Clash of the Titans (2010)

Honeycutt finds the adventure entertaining despite an awkward start and weak 3D. He praises the digital creatures and effects while criticizing the campy depiction of Mount Olympus.

Brooks finds the film an amiable, entertaining upgrade, especially in its breakneck second half. He praises the spectacle of the giant CGI scorpions while criticizing the dialogue and flat protagonists.

The page identifies this as a review, but the paywall prevents access to the critic’s verdict. The review’s specific praise or complaint is not visible.

The publication rates the film three out of five stars. The review text is unavailable, so its verdict and specific praise or complaint cannot be established.

Ebert gives the film a negative assessment, finding it more spectacle than substance. He particularly criticizes its noisy effects-driven approach.

Smith finds the reboot unremittingly average and inferior to the original in nearly every department. He gives credit to the improved visual effects but criticizes the dull hero, stilted script, and rushed 3D.

Gonzalez dismisses the film as slick, chaotic entertainment whose plot and performances often frustrate. He praises its disorienting staging of creature confrontations and finds its laziness hilariously kitschy.

Lane finds the film diverting but ultimately a chore rather than a compelling mythic adventure. He praises the Medusa sequence and Mads Mikkelsen’s performance, while criticizing the film’s muddled logic and mythology.

Errigo finds the film poorly written and lunkheaded, though its beefcake action may satisfy some viewers. She singles out Ralph Fiennes’s entertaining performance as Hades for particular praise.

The critic's verdict is negative, finding the film more noisy spectacle than compelling myth. He singles out its hollow action and lack of substance as the central shortcomings.

Lowry finds the film visually busy but ultimately flat, with its action and 3D failing to improve the story. He singles out Ramin Djawadi’s operatic score as the most satisfying creative element.

Turan finds the remake dull and says its 3-D makes the film worse rather than better. He criticizes the clunky action and confusing battle scenes, while noting that Pegasus benefits from the 3-D.

The review finds the remake a dull, messy spectacle weighed down by relentless exposition and repetitive action. It singles out Gemma Arterton as a welcome bright spot.

Thompson strongly pans the film as a shoddily written and executed hack job. She singles out Mads Mikkelsen’s convincing performance as warrior Draco as a rare bright spot.

The critic finds it entertaining but more visually exciting than emotionally satisfying. The spectacular mythical monsters are singled out as a major attraction.

Bowles finds the remake distinctly average, disappointing and soulless. He particularly condemns the retrofitted 3D, saying it looks darker and foggier while adding little.

The critic calls the film a dull, poorly made failure despite its spectacle. They especially fault the confusing, choppily edited action and the headache-inducing 3D.

The critic finds the film a monotonous, overstuffed misfire that lacks the original’s charm and sense of adventure. He particularly condemns its ineffective 3D conversion, which he says detracts from the film rather than adding anything.

The critic pans the remake as a soulless, uninvolving misfire. They single out its wafer-thin characterization and frenetic, shaky action camerawork as major flaws.

The critic finds the film a disjointed, cynical disappointment that fails to make its story or characters compelling. He singles out the intrusive 3D, lifeless CGI, and weak script as major flaws.