Some films really are critic-proof. It’s doubtful any of those who are planning to see this movie will read any reviews before doing so, but if they did it might change their minds ever-so-slightly:
The Washington Post:
“Clash of the Titans” is the latest example of Hollywood’s belief that any terrible script can be made palatable if you just throw enough money and British accents at it.
Director Louis Leterrier wants his movie to be a serious action-adventure, an epic with mythic resonance; if he didn’t, he wouldn’t have cribbed so much from “The Lord of the Rings” movies. But in striving for a combination of grit and grandeur, Leterrier misses a chance to make the kind of camp classic that could have endured for generations. Instead, it’s a muddled disappointment.
On the other hand, all is not lost. A few critics have said it isn’t half-bad. Roger Ebert, for instance:
The outcome is told in “Clash of the Titans” with impressive technical mastery and somewhat lesser dramatic command. For its intended audience, I suspect this will play as a great entertainment. I enjoyed myself, particularly after they released the Kraken. There’s no particular dramatic conflict in the movie; Perseus has to wrestle with his demi-god ambiguity; Hades (Ralph Fiennes) nurses a resentment against Zeus; he demands the sacrifice of King Acrisius’ daughter Andromeda (Alexa Davalos) to spare the city, and the citizens seem prepared to get along very nicely without her. That’s about it.