Immortals Released 11 November 2011 Director Tarsem Singh Starring Micky Rourke, John Hurt, Kellan Lutz, Henry Cavill, Freida Pinto, Luke Evans, Isabel Lucas, Stephen Dorff Writer(s) Charley Parlapanides, Vlas Parlapanides Producer(s) Mark Canton, Gianni Nunnari, Ryan Kavanaugh Origin United States Running Time 105 minutes Genre Action, drama, fantasy Rating 15A

60

Un-pec-tacular.

In some respects Immortals is not a film to like but to admire. Not a full-blown, knock-you-off-your-feet kind of admiration you understand-more a feeble, tentative approval of the way in which a picture can wholly transport you to a diametrically opposed time and place. Greek myth with its convoluted and heady tales of familial betrayal, love and vengeance is fertile ground for any imaginative filmmaker with a blockbuster budget. Delving straight into the creation myths is Immortals director Tarsem Singh who gives rein to his inner history geek to bring one of the most enduring tales to the big screen.

Aeons ago the race of Titans-primordial and powerful deities-were defeated by their bitter rivals the Olympian Gods. Embittered and banished to Tartarus, the glowering gods impatiently await the one who will set them free with a well aimed arrow from the legendary Epirus Bow. Seeking to unleash them and usher in a new era of doom is megalomaniac King Hyperion (Mickey Rourke) whose depravity and hatred of his fellow man knows no bounds. And yet mankind has one shining hope in the form of a muscled and spear-friendly peasant called Theseus (Henry Cavill) who was earmarked at birth by Zeus (Luke Evans) as the future saviour of the Hellenes.

Billed as the next 300, Immortals was always going to have a hard time wriggling out from under that mantle. The similarities with the hugely successful 2006 fantasy action flick are immediately obvious-the strikingly rich colour palette and propensity of the actors to glare menacingly into the (CGI) distance are all there-and yet it seems that as we wait for Immortals to establish itself, to lay down the tracks of its own story, it dithers and hobbles along, afraid to establish its own identity away from the 300 fold. It is not by any means a particularly bad movie in fact there are a plethora of positives-Henry Cavill is really rather good as the woebegone hero who must rally his spirits against the havoc wreaked by Hyperion. Yet accomplished as he is at spewing out atypical Hollywood battle cries, Cavill doesn't quite have the profile just yet to carry this movie to the top of the box office charts. It helps of course to have established veterans like O'Rourke, who is truly sinister as the avenging king, and John Hurt as a wise 'old man', to offset any fumblings of the relative newcomers but ultimately this is not enough. Where Immortals falls down is that in effect, the story of good versus evil has been done to death. We know how the story is going to pan out but what we are really looking for is a new, fresh take on the genre. The very idea that the good side are the beautiful, ethereal ab-tastic people while the bad are typically the scarred, greasy-haired monsters is more than a little too simplistic at this stage in the movie business.

It probably isn't too much of a stretch to say that Singh had a ball making this movie. The effects incorporated into the action are oftentimes breathtaking-the precipitous dwellings are so starkly outlined that it gives us an engaging and tremulous visual metaphor for the mortal danger that mankind face. Yet it is a sad fact that in the wake of CGI trailblazers like Avatar and its ilk new ground has been forged and the viewing public are no longer satisfied by just a smattering of well manipulated effects. We want more.

- Louisa McElwee