I went to see Clash of the titans 3d on friday.
It was quite bad. But not so bad that it was easy to make fun of, so we ended up not enjoying it very much. Performances weren't very good, sam worthington's accent was inconsistent, it was hard to follow who was who at times, we're pretty sure someone dies and is then seen in another shot alive and well (as if they put the scene together in the wrong order). The story was an "epic" journey leading to a rather anti-climactic final battle, and barely even a confrontation. It was just not very good. On top of that, at several points we took our 3d glasses off and there was no difference. Occasionally there'd be something a little blurry in the scene - columns or candles or something in the background, but it was never intended to be 3d and making it 3d added nothing to the film. They really need to save 3D for the films that are filmed with 3D in mind.
Nightmare on Elm Street
This was better than CotT, but still not very good. It just didn't seem to have any merit, no reason, it didn't really do anything to improve on the original (other than effects) it wasn't as scary, characters weren't as likable, the story was a retread, it just seemed to have no purpose.
Iron Man 2
Loved it! Really good, maybe not on a par with the first, but still very good, downey jr was his usual likable self, cheadle was an improvement on howard, paltrow was ok again, sam jackson was his cool self, johanssen, well she was almost bearable. Sam rockwell was fantastic, and mickey rourke was pretty decent. (And john slattery played tony stark's father quite well, in video footage). Going in I was concerned about too many characters to do them all justice, but I think they juggled it well, but I think it helped that most of them are really good actors, so could portray so much, with minimal scenes/info. Only really Jackson and Johanssen weren't fully developed, but that is more to do with them being part of a mysterious shield organisation and not to do with poor performance/lack of material, at least with jackson. Johanssen might be poor performance (though I did enjoy her when she was fighting)
It was quite bad. But not so bad that it was easy to make fun of, so we ended up not enjoying it very much. Performances weren't very good, sam worthington's accent was inconsistent, it was hard to follow who was who at times, we're pretty sure someone dies and is then seen in another shot alive and well (as if they put the scene together in the wrong order). The story was an "epic" journey leading to a rather anti-climactic final battle, and barely even a confrontation. It was just not very good. On top of that, at several points we took our 3d glasses off and there was no difference. Occasionally there'd be something a little blurry in the scene - columns or candles or something in the background, but it was never intended to be 3d and making it 3d added nothing to the film. They really need to save 3D for the films that are filmed with 3D in mind.
Nightmare on Elm Street
This was better than CotT, but still not very good. It just didn't seem to have any merit, no reason, it didn't really do anything to improve on the original (other than effects) it wasn't as scary, characters weren't as likable, the story was a retread, it just seemed to have no purpose.
Iron Man 2
Loved it! Really good, maybe not on a par with the first, but still very good, downey jr was his usual likable self, cheadle was an improvement on howard, paltrow was ok again, sam jackson was his cool self, johanssen, well she was almost bearable. Sam rockwell was fantastic, and mickey rourke was pretty decent. (And john slattery played tony stark's father quite well, in video footage). Going in I was concerned about too many characters to do them all justice, but I think they juggled it well, but I think it helped that most of them are really good actors, so could portray so much, with minimal scenes/info. Only really Jackson and Johanssen weren't fully developed, but that is more to do with them being part of a mysterious shield organisation and not to do with poor performance/lack of material, at least with jackson. Johanssen might be poor performance (though I did enjoy her when she was fighting)
