Mythology Film Review: Clash of the Titans

In selecting a film to review, I wanted one that I had heard of and that I thought might be entertaining to watch. Clash of the Titans sounded fun, so I selected it for review. The 2010 film is actually a remake of a movie by the same title from the 1980s. That 1980s film was loosely based on Greek mythology, and the 2010 film was loosely based on it—so it was really not much of a surprise that the film’s characters bore little resemblance to the actual characters from classical mythology. Still, I was a bit disappointed that the writers failed to take even a passing interest in representing the stories of the Titans more accurately. What proceeds in the film is a loose—very loose—re-telling of Greek mythology from a bunch of people in Hollywood who seem more interested in reaching for any excuse to see a man in armor battling various monsters and foes.
My view of mythology is that it is important for explaining a people’s history and origins and worldview. Greek mythology is most important in the sense that it conveys the idea that the gods are involved in the lives of mortals and that they do care about what happens to human beings. I enjoyed reading about the Trojans and the Greeks in Homer’s Iliad and I found it to be very human and compelling. It was easy to identify with these characters and their feelings. The wrath of Achilles made total sense, as did the stubbornness of Agamemnon. The nobility of Hector and the humility of Priam, willing to beg Achilles for his son’s body back—it all resonated deeply with me. Thus, while I did not hold out much hope that Clash of the Titans would reflect many of these human themes, I did want it to have some depth to it. However, it was all spectacle and special effects, with very little in the way of character development. Perseus should have seemed more likeable—but in the film he does not do much to make one want to identify with him.
Still, the film does connect for me in my own life because it is ultimately about a person figuring out his identity and role in the world. Identity vs. role confusion is a major conflict that most people experience as they grow up. It is often the subject of coming of age tales. I was not expecting a coming of age tale with this film, but it sort of made me feel that I was watching one, and I liked that element of it.
The film does not, however, follow the readings very closely. It makes up characters that are not in Greek mythology and completely gets the relationships of characters all wrong. For instance, Io was an ancestor of Perseus—not a contemporary. Putting Io in the film like that made it all seem very haphazardly constructed. Moreover, the film’s title suggests that there would be more Titans in the film—but there were actually no Titans involved at all. The Kraken is not even something out of Greek mythology. It is from Norse mythology. It is in the 1980s movie, which explains its presence in this film. But there is plenty of richness and creativity in the actual Perseus myth—so why not just stick with that? Or tell the story of the Titans?
Io should not have been a love interest for Perseus, either. It does not jive with the original myth. Moreover, Poseidon is the one that should have been represented in the film—not Hades—because in the original myth it is Poseidon who is offended at the lack of respect due to the gods. The film’s license with the original narrative did not really detract from my ability to engage with mythology. It was fun in a way to pick up on these things and notice how far from the source material the movie was deviating along the way.
Of course, the film’s actual source material was really the 1980s version, so it is not quite fair to argue that the movie was deviating too far from the source material, for the 1980s version also has a Kraken in it and also takes liberties with actual Greek mythology.
I doubt I would recommend the film as I feel that at the end of the day it did not actually do much to impress me. It was a typical action fantasy film and I think I might have enjoyed one of the other films more. I did not want to watch Thor, however; nor was I that interested in watching the 2004 King Arthur as the image of Keira Knightley made me think, “Nah.” Tristan and Isolde looked like too much of a romance for me and I did not feel like watching James Franco for two hours—so I went with what I figured would be the cheesiest of all the choices.
The main reason I would probably not recommend the film, however, is that there would not be any point in doing so for it bears very little connection to Greek mythology or to the mythology of our modern world. I think that the mythology of our modern world is better represented by technology and science-fiction than by fantasy. The idea of gods and goddesses seems completely over the top for modern sensibilities. Yet modern mythology is completely enamored of technology and what people can create. It is as though everyone alive today were secretly a Victor Frankenstein dabbling in the black arts of technology, with artificial intelligence or something of the sort. We are driven by this desire to be like gods—but to see gods and demigods on the screen is something of a let-down, as it does not really temper the desire or approach the darker side of that desire. The film is more of a mindless bit of entertainment, and it connects mythology to our modern world by turning it all into empty spectacle—and that is not what Homer or the Iliad is about at all. I would rather recommend the Iliad to someone interested in mythology.