Review: Clash of the Titans

Thanks for checking out our Clash of the Titans review.

Genre: Fantasy Adventure
Directed by: Louis Leterrier
Staring: Sam Worthington, Liam Neeson, Ralph Fiennes, Gemma Arterton, Alexa Davalos
Released: April 2nd 2010


Perseus (Sam Worthington) raised as a fisherman, but is actually a demi-god – the son of Zeus (Liam Neeson) and is about to take on the gods after the death of his family. It is revealed that it is Perseus’ destiny to rescue the city of Argos from the ruthless rage of Hades and his Kraken monster. With nothing to lose, Perseus leads a band of soldiers on a quest to defeat the Kraken.

Though strongly inspired by Greek Myth, this is NOT word for word adaptation of the lore.


The whole feel of the movie gives a more gritty reality to this world of utter fantasy. Where the Gods are real and people are only partly surprised to see them appear, this film has a LOT of depth to its world. Fantasy is commonplace and it shows.

Gemma Arterton is not just beautiful, she is angelic. To have her play the mysterious Io was a perfect match. And when the Argos queen brags of her daughter’s beauty, Alexa Davalos plays a fitting Andromeda. Liam Neeson is vulnerable and stern, an inspired quality to play the King of Gods commonly criticized for loving his creation too much.

The action was great, paces well, and the visuals rock. Every bit the action adventure we needed for a Clash of the Titans remake.

And the MUSIC was a great relief. Not one chord of that misplaced heavy metal power rock played in the trailer was found in the soundtrack. The movie was appropriately scored with dramatic orchestrated score that fit the setting.


There were a few brief moments in the movie that pulled me out of the fantasy, and as much as it pains me to say it the clockwork owl Bubo from the first film makes a cameo and its very much out of place and takes away from the scene. If he was just sitting on a shelf in the background it would have been better, but they pay him attention and its distracting. Also, in an inspiring speech before entering Medusa’s lair, Perseus ends by saying “Don’t look that Bitch in the eye”…. arg. Really? He woudln’t have talked like that. Distracting.

Sam Worthington was painfully average in this. He wasn’t the grand hero. He wasn’t inspiring at all. Fortunately he was surrounded by others far more interesting.

And the Gods, while amazingly portrayed in their celestial court looking down on mankind were reduced to Zeus and Hades talking with a bunch of others just standing around. I would have liked to have seen more interaction than just a few nods and noncommittal statements.


It was a fun action film with adventure and fantasy with some good light comic relief and a worthy remake. There were a few choices made that stumbled the film, and I would have liked a more inspiring star to lead the fight.

I give Clash of the Titans a 7 out of 10

Comment with Facebook

68 thoughts on “Review: Clash of the Titans

  1. i didn’t go to the movies to see this cause i knew i would get upset. at least the one from the 80’s stayed on the topic of the gods and what was done to them. i was trying to explain the movie to my stepdaughter who is 14 and it was very hard. i gave up and i just put in the one from the 80’s and she clearly understood it. all and all the new one was good, it just swayed off topic.

  2. I find myself liking this movie quite a lot. Enough to see it more than once, in fact. I will also say that I haven’t seen the original, so any sort of “nudge/wink” moments-a la the owl-were completly lost on me. But basically, I’m here to voice my wholehearted agreement with your review.
    The visuals were stunning. I love big sweeping shots and epic scenery, both to be found in several instances. I found myself mentally going “ooooo…” at a big landscape shot with leeeeetle men trudging along in the foreground.
    Action is plentiful once the film gathers itself. Some people have made much ado of the “shakey cam” aspect of some of the action scenes. Personally, I’m not distracted. It sort of adds a touch of realism for me. The CGI aspect-Medusa, Kraken. I’m not sure the technology exists to make something like Medusa look 100% real. I was impressed with her half human/half snake design, and with the fact that they gave her some weaponry instead of just having her sneaking up on people and turning them to stone. (And those swallowtail broadheads she was shooting! Ouch!)
    The casting was quite good. I liked Liam Neeson as Zeus, shiny disco ball armor and all. Gemma was very lovely as Io, ditto for Alexa as Andromeda. But the real highlight of my (repeated) viewings? Mads Mikkelsen’s character Draco. In my opinion, he completly blew Sam’s Perseus out of the water. Compelling and charasmatic. And on a completly shallow note, a lovely gravelly growl of a voice.
    What didn’t I like? Some of the dialouge was just…wrong. “Don’t look this bitch in the eye.” springs instantly to mind. I may have actually cringed when that was uttered. Another one that kind of hurt was at the dock on the RIver Styx. Someone remarks that Charon only ferries the dead across. An older warrior named Solon immediatly draws his sword and asks “Any volunteers?”. I respect that they were trying to be funny, and it was even in character for the guy (so I can forgive it a little) but really….that almost sounds like something from a Scooby Doo story.
    I *know* there must have been more to this movie than what ended up in theaters. Surely the powers that be didn’t gather such a stunning collection of Olympians just so they could sit/stand around and look pretty? I’d have very much liked to have seen more of them.
    My biggest complaint, however, is Sam Worthington. I’ve not seen Avatar, nor his Terminator movie. After this, I’m not really sure I want to. I feel no pull towards him at all. For me, he is neither inspiring nor interesting. He’s sort of…average. Leaning a little towards dull. But as I’ve said, I haven’t seen him in any other work, so I can’t judge if its his fault or if he’s done better under different direction.
    And a final note on 2D vs 3D. If I want to see it on a large screen with proper surround sound (which is a must with such a magnificent soundtrack) I have to see it in 3D. I rather wish I didn’t. I have to wear the 3D glasses over my reagular ones, and it gets pretty annoying after a while.
    Overall, I’m saying eight of ten. And I’m going back tomorrow night. Matinee price and free popcorn!

  3. What was most wrong for me was taking out the romantic angle of Perseus and Andromeda…HELLO?? Thats the whole reason they both have constellations named after them!! In the original we understood Perseus’s motive on defeating the Kraken because he cared for and wanted to save Andromeda. Now its some revenge against Hades??
    The new one has some new love interest which isn’t even in the Perseus mytho. IO was part of Argos but nowhere does she appear in the Perseus Story.
    Perseus pretty much rocked shit by himself, looks as if they added some of the Jason and The Argonauts story to Clash to add more characters.

    1. There were no constellations named after them in this movie.

      This is NOT Greek Myth, but rather a new story inspired by the characters of myth. If I wanted to see the original Clash of the Titans again, I would just play it in my DVD player at home. They changed things to make it fresh and new.

      And the first Clash didn’t stick to Greek mythology by the book either… why should this?

      1. The Myth is directly related to our hero’s motives. Storytelling 101.
        In the myth and the original Perseus tries to rescue Andromeda because he loves her not as some plot stray about revenge on Hades. I not asking for an actual retelling of greek mythology whic itself has many different versions. I just think this particular plot point was pretty weak as far motives for our hero compared to the original story and movie.
        That like telling the story of Anthony and Cleopatra and taking out the love story.
        But I guess I’m criticing storylines in a movie that for some reason Gods need to wear Arthurian shiny armor whilst standing around Mount Olympus.

      2. Again you are applying a quality found in the myths and complaining that this movie lacks it.

        He has motivation, but for once its not over some unrealistic “love” he could have for someone he met for moments. I find his motivation much stronger this way than trying to force myself to believe he would risk battling an immortal god and the only creature they fear because some pretty girl smiled at him.

        This is not the myth, this is a completely different story with similar characters as the backdrop.

        Your complaint is that the story is “wrong” because its not the story you wanted instead of looking at the story there IS in the movie and accepting that. Would the movie have been better if his name was not Perseus?

        And that the gods adorn themselves with armour might just be a fashion statement. Why does a king wear a crown? Status. It serves no other fucntionality.

      3. While I see your point Rodney the original at least sets up their love and does so with creativity. I wasnt looking for a retelling of the actual story myself but there was no reason to greatly deviate from the path. Dont take this the wrong way but I dont understand why you keep on defending this shitty movie. If Hollywood was going to take a classic movie that you really liked and then screw it up, how would you feel? Not happy Im sure. I just think that there should be a level of respect when remaking certain movies such as this one. Im not saying they didn’t respect the original at all but not fully. As for the armor, I actually thought that was cool looking.

      4. I am not defending a shitty film. I am addressing why you seem to think its shitty.

        Its like calling pasta shitty because it doesnt taste like ice cream. You dont like it becuase its not what you wanted. Thats fine. But lets look at what they ACTUALLY did with it (create a new story with new motivations and still pay tribute to the myths that inspired it as well as the original film) and you have a half decent film.

        I didn’t give it a 10 out of 10, but it was a good entertaining action flick with some good effects and decent story. Thats what it was trying to be and did a pretty good job doing it.

        If they were trying to word for word play out the myths? It failed. But it wasn’t. If it was word for word trying to play out the original story, then it failed. But it wasn’t.

        You are applying standards to this film that the film was not aspiring to do.

      5. Youve made a good point. I just had anticipated something different, or updated is more the term, than what was delivered. I was entertained by the action I’ll definitely give credit there. Thanks for your immediate feedback. I think thats important when running a movie blog, or any blog for that matter, and thats what I do with mine. My goal is have something like this site. Nice work!

  4. So, I saw Clash of the Titans and I wasn’t impressed at all. Even with all the CGI and 3D-ness these things couldn’t cover up the fact that the movie wasn’t too interesting. Yes, the CGI was very cool but it was a waste to see it in 3D because the quality was not like Avatar. Please understand I’m coming from a different point of view than most people. My father introduced me to the original and it’s a movie that I’ve always been fond of. I am also a huge fan of Greek mythology who always found this story to be particularly interesting. This new version was barely like the original version or the myth itself, which frustrated me to no end. If you have never seen the original and know nothing about the story then you should see it. You may like it. However, if you’re like me I suggest not seeing it because it’ll piss you off. I just don’t understand Hollywood. All they had to do was remake a classic cult movie with up-to-date special effects and everything would have been fine. Instead the writers and director changed certain plotlines and created their own version which completely lacked substance thus ruining the story. What I really didn’t like was that Perseus renounced his divine heritage for half the movie in order to achieve his mission as “a man”. You’re a demi-god moron therefore you can’t fight the inevitable. Plus that’s not even in the myth or the orignal film. By incorporating this it really took away my interest. Furthermore, I felt that Sam Worthington’s performance fell flat. There was no sense of life to his character. He didn’t seem like a man who wanted to prove his self worth like the myth clearly illustrates. Instead, he was just another man hell bent on revenge. How many times have we seen that? Fuck this movie. I’m so angry that these Hollywood shitheads continually screw up classics.

    1. You do realize this is a REMAKE and therefore doesn’t have to fit with the original film exactly. Change is fine. There is no rule that says they have to remake the film and do everything exactly the same.

      And this is INSPIRED BY Greek Myth. Even the original shit all over the Greek mythology. So why should this suddenly be a movie about a proper portrayal of the Greek Myths.

      You are cursing the film for being something it never was in the first place.

      1. Yes I know this was a remake and yes I know the original is not like the myth. Ive read Edith Hamilton’s “Mythology” several times among other myth books. I just felt that it wasn’t necessary to create this new version in their own image. The original had better character development unlike this one. Like I said in my post I’m coming from a different perspective because I’ve been reading these myths for so long. I felt the same way when I saw Troy. It would just be nice for their to be an accurate portrayal of these types of stories. They’ve only been told for past 2-3000 years so respect is due. Furthermore, what T-Vo wrote is correct to a point. In the myth Perseus only meets Andromeda on the way back from his mission, but he still falls in love with her. In the original he takes up the mission to save her because he loves her. If the characters were to “fall in love” at the end of the film then ok I would be fine with that. However, he goes off with Io, who, like T-Vo wrote, isn’t even in the myth. Her only relation to the film/myth was that she was a priestess in the city of Argos. Her story deals with Hera, Zues, Argus, and Hermes. Poor writing and planning.

  5. The effects and some action sequences were great (the final scene being extremely disappointing, especially since we never did get a full clear shot of the Kraken). But there were too many times when it was SO dramatic, and others where it was just so cheesy. This was one film that showed how hard it is to be clever and witty without coming across campy. It’s like they couldn’t decide if they wanted to be an action movie or a goofy popcorn-fantasy flick. So it failed at both. I’m with Rodney – while not directly comparing it to the original, I was definitely anticipating it based on my enjoyment of the first and hoping it would be the new definitive version. And it also showed that when you make a movie 3-D instead of making a 3-D movie, it’s frivolous and distracting. The quick-action fight scenes became dizzying to the point where you couldn’t sort out what was going on until everything stopped moving and you saw who had won the fight. Scenes need to be thought out ahead of time to benefit from the 3-D – it’s not just something to be added later to try to make things more exciting. And while the numbers show box-office records, don’t mistake that for a successful film – it’s safe to assume that people didn’t realize how the film was going to play out until after the credits were rolling. I would be amazed to see repeat business or a good 2nd weekend or little more than minimal DVD sales based on the buzz from those that ended up seeing it.

  6. I just saw the movie yesterday. I agree with what many people are saying. The special effects were an upgrade (to the original movie) but as far as the “body” or “content” I was not impressed. As a fan of the original movie, it was a bit of a disappointment. Not much dialogue from the characters in the story. I can remember being on the edge of my seat at the original movie. This one (and I’m very open-minded mind you) I just sat back and tried to find something to be impressed with but couldn’t). Now, the young lady (Gemma Arterton) was amazing…….just absolutely stunningly beautiful. Someone else suggested she be cast as Wonder Woman. I wholeheartedly agree! I think I fell in love.

    Great special effects upgrade……..disappointment in the body of the work. I give it 5 out of 10 stars, and 3D is a waste of your money. Go 2D instead.

  7. Great Review Rodney, and I just want to say thanks for keeping the site going all this time. I was an avid fan during the Campea/Nagy days and had starting moving over to /film, while still checking in over here, and you do a great job in keeping continuity and having some great angles on stories and opinions.

    As for Clash, I also had great anticipation for this film being a huge fan of the original. I thought it was a fun film with some great mythos behind it. They could have done a much better job if they sat down and really crafted a good story though. It seems like they built the movie around set pieces and action sequences and just filled in the gaps on the fly. That coupled with the lack of charm from the first one makes it an inferior film to the original (rare, huh?) but still a fun experience and a sllight improvement in certain scenes/ideas (see Kraken and Pegasus).

    As for 3D, completely unneccessary and obviously added after the fact. I LOVED Avatar in 3D, this usage of the technology was aweful and could have ruined the film for me.

    Anyway, I liked the film, but it could have been much better. I give it a 5.5/10.

  8. This movie is such a great movie. I really like the actors that star in this movie. The picture looks so much better when you see it in 3D. This movie should win an Oscar award. There was so much action in the movie that made this movie turn out to be so great. Liam Neeson was such a good actor in the movie. I like a lot of the movies that he stars in, especially this one. He shows many of his talents in this movie. The music really made this movie a great and fantastic movie to watch. This movie was made with a lot of adventure. Movies like this with a lot of adventure is so great and interesting to watch. In this movie, at some points during it, it is hard to tell what will happen next. The characters really made this movie so great to watch.

      1. I would have phrased that, “I always thought the Razzie should have been a category of the Academy Awards!”

        I’m actually looking forward to watching this *because* I don’t expect it to be anything epicly awesome… there’s something to be had with a popcorn flick that’s not so bad or distracting that it makes me realize I’m actually watching a movie half-way through it…

  9. I thought the movie was awsome…until the speech at Medusa. From then on, it was down hill…hell, the movie felt epic up until that point. It quickly unravelled and ended abruptly. Sure, time was ticking, but they could have molded it a bit better.

    As for Sam Worthington, there was nothing special about his performance, but nothing game breaking either. Io was amazing.

  10. Good, not great. It wasn’t painfully average and was a little better than I expected it to be. Man this was a quick movie!

    6.5. Good popcorn flick, nothing else. Oh and worthington, yeah he was a little better than average, and Neeson was good in a part that EASILY could’ve been a flat character if played by anyone else.

  11. I saw it in 3d. Unfort I was in the very back and in the corner. And to me it didn’t pop like Avatar did. In my opinion see it in 2d as it was intended, but because of Avatar sussess, they swiched it to 3d. For me, don’t waist your money.

    1. You are free to like and dislike any film you want. Film is subjective.

      But to say its one of the worst movies that you have ever seen just illustrates how few films you have seen.

      There is a LOT more that is far worse than this out there.

  12. I hated it. Horrible, horrible film.

    Agreed, it wasn’t meant to be a strict adaptation of Greek Mythology, but I friggin’ love the old myths and to me, this was sacrilege, no pun intended.

    Sam Worthington sucked big time. I was hoping he’d be great.

    And yeah, don’t watch it in 3-D. It’s way better in 2-D, the 3-D in this film is just painful.

  13. 1) Should movies be reviewed from a CRITIC POV or from a TARGET AUDIENCE POV? Because this movie was made for teenage boys and people craving for popcorn fun, it wasnt trying to win an Oscar.

    My point is, is it fair to review… say “Bob The Builder: The Movie” as strictly as Titanic was reviewed?

    Clash of the Titans is NOT for everyone. So should it be reviewed harshly? It wasnt trying to be great, it was aimed at a certain audience.

    It was PERFECT for what it was trying to be (epic action movie) but as a movie overall i counted 17 flaws, major flaws. In fact I predict they will make about 20 parody videos of it “How Clash Of The Titans Should Have Ended”

    2) Worthington was NOT ok. He was fucking STALE.

    He is only convincing when he lets out a battle cry in the middle of an epic fight. Bu when he tries to have a civil conversation the scene turns to shit.

    3) How was the bitch line distracting? The way he said it was used back then, and even more so. He didnt say “yo” or “dude” he said something people said back then. You should keep in mind that theyre speaking english with Brit accents, not Greek. So the dialogue was adaped.


    1. I didn’t expect them to use Bubo, but I was hoping he would be an easter egg hidden in the film somewhere. As it was, they drew too much attention to him.

      The “bitch” line was distracting because they WOULDNT have used it back then. Bitch (derived from the old English Bicce or Old Norse bikkjuna – both meaning female dog) was not used as a derogatory phrase until the early 1400s illustrating contempt to women.

      In a fabled time set in ancient Greece predating the Roman Calandar, we can forgive them for using English for the sake of entertainment, but to make pop culture references is using something they DIDNT say back then, and is exactly the same as if he said “dude” with the same pop culture context.

      They didnt adapt the dialogue to be english, they added a pop culture reference for amusement, and it had the reverse effect on me.

      As for your initial rant, when I rate a film, I rate it for what it is trying to be. I dont give it a bad rating because I liked The Blind Side more, because its not trying to be The Blind Side.

      And I dont rate it for what I might presume is the target audience, but rather its target genre. Its a fantasy action adventure. It did all those things well, and I enjoyed it. So I rated it accordingly.

      1. When i said the POV rant, i wasnt talking about your review at all. I was talking about EVERY REVIEW IN MANKIND. I was trying to bring up a point. Should movies be reviewed from a critic or a target audience POV? I didnt mention your review when i asked this the first time.
        The only time i talked about your review was to disagree with the bitch thing and to agree with Sam Worthington sucking.

        When he said bitch he didnt say it in a ghetto bitch modern way, he said it in a “whore’ bitch manner, but it had to be PG-13. It wasnt like “dont look at that bitch-ass chick, yo”

        If you want me to talk about your overall review, ok:

        Great review, identical to mine… only that i gave it a higher score. And mentioned the flaws more, because they really bugged me

      2. He still used Bitch in a modern context, and that was distracting. If he said Dude, I would have the same complaint. He doesn’t have to use Bitch in a “ghetto” way to even be modern. Its still about 2000 years out of context from the use of the word.

        It wasn’t a translation to English, it was updated dialogue.

        And your rant whether it applied to my review or not, I still addressed. Everyone applies their own reference to a film when rating it. That’s what makes film so subjective. There is no “right” way to judge a film, but provided you use a consistent measuring stick and reference point then your reviews will be consistent.

        Like when people criticize me saying I rate one movie an 8 and another film of a completely different genre a 6 then try to compare the two. Which movie is better? Are you saying that movie is better than this one? No. Each movie is rated by its own standing, not in comparison to others.

      3. People have been saying bitch for 600 years and it is a pop culture reference?

        Even though they didnt use the word bitch, I am sure they had a word that translates to it. So if there was a word that meant malicious, unpleasant, selfish woman, why not just say bitch? Would it be better if he said lets get this malicious, unpleasant, selfish woman?

      4. That’s just it. While other slurs are directly translated this one isn’t. And the term while 600 years relevant, is still well outside the translated pre-roman calandar mythological world.

        And its not just the choice of words but it doesn’t fit his little inspirational speech that he gives just before it. He is all poetic and then delivers this attitude dripping line “don’t look the bitch in the eye” like he is going to deliver high fives all around before they rush the temple.

        The WAY he says it is precisely the context and tone of modern reference.

      5. Dude. it was a joke, get over it. If i would have told it to your face, you would have laughed.

        Maybe all reviews should state whether theyre being reviewed from a critic or a person who is part of the target audience… or someone that is biased. (NOTHING TO DO WITH YOUR REVIEW, its just that ive been reading the Rotten Tomatoes reviews)

      6. Would it really have been too much trouble for the filmmakers to change a b to a w? Let’s see:

        “Don’t look that bitch in the eye!”

        “Don’t look that witch in the eye!”

        Hmmm…yes. ’tis a big improvement, is it not?

      7. We have been using the word bitch for 100s of years. Probably longer than other words used in the movie, with no direct translation, that you wouldn’t even notice. Come to think of it, there is no such thing as direct translation. Its not like everyone sat down together and decided what words each language would use.

        Bitch seems like a misogynistic word to me. I cant think of a better time to use misogyny to express male dominance than when four men are going in to battle with a female.

      8. All reviews come from a critic’s POV. How would someone try to get outside their own POV and assume that of the “target audience,” whatever that might be? That’s just a ridiculous idea.

      9. I have reviewed a number of children’s movies before and had to review them from tha child’s point of view to find any merit. There was NOTHING in the Thomas the Tank Engine movie that appealed to me as an adult – but every kid in the theater with me was literally bouncing with excitement and enjoying it.

        You could review from a target audience POV, but it still is not that effective since you are now just guessing what they thought of it.

  14. so my question is this, is there any favortism in your rating. Every one else online seems to be hating on it a lot. Now i am a big fan of the original in all its glory lol so im pretty sure i will like this film a bunch. But all the critics are doing is bashing it. I dont mind favortism cause in this case i love it…but truely do you think some people like say myself would rate this a 8 or a 9? I DONT PLAN ON WATCHING IT IN 3D SO THATS NOT A PROBLEM

    either way a 7 gets my hopes up for sand n sandal ass kickery!

    1. I won’t lie. A lot of my anticipation was based entirely on nostalgia and a trailer.

      This remake certainly benefits from modern technology, and it delivers action and adventure just as well as the first one – if not more.

      There is no favourtism in my rating… there was favourtism in my anticipation.

    2. A lot of bad reviews I’ve read the person reviewing seemed to have watched the movie in 3D. I saw it in 3D and damn well wish I hadn’t. It ruined the enjoyment of the movie for me so much I took off my glasses at points where the 3D was so horrible I couldn’t even tell what the heck was going on. Go see it in 2D and you will have a different experience.

  15. I saw Clash of the Titans a few hours ago. I’d say 7 out 10 stars. Given more time for polishing , this movie might have been even better. Louie Letterier is ready for Avengers, I should say, judging from his work on this movie. No need for 3D for this film. 2D is already fine .

      1. The problem is he’s playing the same character he played in Avatar and Terminator. He has nothing new to show. Hell, sometimes he felt like it was hard for him to even smile

      2. Medusa is made from the bad computer animation, other effects are ok, they throw out cerberus too from originar, the guardian of medusa. The dialogue is painfully written, and plot is messed up, with no logic. If you ask me, the script is much better in original, the difference is, that this film has better effects then the original film and and that is all that is good, 4/10 from me.

      3. Couldn’t agree more with Medusa, she is painfully look to cg, just a glimpse and people recognise the artificial in this character. Even her face just so generic of cg character. That really dissapointed me, also no Cerberus? Come On! Overall, it’s an okay summer action flick.
        Gemma Arterton indeed is regal and mysterious looking, almost angelic infact. I’ll vote her to play Wonder Woman now.

      1. I’m a 2D fan myself, but there were a few scenes where I thought 3D would have been interesting.

        To wit:

        * The intro with the constellations and the heavens
        * Hades’ transformations
        * Krakken’s moving heads

        Still glad I went 2D. I agree with your review about 100% overall. Decent, but not memorable.

      1. Yeah, there is nothing like a shakey camera effect for 3D, talk about nauseating. Total waste. Go see it matinee… best bet. I guess me problem was that I didn’t care about any of the characters. Oooops.. someone died, oh well. I was disappointed in it because it didn’t reach my hopes at all. And yes, they did butcher the mythos, but that I could forgive somewhat as stories change throughout time.

Leave a Reply