brad and Angelina in the movie as Perseus and Andromeda? Too bad that Sean Connery has retired, he would be a great Zeus…

Clash of the Titans was not a throwback. In 1981 there were no movies with effects better than this. It wasn’t until 1984 with movies like Star Wars when the effects barrier was torn wide open with giant monsters like the Rancor. (which was just a puppet filmed in slow motion)

I didn’t intend to use the word “crap” in a purely negative manner. what I meant by “crap” was the movie’s fx compared to TODAY’s movies’ fx.

the advancement of visual fx today comes from years and years of movie fx. and most likely, some of the wizards of today’s visual fx started their love and passion upon seeing this movie as a kid.

I agree with BT’s point. the fx today will be very much outdated in the years to come and my bet is our grandchildren might have a discussion on this issue one day. perhaps on the Transformers movie and say how lame it was. who knows right? there is a big possibility there.

I also agree with another of his good point – the artistry and soul of the movie is what matters. the fx just spices it up to make the artistry shine and the soul of the movie to come alive.

I know I should have used a better word to describe the fx. again, I humbly apologize to those I’ve offended here. forgive me.

thank you, international friends.

and before I end, let me say this – I love this movie!

I was lucky enough to see this on the big screen a few years back, loved it as a child, love it just as much as an adult.

The effects were beyond cutting edge for their time. Compare these to some earlier stop motion stuff and you can see it is damned near perfect. However in a day and age where many effects are so photoreal and perfect that they don’t even look like effects some people will be put off by the distraction.

But mark my words, the effects were incredible for their time and still hold up today. I have seen some movies where the effects are just sad and knowing they could do THIS in 1981 makes me wonder why.

Sure, if your standard is that it must look as photorealistic as possible by modern technology then they are “crap.” But if you view movies as an artform or even just as a craft then of course you can appreciate amazing work even after new technology has been invented. Are the effects in the original King Kong “crap” too? How about Star Wars? Won’t Gollum seem like “crap” in 20 years too if you’re just going by technology and not artistry or soul?

Today’s most expensive effects movie still don’t look real and cause people to complain about CGI. Almost none of them have even a small percentage of the personality, beauty and obvious skill put into these amazing scenes.

I don’t mind a remake because it would be very hard to have a worse star and more boring story than the original, but the effects make it a risky venture. Without groundbreaking WETA-level effects it will seem pretty worthless. A CGI medusa may or may not look more real, but I will be very surprised if it looks cooler. And when you watch that scene you can’t help but wonder how the hell they kept track of which direction to move each snake each time they advanced a frame. With CGI you know they just had a program to do it.

but while I was doing my degree, I was fortunate enough to see the movie’s disc on sale. having no money at that time, I borrowed from my friends and man…it was worth it!

I watched it again and again. sure the effects are crap but who cares? I love that movie! makes me a kid again every time I see it. and now, I’m passing the torch to my 14 year old cousin – who also loves that movie upon seeing it the first time.

anyways, thank you for your review of this old “classic”. Zeus rules!