I think the thing that was so annoying about this movie was the fact that everything was introduced then quickly abondned for somthing else. Like the most anticipated part of the movie was going to be Cloverfield erm.. the Kraken, but it only lasted for about two minutes with an extremely anti-climatic solution, no epic battle or anything. Which I guess would have been impossible, but by that point we've already seen giant scorpions and a woman with snakes for hair.Maybe the thing that makes this movie feel so incomplete is because there is no real conflict or drama like movies such as Beowulf. It's kinda like well us 10 guys can probably take on the gods so hi-ho the dairy-O lets go marching somewhere to see if we can.

I actually disagree about the story being coherent.  Maybe multiple writers wanted different things, but they couldn't seem to decide whether they wanted a "war against the gods" theme which is how the movie started.  This theme was emphasized a few times throughout the movie.  Many people in the movie about how the gods are unfair and the one really religious guy in the town becoming a villain of sorts (though I will admit they complained about injustice and didn't show it, though Zeus goes along with the "kill them to teach them a lesson" plan).Unfortunately, they also had a HEAVY Christian running throughout the movie.  Hades was turned from a rather neutral figure to a Satanic one (the second movie like this of late, as Percy Jackson also did the same thing, even though the books were true to the mythological Hades -- that's a sidenote).  Zeus at times, especially the end, was painted as a loving god.  Of course, this theme doesn't work well when you add that Zeus raped Perseus's mom and, like I said above, went along with the plan to kill the people to teach them a lesson.  On the other hand, at the end of the movie the lead character turns his back a bit on "doing things like a human", takes the magic sword, uses his dad's help against Hades, and then acts like his father is a perfectly good guy.  Other elements towards the end of the movie back up the "Zeus is a good God" theme, even though earlier elements in the movie don't back that up.  There's also an element of Perseus being a Christ-like figure where he is brought back at the end only to be whisked away by "God" and no longer lives with the mortals.Anyhow, my brother and I went in expecting this to be a "war against the gods" movie which is how it was advertised.  In the end it was just really confused.  Of course, the complete lack of character development didn't help.  It does feel like it was made by many writers at the same time who kept trying to tug the script in different directions.

I rather enjoyed this movie. While it is not the greatest movie in the world, it was entertaining and didn't try to make itself into something it wasn't. Sam Worthington even called it a "popcorn movie," stating that it wasn't a serious film, just something that you could sit down and enjoy. I think I'd give it a three out of five simply because I appreciate a swashbuckling, action movie that knows it's not more than that and can still be entertaining.P.S. I noticed you commented on Sam Worthington's legs.  They were SO skinny! However, it is because of Avatar.  He had to lose all of the muscle mass in his legs so they would accurately portray the atrophy of someone who spent all their time in a wheelchair.

This movie was terrible. The plot was just a jumpy mess. I didn't even finish this movie because it was terrible.

I'd give it a very strong dog turd out of five. It did no justice for Grecian mythology and I had never been so bored. I love Sam Worthington - he's an Aussie hero - but this was just not the right movie for him. I'm so sick of everyone ripping off Grecian mythology and making it cheesy. I can handle Wonder Women, but jeez, this was just too much.

I love mithology and that makes me a hard "acceptor" of functional/convenient modifications just for the sake of a movie, of a catchy plot, of a rising-up actor, bla bla bla; and Hollywood does this a lot. I understand that's how film industry works, but this is my strong spot. It's uncomfortable for me when mithology is modiffied (even a little bit) in the big screen. My reasons: movies are the "novel-story books" of this era. Since reading books is left to less attention, movies should be more thruthworthy of the original clasic stories. Then, people that doesn't know enough or nothing about mithology (and literature, and history) end up believing whatever was told in this movies was truth or the original universal story.So, to be short, the kraken in a sea monster from the see where there is lot of water... so why is Hades -ruler of the underworld- involved in the plot as antagonist and controling a sea monster? What happened to posseidon? (because is better for the big screen an universal fight between good and evil, so Hades is better villain for the story than Posseidon). Posseidon is the real antagonist of this episode of the story of Persseus, not Hades; and the story was never about good and evil. Cassiopea claimed that she and her daughter Andromeda were more beautiful than the sea Nereids (not Aphrodite; why Aphrodite? because she is the universal symbol of beauty or the only one? Please, be more educative), so Posseidon gets angry and that's the argument. Forget about the Kraken, the real monster was a sea serpent called Cetos. No, come back to the kraken... why it looks like an ugly turtle? A real kraken from mythology is a squid-like monster (the version from PIrates of the Caribean is just perfect).CAssiopea dead at the begining??!!!! Come on? She is the one that is most eager to sacrifice her daughter, better for her to be the only one beautiful woman in Ethiopia (Not Argos; why Argos? Planning to make a sequel with Jason and the Argonouts? Please Don't mix more). MEdussa lives in hell? That one I hated a lot. She does not live in hell (she lives in the Gorgon's cave), that implies she is either a demon or a dead soul suffering for her sins. But no, she is none of this. Monsters and demons are not the same for clasical mythology. Her punishment is, while being alive, be a horrible creature that was once a woman and cursed to turn any man into stone. Perseus never visits the underworld in his quest, so the reason for this might be that a good side hero has to venture to horrible dark side evil places like an universal hell, and battle horrible mosnters to look atractive for filmakers.Ok.. so. Perseus kills medusa but still Peagsus wont come from her blood. Why? Why? The 1981 version also modifies this. Why? Not attractive that one of the most beautiful creatures from mythology is born from the blood of a horrible monster? and After a horrible decapitation? Yes, so... pegassus origin is better to keep it clean, sweet, not-gory, not monstrish. Then why make the PErseus pegassus black?? (Don't get me wrong, I loved this black winged horse, ut was beautiful) If the idea is to use universal symbols for good and evil to increase the film atractiveness, black pegassuses don't work so well (This one critic was strict, I know)What about perseus gifts? Zeus gives him a sword, Hermes gives flying sandals, Athenea gives a shield (the one that he uses to see the reflection of Medusa, not one made from scorpion's scales) and Hades an invisibility helm (yes, Hades helps Perseus that's why is owful for him to be the antagonist). Perseus accepts all of the gifts. Why the change? Don't know. Maybe because the hero is too good sided to accept his father's cruel/autoritarian acts againts humans. He is the symbol of freedom from the oppresive gods which Zeus is the ruler. YEs, that looks good in the big screen... But is not the true story.There is more where this critics came from.P.S.: Don't make me talk about Percy Jackson and the Lightening Thief.

First, we had Russell Crowe in Gladiator, introducing the Roman crew cut and gravelly voice from Hell, but every movie since then that takes place around the same time period, at least by the producers/directors timeline, has the exact same kind of character.  Maybe it's just me, but I don't think living life as a fisherman the way Perseus has would have left him with a voice that sounds like he's been chain smoking for 20 years.  This movie was a big case of "did not do their homework."  Even taking a cursory glance at any ancient Greek artwork shows that they were all about the "flowing locks" back then, not the crew cut.  The movie also feels greatly disjointed and the addition of Gemma Arterton as Io, though extremely hot, derailed the movie even further.  This movie only felt like it flowed marginally better than the first Fantastic Four movie... and we all know how horrid that one was. It's sad to say, but the original version is still vastly superior.