Ebert, who was amongst the 2010 Clash of the Titan
's biggest fans (3/4 review
: "I like the energy, the imagination, the silliness"), smacks Immortals
down with a mere 1.5 stars
, and in so doing, confirms all my impressions from the trailers:
All of Greece seems to be on the edge of a drop of hundreds or thousands of feet, although sometimes in the far distance we see flatlands, which are no doubt where the peasants live. No one on the cliffs but Gods, heroes, Oracles, warriors and suchlike. These characters all seem compelled to live as close to the edge as possible, where they run nimbly, survey the horizon, push each other, and never look down to check their footing. You know how nervous that makes me get.
... There are no end of battle scenes, interminable and incomprehensible, in which beheading and skewering are routine.
I am surprised, however, to read this, given who dark the movie looks in trailers, darkness being one of 3D's biggest problems:
The 3D cinematography is a pleasant surprise, one of the best iterations of the medium I've seen.
Everything is on a cliff? Clearly he wasn't paying attention then, as it was established that Theseus's home was a remote small sea side village. He also must've missed that vast open plain where the salt mines were, not to mention that other vast open plain that had a mountain range, a giant wall and an even BIGGER FUCKING CITY behind it.
The gods in this movie actually felt like gods. No old men in toga's hamming it up. These gods know how to fight....Aries scene where he saves Theseus is one of the most bloody I've seen in a movie, but is effective because that's what it's like when a god deigns to kick your ass.
Visually the movie is gorgeous, and far more so than "Clash" feels like a mythology story come to life.
I'm not surprised Ebert enjoyed the stale "Clash Of The Titans"....it was just another cliched summer block buster with a Greek Gods angle, and brought nothing new to the table.
At least "Immortals" had beautiful imagery, felt truer to Greek myth, had better actors (Sorry Liam, you sucked in "Clash" and your lines were laughable) and had kick ass Greek Gods.
I'll be seeing it again.
So I was short of time when I originally posted this, so I was not able to read Ebert's entire review.....Now I am off work, and have just finished reading it and I stand by my original assertion: He was not paying attention. Seriously not paying attention. So don't waste time with his review when it comes to deciding whether or not you want to see the film. Let's take his review point by point:
Alas, the movie makes next to no sense. It involves, in a very broad sense, the attempt by King Hyperion (Mickey Rourke) to conquer Greece, and the battle to stop him led by a plucky peasant named Theseus (Henry Cavill). Much depends on the possession of the hidden Epirus Bow, which can fire arrows that materialize from thin air and guide themselves to a target. This sounds great, but when you're shooting arrows at tens of thousands of enemies, your fingers could get bloody pulling that bow string.
Hyperion's goal was to release the Titans using the bow.....not to fight "tens of thousands of enemies". Theseus was not trying to get the bow to defeat "tens of thousand of enemies", he was trying to prevent Hyperion from getting the bow so that he could not release the Titans.
. In fact, all of Greece seems to be on the edge of a drop of hundreds or thousands of feet, although sometimes in the far distance we see flatlands, which are no doubt where the peasants live. No one on the cliffs but Gods, heroes, Oracles, warriors and suchlike. These characters all seem compelled to live as close to the edge as possible, where they run nimbly, survey the horizon, push each other, and never look down to check their footing. You know how nervous that makes me get.
As I said above, he clearly missed the salt plain, the temple, the other massive plain, the gigantic mountain, the gigantic wall and the huge fucking city behind the wall. Theseus lived in a small villa in a cliff wall. They never said, or intimated in any way that this was the whole of Greece. The gods did not "live on a cliff", but Mount Olympus, and they had a balcony that allowed them to see the "world" (of ancient Greece).
One legendary character does dive into the sea, turning into a kind of missile and impacting like a bomb, creating a giant tsunami. You'd think the waves would wipe out civilization, but the payoff seems mostly when everybody finds themselves covered with mud.
>sigh< What civilization? Theseus' village? The very remote one where everyone was slaughtered? That one? And I'm sure Poseidon couldn't control the damage done by his wave, what with being a god and all.
But a lot of the time I had no idea what was going on.
And this right here pretty much invalidates the entire "review". At NO TIME was this movie in any way, shape or form, confusing. It had a fairly simple and straight forward, albeit incredibly gorgeous, story.
Characters would turn up for the first time, seem terrifically important, and disappear. If at many moments I had stopped the film and asked anybody around me, "who is that, and what are they doing and why?," I think they'd have been stuck for an answer.
And again, not paying attention. This is pretty much the opposite of reality. Seriously, I honestly could not believe I actually read this.
There are such puzzles as why an army stretches the width of the horizon and has to funnel four abreast through a narrow opening in a wall.
Oh for fuck's sake....it's called a fucking "choke point".....you make your enemies come through in as few numbers as possible....Not to mention it was the ONLY VISIBLE opening at ground level, and the wall was to fucking high to scale!
And call me an idiot, but when they found the three people trapped inside the giant (golden? brass?) bull while being slow-roasted, I had no idea how they got there or who they were.
You are an idiot Roger, a senile fucking idiot!! The three people in the brass bull were the oracle's decoys. I figured it out the second I heard female screams coming from it, I mean jesus fucking christ, did they have to come and take you by the hand and spell it all out for you to get it? It's not like they opened it and showed you two light skinned women and one dark skinned one, all of whom looked exactly like the same women you saw earlier EXCEPT THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT THEY DID. You should've been able to connect the dots since those were the only three women in the entire film who matched that.
Let me say this again.....Do not base your appraisal on whether or not to see this movie on Ebert's "review". There's having a difference of opinion on something, and then there's not paying attention. I don't know if he was heavily medicated, is senile or what, but these were not the things you wanted to point out as negatives.
Let me give you the "negatives": Light on story, heavy on action and gore. If you find those "negatives"....don't go.
If you want an ass kicking, popcorn flick that is incredibly gorgeous....then go see it.