'Wrath Of The Titans' boring, listless (IANS Movie Review)

Film: 'Wrath Of The Titans'; Cast: Sam Worthington, Liam Neeson, Rosamund Pike, Ralph Fiennes; Director: Jonathan Liebesman; Rating: * 1/2

No matter what critics say, the business of cinema is quite different in reality. How else could one explain a sequel being made of a film which was insipid, listless and pointless?

Actually there is an explanation - the first film 'Clash of the Titans' supposedly made $500 million. So, there was obviously a need for the studio to do one up and they indeed manage this - 'Wrath Of The Titans'. Sadly its story is worse than the original, but special effects are much better.

Half human half god Perseus (Sam Worthington) has abandoned a place next to his father Zeus (Liam Neeson) ruling over mortals and takes care of his son as a fisherman in a village.

However, the gods are weakened by the lack of prayers from humans. Hence, when Zeus's brother Hades chooses to release their imprisoned father Kronos from the prison of Tartarus, Perseus has no choice but to try help his father so that the universe can be saved from destruction.

Looking at its wafer-thin story, this one tries to do a father-son sketch with every subplot revolving on another type of father-son relationship. But neither does it reveal anything new about it nor does it comment on it in an interesting manner.

When one talks of gods, logic falls apart. After all gods are supposed to be able to do anything. But when you apply logic and bring them to the human plane by making them mortals, one has to play the film by similar logical rules. Sadly, it shows no hints of doing any of those.

'Wrath of the Titans' thus becomes a study in contrast. While the character sketches, story, writing and acting are boring and listless, the action sequences are just the opposite. A lot of effort went into making them lively and breathtaking. If only the producers would have put a quarter of the effort to the story as well.

But they realise they do not need to.

And considering that the first film made $500 million, one perhaps can forgive the producers for almost ensuring that there is no story. However, what they fail to realise is that if they had ensured a good story, they would perhaps have made double the amount.

The producers also perhaps hoped that using actors like Neeson and Ralph Fiennes would give the film legitimacy. Sadly, wasting these actors on such insipid roles only worsens the allegations.

The film really has nothing to offer.