Perseu deve lutar com a Medusa e o Kraken para salvar Andrômeda.Perseu deve lutar com a Medusa e o Kraken para salvar Andrômeda.Perseu deve lutar com a Medusa e o Kraken para salvar Andrômeda.
- Prêmios
- 2 vitórias e 6 indicações no total
Avaliações em destaque
This film is one of the reasons for my being a student of the classical world! After being spoiled by the talents of Harryhausen, I just do not get excited about today's CGI effects... Not quite accurate portrayal of Perseus, but that just doesn't affect the enjoyment of this film. Fantastic film, fantastic cast!
This movie has been a favorite of mine since i was a kid--i was very into Greek mythology during grade school, so i loved this film, even though i've seen it about two dozen times (it continues to be a Sunday-afternoon staple on TV). There are a number of mythological inaccuracies in this film (the Kraken wasn't a mythological monster; Perseus didn't have Pegasus, but actually borrowed Hermes' winged sandals, etc.), but it's still a good kids' introduction to ancient mythology. While the actors playing the "mortals" are definitely inferior to those playing the Gods, i suppose it works in the sense of their being the Olympians' puppets and, well, a little limpness in the thespian department is somewhat de rigeur (as is the wise/comic sidekick of Burgess Meredith and the 'little and cute' factor of the mechanical owl) for the kind of classic matinee swashbuckler that "Clash of the Titans" is.
But all these complaints that the Harryhausen effects are crap and it would be so much better done with CGI... well, that's pure craziness. Sure, the monsters don't look convincing, but they look a hell of a lot more convincing then they would as cheap computer animation--can you honestly imagine the Medusa sequence being done any better with some cartoon computer program? (Why? So it could look like the crap in "Phantom Menace"?) I've always felt that Harryhausen's stop-motion technique and the resultant odd way in which the monsters moved added to the sense of their mythic status, their unreality, the sense that these are creatures from another world, another plane. (The recent Asian fantasy/action film "Onmyoji" paid tribute to the master by having a CGI demon army move in Harryhausen stop-motion style and damn me if they didn't look scarier, more unearthly for it.) In my opinion, CGI looks even less "real," more like a painted-on cartoon. There's a depth and detail to creatures that have actually been created in the three-dimensional real world that those who have only existed on a computer screen don't have. Also, no matter how good an actor is, there's a difference between someone who's in the same room with the monster he's fighting, or who at least knows what it looks like, and someone who's just trying to "act scared" in the general direction where something will be inserted later. (Imagine the "Alien" movies made with a hyped-up animated creature: you know that even motionless and plastic squeezed between light stands, that giant H.R. Geiger monster gave everyone on set the creeps.) Maybe people like CGI because they feel safer with obviously fake monsters, things that never even existed as a three-foot high model next to the ham sandwich in someone's shop.
But all these complaints that the Harryhausen effects are crap and it would be so much better done with CGI... well, that's pure craziness. Sure, the monsters don't look convincing, but they look a hell of a lot more convincing then they would as cheap computer animation--can you honestly imagine the Medusa sequence being done any better with some cartoon computer program? (Why? So it could look like the crap in "Phantom Menace"?) I've always felt that Harryhausen's stop-motion technique and the resultant odd way in which the monsters moved added to the sense of their mythic status, their unreality, the sense that these are creatures from another world, another plane. (The recent Asian fantasy/action film "Onmyoji" paid tribute to the master by having a CGI demon army move in Harryhausen stop-motion style and damn me if they didn't look scarier, more unearthly for it.) In my opinion, CGI looks even less "real," more like a painted-on cartoon. There's a depth and detail to creatures that have actually been created in the three-dimensional real world that those who have only existed on a computer screen don't have. Also, no matter how good an actor is, there's a difference between someone who's in the same room with the monster he's fighting, or who at least knows what it looks like, and someone who's just trying to "act scared" in the general direction where something will be inserted later. (Imagine the "Alien" movies made with a hyped-up animated creature: you know that even motionless and plastic squeezed between light stands, that giant H.R. Geiger monster gave everyone on set the creeps.) Maybe people like CGI because they feel safer with obviously fake monsters, things that never even existed as a three-foot high model next to the ham sandwich in someone's shop.
This film opens with a woman and her child being shunned by her kingly father and the city he represents, and banished to the depths of the sea. We soon find out that this child is the son of Zeus, king of Mt. Olympus and king of the gods. Zeus then releases this terrible beast called the Kracken to destroy the city. The child is saved and grows to manhood. His name is Perseus. The film is then a chronicle of Perseus's adventures as he battles the deadly, deformed Calibos, giant scorpions, a two-headed giant dog, and the evil Medusa herself, as well as the mightiest of all titans, the Kracken itself. We also see him befriend the magical Pegasus, and meet Cheron on the river Styx. This movie is great fun and makes all these mythological names come alive. The credit for this goes to the wonderful stop-animation work of Ray Harryhausen, in his (unfortunately) last film. Credit also goes to the wonderful supporting cast of British stage nobility playing the gods and such, Laurence Olivier plays Zeus, Maggie Smith is Thetis, and Claire Bloom, Ursala Andress, Flora Robson, and Burgess Meredith play memorable roles as well. Harry Hamlin as Perseus and Judi Bowker as his love-interest Andromeda are lackluster(although Ms. Bowker is VERY easy on the eyes). But their lack of acting savvy is one of the few detriments of the film. This film is fast-paced adventure that is magical, mystical, and memorable!
10badact
I ignored this film when it first came out in 1981. There were just too many cool films to see that year. Friends who saw it told me it was a laughable hoot. Despite it's august cast and attempt to cash in on the mythic quest themes of Star Wars, it rapidly sunk from sight. In 1995, looking for a film appropriate for my 7 year old daughter, I pulled this film out of the 'family' section of my local library. The critics are right. The F/X are clunky, even by 1981 standards.Harry Hamlin is wooden. Judy Bowker is forgettable, and Laurence Olivier hams it up shamelessly...and yet...IT ALL WORKS! The sets and lighting perfectly capture our deepest feellings of mythic Greece. There isn't a drop of contemporary forays into irony & cynicism. It is unalloyed GOOD vs EVIL lovingly given to us by the effects wizard Harryhausen. His monsters have a childlike beauty that makes them 'scary' without trying to gross you out. It's the myth, the quest, and finally the theme that love does conquer all. No need for smart-alecky, eye-winking protaganists. Just a good old fashioned story told straight and true. My now 14yr. old daughter, wife and I just saw it again last night. See it with the child in your life, or the child in you.
Thank you Mr. Harryhausen, for this and all your wonderful films.
Thank you Mr. Harryhausen, for this and all your wonderful films.
Clash of the Titans! A story of daring adventurers, on the spot romance and cheesy dialogue can be considered a classic but is very much flawed both for better and worse.The setting of Greek mythology opens up a gateway to a whole cast of "epic" stop-motion creatures which is Ray Harryhausen's specialty but if you've never tried stop-motion before it may be harder to appreciate his great work which is the best part of this film As for the films weaknesses, it has many. However my biggest complaint is just how dated it feels. It looks and sounds like a film from the 1960's, like another Hausen picture "Jason and the Argonauts". The characters are fairly 2-dimensional and the romance sub-plot is a bit confusing with just how silly it is but at the same time it works to the films advantage. Its silly but entertaining, sometimes you'll be laughing your arse off but in a good way. The film doesn't exactly take its self seriously. When it comes down to it the films at its best when there's monsters on the screen, especially one fight with a medusa which blew me away but I won't spoil it, but besides that its not particularly strong in the other categories. I give a strong recommendation nonetheless for just how entertaining it is. If you see it in a shop, don't hesitate to pick it up.
Você sabia?
- CuriosidadesDespite being listed on posters and having main title billing, Ursula Andress only has one line in the entire film.
- Erros de gravaçãoAs the destruction of Argos begins, heavy winds blow the tunic of a man pulling a donkey on a rope to reveal a pair of modern-day gym shorts underneath.
- Cenas durante ou pós-créditosIn the closing credits, the cast is divided into three categories: The Immortals (for the gods of Olympus), The Mortals (humans, etc.), and The Mythologicals (As Themselves) (In Alphabetical Order) Bubo, Charon, Dioskilos, Kraken, Medusa, Pegasus, Scorpions, Vulture. Those 8 are the non-human animated characters supplied by special effects.
- Versões alternativasThe UK cinema release was cut by the BBFC to secure an 'A' rating and removed the closeup shot of Calibos' trident-hand piercing a man's back, as well as shortening the prolonged shots of Calibos on his knees writhing in agony after a sword has been thrown into his stomach. The cuts were restored in all video/DVD releases and the certificate upgraded to a 15 (12 for the DVD).
Principais escolhas
Faça login para avaliar e ver a lista de recomendações personalizadas
Detalhes
- Data de lançamento
- Países de origem
- Central de atendimento oficial
- Idioma
- Também conhecido como
- Furia de titanes
- Locações de filme
- Azure Window, Gozo Island, Malta(final scene with the Kraken)
- Empresas de produção
- Consulte mais créditos da empresa na IMDbPro
Bilheteria
- Orçamento
- US$ 15.000.000 (estimativa)
- Faturamento bruto nos EUA e Canadá
- US$ 41.092.328
- Faturamento bruto mundial
- US$ 41.092.328
- Tempo de duração1 hora 58 minutos
- Cor
- Proporção
- 1.85 : 1
Contribua para esta página
Sugerir uma alteração ou adicionar conteúdo ausente
Principal brecha
By what name was Fúria de Titãs (1981) officially released in India in Hindi?
Responda