Ten years ago, the film that made
Henry Cavil aka Superman, aka The Witcher a household name. That film was
Immortals a Greek Mythology movie were Greek Mythos where nearly hitting the
brink of destruction although this wasn't the reason why but this film at the
time had some potential in a sense. I've seen this film in the theaters for
which, why I went to it was, well because Cavil was reported to play Superman,
so I must see this and so how does this film rank up now? Well, to be honest
the film itself was not all bad but at least better than the 2010 and 1981
version of Clash of the Titans. Now don't get me wrong it does have some flaws
moreover some moments where it could have been better and lastly has Stephan
Dorff who consistently tries to have a career, but his talking fails miserably
when opens his mouth. But on the bright side this has Mickey Rourke playing the
bad guy in the movie which is convenient despite the fact that he was in the
Wrestler two years prior to this film's release so obviously he brings
wrestling fighting style when he takes on The Witcher. So, without further ado let’s
talk and see if Immortals was as good as I or yourselves remember it.
The film is loosely based on Theseus
(Henry Cavil) who fought the mighty Minotaur. After his mother is brutally
murdered by King Hyperion (Mickey Rourke), Theseus goes on a quest that will
change the very course of history when it is revealed to him that he was chosen
or mentored by Zeus (Luke Evans and John Hurt who plays mortal version of
Zeus). Accompanied by an Oracle (Freda Pinto) who can for see the future.
Theseus leads the people of Greece to stand and protect Mount Tartarus or else
Hyperion will unleash the Titans and bring Chaos upon the world.
Now before you call me out on this
yes I know this film came out in November but since where living in a screwed
up world, all thanks to the American Government I honestly don't have anything
to talk about so I guess sorry but not that sorry. I got to say, I don't
honestly remember my views ten years ago though honestly the film is okay-ish
but there were mostly moments and visions I can't take much serious when it
comes to the whole movie, plus its story as well. And I'll start with the
story, the whole concept of a mad man taking revenge on the Greek Gods because
his prayers weren't answered to save his family that whole concept for the
antagonist I get, moreover Zeus's point of view of never interfering with
mankind though he guides a demigod like Theseus to be a skilled warrior and a
leader through mortal form that I get as well, but if he for saw the events of
Hyperion trying to destroy mankind also the Gods themselves then why didn't he
just summoned the assistance of other demigods like Hercules, Cadmus or even
Perseus to help our main demigod since were telling a fantasy story why not
just break a few rules and having a few demigods join forces to stop the mad
man from destroying the world. For many reason's I'd rather prefer that concept
than having to listen to Stephan Dorff talking, I mean holy crap there were
times when I just wanted to shout at my TV "SHUT UP STEPHAN DORFF",
I'm sorry but there was a time I view him as a mediocre bad guy and that was
after watching Blade. I don't mind a whole lot of the Titans look per say, but
the Greek Gods I do kind of have an issue because they all look like there
about the same age especially when there's a scene between Zeus and Athena even
though Zeus is talking to his own daughter who looks the same age as he is. I
mean sure you can argue that the Greek Gods are supposed to be perfectly good
looking but really you can at least make them different in a sense like at
least for example have Zeus and Poseidon have at least a grow a beard for the
presence that they're both brothers and they're also the origins of Olympus,
Ares another great example since he's the God of War he can always have like a
battle scar furthermore he also has post dramatic stress, but on the other hand
Ares would also make a good antagonist as well instead of just writing a
fictionalized mad King or Ares can also influence Mickey Rourke's character in
mortal form as well. The other thing that I kind of feel confused nor don't
understand is the whole battle sequence between the Gods and Titans is there's
very few Gods taking on the Titans moreover it would of been in interesting
fight if you had Hermes involved because he can use his speed to run over these
Titans one by one, speaking of very few Gods they didn't have Hades involved
and personally he come down and summon spirits of lost warrior's but I guess
the only explanation I can think of is budgetary reasons which I don't know how
that can make any sense or logic. Furthermore, this is one of those films that
I believe could have been done better in terms of story and action sequences
despite the fact that this film has already been made ten years ago. Now, I
haven't seen the 2010 or 1981 versions of Clash of the Titans in quite a long
time though I do have a unique memory of the 2010 version and I can honestly
say that Immortals is a better movie than the 2010 Clash of the Titans a side
of that being a very small complement because this film really has some flaws,
but its honestly not all bad I just feel like it could of been made better
although more appropriate version of this movie is logged in the forgotten
reaches of my brain. Having watched this film for the first time in ten years,
I have to admit it's really not all bad Henry Cavil isn't all bad as the
protagonist in the movie Luke Evans does a good job as the King of the Gods,
the story itself is decent and so is the action sequences, though in my honest
opinion this film alone could of been done better. So, this film is in the one
dollar bin or the five dollar bin I would recommend picking it up or just rent
it on your phone or touch pad, just don't buy it for many reason's it cost
fifteen dollars and to me that's expensive for a B-movie like Immortals, but if
you’re not adventures I totally understand.
No comments:
Post a Comment