Clash of The Titans (2010) - Nostalgia Stuff

Nostalgia is a strange and powerful thing. Take the 1981 adventure epic Clash of the Titans, for example. For years it sat on the shelves, a film of interest only to A) those who'd seen it as children, B) those who want a really silly refresher course on Greek mythology, and C) hardcore movie nerds who worship at the altar of special effects legend Ray Harryhausen. Titans was neither reviled as insipid nor adored like a Jason and the Argonauts (deservedly) is -- but Clash of the Titans

But now that a remake has reared its snake-laden head, everyone is falling over themselves to mislabel Clash of the Titans as some sort of unheralded classic, which does a grave disservice to Louis Leterrier's remake -- a film that, on its own, is a perfectly mindless, bombastic, colorful, and enjoyable piece of matinee-style popcorn entertainment. Part of me wishes that WB had simply canned the remake idea and forged ahead on an "original" Greek mythology quest ... but this new-fangled Clash of the Titans will keep me suitably entertained until a true classic of "mythology cinema" makes its entrance.

The story is essentially hodge-podge of various Greek legends: the Medusa, the Kraken, the Pegasus, the Stygian Witches, and several very fancy gods flit through the proceedings, but the central focus is on a young fisherman known as Perseus. Through a series of events that don't seem to interest the movie all that much, Perseus is thrust into the role of noble hero, and his ultimate goal is to defeat the god Hades as revenge for the death of his family. Unfortunately, A) Hades is a god and is therefore unbeatable, and B) Perseus and his crew must contend with a half-dozen disparate creatures before figuring out how to put Hades down.

Enjoyably unladen with excess plot or overtly brainy ideas, the new Clash of the Titans wants little more than to dazzle your eyeballs for one lazy afternoon (and perhaps bring in a few 12-year-olds for repeat viewings), and by that measure the flick is a smooth success. Come to think of it, the new Clash would make for a perfectly entertaining double feature along with Neil Marshall's new Centurion epic. Titans is an unpretentious, non-ironic, and impressively fast-paced piece of big-budget escapism -- and even when the flick gets something wrong, it's moving too quickly for you to care all that much.

certainly had its place among the swords & sandals epics.

(One new touch I did appreciate is this: the screenwriters found an interesting way to make the gods' roles a bit more compelling. In the original Titans, humans were little more than playthings for the gods on Olympus. In the remake, the deities actually need the prayers of humanity to give them strength. The angle is neither new nor brilliant, but it adds a nice wrinkle to a dramatically lopsided relationship.)

Does the new Titans have a slightly bland lead actor? Yup. Does it have pacing issues in Act I and a small sense of confusion when it comes to keeping the peripheral characters involved? Indeed it does on both counts. Is the dialogue often pulpy and are the characters frequently a bit goofy? (Especially the Greek God characters?) Yes, yep, and absolutely on all counts.

But here's the thing: Aside from the HUGE difference between stop-motion Harryhausen magic and today's non-stop CGI explosions, there's nothing wrong with the new Clash of the Titans that wasn't wrong with the first one. (Laurence Olivier as Zeus is both as commanding and as silly as is Liam Neeson as Zeus.) Dare I posit that the new version may also inspire youths to cinematic geekdom the way the original did for my generation? Sure, why not? It's a fun flick, and fun is a valuable asset these days. And as wonderful as Harryhausen's old creations are, there's also a lot of artistry to be found in the remake's impressive CG effects.

Not nearly as serious as Braveheart or Troy; considerably less stylized than 300, and infinitely more amusing than the Mummy sequels, the new version of Clash of the Titans is a perfectly diverting piece of B-movie lunacy, complete with all the "shortcomings" you often find in films of this crowd-pleasing sub-genre -- and also boasting some rather kinetic action scenes, a few unexpected chuckles, several beautiful women, and tons of monsters that (fine) aren't as cool as Harryhausen's creations -- but are certainly nifty enough to warrant your 105 minutes, provided you like this sort of stuff. Like I clearly do.

Buffy versus Twilight : A Slayer, and a Vampire

Whether you are Team Edward or Team Jacob, Team Angel or Team Spike there is one thing that all of these fans have in common and that is passion, passion for the characters and stories that make up the two most popular contributions to the pop culture of vampires in the last 20 years. With that passion, as is often the case, comes debate and controversy.

In 2008, the film adaptation of Stephanie Meyer's book Twilight was released catapulting the series of books written by Stephanie Meyer off the charts. The Twilight craze had begun and fans all over the country devoured as much of the books, films, soundtracks and merchandise as possible. The series itself is four books, Twilight, New Moon, Eclipse, and Breaking Dawn.

There was another group of fans, a slightly older fan-base, that reacted with annoyance at the fans of the new craze claiming that this was nothing new, the storylines now famous bore a striking resemblance to the vampire culture that they had known and loved for 10-plus years, Buffy The Vampire Slayer. Buffy The Vampire Slayer, the TV series written by Joss Whedon, ran for seven seasons from 1997 through 2003. Gradually, the Buffy community began to grow ever more irritated at the attention being received by the Twilight series and the Twilight fans became equally as irritated claiming that the Twilight series was both different and superior to the Buffy series.

Twilight

While the Twilight craze was initiated by the release of the films, there was a large fan-base that was already in place; the books themselves had already generated a large following of devoted fans. I should warn the reader that I don't consider someone a Twilight fan if they haven't read the books, while the films are great; I am always biased towards the book in nearly every case. Whenever a book is adapted for film there is always so much material that is left out. The books chronicle the story of Bella Swan and her arrival in the town of Forks. She meets a young man named Edward who has a secret. The two of them fall in love and have to deal with the consequences related to friends, family, society and Edward's secret.

Buffy The Vampire Slayer

The Buffy The Vampire Slayer series chronicles the story of Buffy Summers, a girl with a secret, and her arrival in the town of Sunnydale. She meets a young man named Angel who has a secret. The two of them fall in love and have to deal with the consequences related to friends, destiny, fate and their respective secrets.

Stephanie Meyer maintains that she had never seen Buffy The Vampire Slayer prior to writing her series. The creation of the Twilight world began when she had a dream about the two main characters and a dialogue that they have, which sparked the novels, the world and pop culture. While there is no reason to disbelieve Stephanie Meyer, there are some significant similarities between the two series.

** Warning: The remainder of this article will cover content from both series that would be considered a spoiler if you have not read all of the Twilight Series or seen the entire Buffy The Vampire Slayer series.**

Buffy Summers and Bella Swan, both independent strong young women. Each of them are deposited into a new town and left to climb the mountain of integrating into a new school, making new friends and adjusting to life with a single parent.

• Buffy falls in love with a vampire named Angel, Bella falls in love with a Vampire named Edward.
• The Buffy series had a werewolf named Oz who was part of the main cast of characters. Jacob is the werewolf in the Twilight Series.
• Both of the female leads have a best friend (female) with supernatural powers.
• Both series have a supernatural governing body, which sets rules for the worlds that they live in and disapproves of the relationship between vampire and human.
• In each series there is a male vampire and his female companion who come to town to stir up trouble.
• The topic of forbidden love, betrayal, and heartbreak are prevalent in both.
• The best-guy friend of the female lead is a victim of unrequited love.

The list of similarities goes on for quite a while longer, however, the point has been made.

In spite of all of the similarities, there are many ways in which the two storylines deviate.

• Buffy has supernatural powers from the introduction of her character and struggles with a dual identity through the entire series. Her life is a constant struggle between fate, destiny and free will. Bella does not come into full realization of her supernatural abilities until near the end of the series. While her story does not deal with such ominous ideas like fate and destiny, hers is more of a story of love, romance and family.
• Buffy is never able to make her relationship with Angel work and while he will always be the love of her life, their relationship will never be fully realized. Bella and Edward at the end of the series find them selves in love, happy, with a daughter and an eternity laid out before them.
• Buffy on a nearly weekly basis finds herself in the midst of a battle in which the fate of the world rests in the balance. Bella may feel often times that the world is ending but in reality the scope of her actions does not extend too far outside of Forks.
• Buffy is a hero, with that comes struggle, resolve, failure and redemption. Bella is a teenager, relatable, fallible, and her character is developed intensely throughout the series.

In my mind, the verdict is simple, Twilight is not a remake, nor did Buffy The Vampire Slayer largely inspire it. While there may be some similarities in the details of the characters and plot elements that can easily be explained by the genre in which the stories where based. When you write stories about vampires in modern day times, when your lead is a teenage female, it should be expected that some of the same plot devices will be present in both. When analyzing the rites of passage and the inner workings of love in youth it is no wonder that the stories unfold in similar ways after all Buffy and Bella are both human.

The overarching storyline of Buffy The Vampire Slayer is that of a young woman who was destined by fate to be a hero. She struggles with the dual identity of being a normal girl who wants to fall in love and the Slayer who carries the responsibility of protecting the world from unimaginable evil. The Twilight series is a character study of a young teenager caught up in a star-crossed love affair. However, discounting either story because of its similarity to previous works sets a scary precedent for countless great works of fiction. Over and over again we see stories with storylines that closely mirror and are inspired by other works. Some of them have come to be milestones of popular culture. The Harry Potter series, the Inheritance series and even the Star Wars series are all rooted in literature that predates when it was written. It doesn't negate the value or the entertainment inherent in those works. We are all inspired daily by things that we see, read, and hear. Our lives are the sum of our experiences and as writers take experiences and use them to inspire their work it is still valuable, still entertaining and still honest.

Why must there be a choice? Why must you be on Team Buffy or Team Twilight? I for one am a huge fan of both series. I think they are fantastic stories full of elaborate characters, and deal with issues that are far reaching beyond the superficial layer of entertainment, that should be what you take away from either series. That is what has generated fans on both sides that share one thing in common, passion.

Bryan Curry is the writer/host/producer of the Hellmouth Podcast. The Hellmouth Podcast is a part of the Hellmouth Empire and is centered on the Buffy The Vampire Slayer series created by Joss Whedon. The Hellmouth Podcast blog is a companion to the podcast which is updated daily with news from the Whedonverse and articles written by Bryan and other members of the Hellmouth Crew.

Movie Theaters Asked to Offer Healthier Snacks

The nation's theater owners were asked today by the head of a major Hollywood studio to have healthier snacks at their concession stands in addition to their traditional offerings of candy, popcorn and soda.

In a speech at ShoWest, the nation's largest convention for the movie theater industry, Sony Pictures Entertainment Chairman and CEO Michael Lynton said, "adding healthier options to your existing menu is the right thing to do for our industry, for audiences and for our country."

Lynton said a poll of moviegoers commissioned by Sony Pictures revealed:

• two-thirds of moviegoers and three-quarters of parents are more likely to buy healthy snacks at theaters if they are offered;
• forty-two percent of parents said they would buy concessions more often if healthy options were available;
• sixty percent of parents said having healthier snacks in theaters would enhance their overall moviegoing experience;

Lynton said he was not asking theaters to stop selling popcorn, soda and candy. "Audiences love them," he said. "I'm just talking about adding some healthier items to what you already sell."

Lynton also announced that the Alliance for a Healthier Generation has offered to meet with the theater owners "and offer advice on how to change your menus in a way that makes sense for your audiences and your business."

"The private sector, including the theatre industry, has the ability to improve the access families have to healthier foods and beverages," said President Bill Clinton, founder of the William J. Clinton Foundation, who co-leads the Alliance for a Healthier Generation with Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger and American Heart Association President Clyde Yancy. "The Alliance brokered voluntary agreements with the beverage industry that resulted in an 88 percent decrease in beverage calories shipped to America's schools in just a few years. We are eager to work with the movie theater industry to craft similar agreements to provide healthy concession options in movie theaters."

"In order to turn the tide on the obesity epidemic we are going to need to make soup to nuts changes in the number of calories we take in and the calories we actively use. Because kids are eating and foraging at home, school, sporting events and at the movies, changes are needed everywhere," said Dr. Neal Halfon, professor of pediatrics, public health and public policy at UCLA and director of the UCLA Center for Healthier Children, Families and Communities. "We can't expect kids to make healthy choices if they aren't given healthy choices to make. And while this is a nationwide problem, and will require support from companies with a national stature like Sony Pictures and large theater chains, it will also depend on the ingenuity and commitment of local theater operators to make the difference in their communities."

In a videotaped message to the convention, Dr. Mehmet Oz, vice chair and professor of surgery at Columbia University and host of "The Dr. Oz Show," said, "Everyone enjoys popcorn and a soda at the movies, but there are healthier alternatives. Good nutrition doesn't mean eating spinach at every meal. But with so many children and teens going to movies so often these days, I think we've got to be mindful about what they're eating and drinking, and giving them the chance to choose healthier food makes a lot of sense."

Lynton said theater owners should consider taking this step because childhood obesity is an epidemic, it's the responsible thing to do for audiences and society, and it's good for their business because it would help families enjoy theaters even more and, by giving them healthier options, more snacks will be purchased.

Regarding what kinds of snacks might be offered at theaters, Lynton said, "I don't think giant tubs of spinach or broccoli's a good idea. And nobody wants to eat cauliflower while watching Spider-Man, or drink a 40-ounce cup of prune juice."

He said moviegoers suggested to the studio's interviewers the kind of snacks they'd like to see:

fresh fruit, fruit cups, apples with dip;
veggies with dip;
yogurt;
granola bars and trail mix;
baked chips, apples chips and unbuttered, air-popped popcorn.

Lynton said some people sneak healthy snacks into movie theaters, like a granola bar or a box of raisins, which represents an untapped market for concession stands. "People are consuming food differently these days. In fact, many of your theaters are located near Starbucks and Whole Foods and in malls and other places where consumers are now finding more nutritious food and beverage options. Audiences would love both a great theatrical experience and terrific snacks."

Lynton said employees at Sony Pictures are offered a subsidized healthy lunch special and expanded salad bar at the studio commissary. He noted some theaters are moving in the direction of offering healthier foods; some use canola oil instead of coconut oil for their popcorn. He also said he understands that some things "will prove to be logistically or economically impossible…But even small steps in the right direction can have a big impact."