Clash of the Titans: Abe Perlstein's Take

[PressBot]

By Abe Perlstein

For those unfamiliar, Abe Perlstein is a respected stereoscopic 3D photographer.  While this isn't a movie review by any stretch of the imagination, Clash of the Titans made such a poignant impression on Abe, that he felt compelled to share his opinions on it. After receiving it in our in-box, we got the go-ahead to have it reprinted here.
Well, I never thought I would say this, but "Clash of the Titans" makes "2012" look like "2001".

Just when you think the bar can't drop any further, a sword and sandal star special effects bonanza hits theaters.  The greatest special effects in the world couldn't help this disaster of direction, editing, dialogue, and acting.

The production, originally shot in 2D, was hastily converted into 3D only weeks before release.  "Clash of the Titans" is surely among the worst 2D-to-3D feature film conversions to date.  Pseudoscopic anomalies and window violations abound, it also features mixed up depth cues during its fast-paced editing.  The overall effect soon becomes tedious.  In some scenes, the cheese factor features only two to five planes of depth, while in others, fully rounded dimensionality offers occasional visual relief.

The 3D-enabled midnight screening I attended was filled at nearly 50% capacity, a decent showing for a weeknight premier in my community. The largely teen and 20's-dominated audience started off with high energy vocal whoops and hollers.  Those soon led to groans or convulsive laughter during serious scenes.  When Liam Neeson, as bearded Zeus, commanded to "Release the Kraken," the entire theater spontaneously erupted into hysterics.

Believe me when I say a $3 US 3D movie upcharge is unwelcome atop already pricey tickets.  Unless one yearns for insipid exposition, scenery chewing, execrable eye gouging fight sequences, and a bombastic musical score; take this to heart: "Clash of the Titans" is a turkey of immense proportions.  Even though the opening weekend's take was impressive ($64.1 million impressive), word of mouth will almost certainly mean box office death.

A few years ago, I recall stereo imaging master John Rupkalvis taking part in Crimes Against 3D.  This was a panel discussion at one of the past Stereoscopic Displays and Applications Conferences in San Jose, California.  The message was that substandard 3D imaging of any subject matter can do well in alienating the public from seeing 3D films.  Let's hope they don't plan a sequel. The horror... The horror...

So!  $64.1 million dollars later, was Clash of the Titans really all that bad?  Did anyone see it?  Share your thoughts and findings in the comments below.
Read full article...

[android78]

So! $64.1 million dollars later, was Clash of the Titans really all that bad? Did anyone see it? Share your thoughts and findings in the comments below.

Sadly, yes.

[cybereality]

Yeah I agree. It was a piece of crap, ambulance chasing, cheap cash-in. I hope this serves as a lesson to the movie industry (although if it makes money it might be the wrong lesson!).

[pixel67]

Yeah I agree. It was a piece of crap, ambulance chasing, cheap cash-in. I hope this serves as a lesson to the movie industry (although if it makes money it might be the wrong lesson!).

I second that... money talks and even the hint of the word "3D" in the title, regardless of the quality, means charge a premium. The consumer really needs a way to tell the difference between native and converted prior to going to see a 3D Movie.