Todd Miller | Collegio Reporter

I had a completely different reaction to “Immortals” than I did to “Tower Heist” last week.
I expected this movie to be interesting and exciting, but instead I found myself completely bored, predicting the entire movie and generally wishing it would end so I could leave.
The movie starts in a bad place with the dreamed vision of the virgin oracle, Phaedra (Freida Pinto). The first scene is nearly an exact copy of a scene that happens about three-quarters of the way through, so we already know everything that happens up to an hour and a half through the movie. In the first five minutes. So the majority of the movie is exposition and filler until we get to that point. Sound like fun yet?
The main character is Theseus (Henry Cavill), a peasant (though this is never really shown other than people saying as much) trying to take care of his unma-ried mother. While growing up, Theseus received tutelage from an elderly man (John Hurt) that has made him a powerful fighter. I say “powerful fighter” because that’s what the plot says, but what it looks like is that he was an impossibly skilled fighter. Despite who his teacher turns out to be, I still don’t buy the amount of skill he seems to have acquired.
Anyway, Theseus seeks revenge on King Hyperion (Mickey Rourke) after he and his men attacked Theseus’ village in search of the Epirus Bow, a powerful, god-like weapon he wants to use to release the Titans and rain terror on the world in his name. Watch the first five minutes and tell me if he succeeds or not at that actual point in the plot.
The gods, based on the Greek gods, of course, don’t want the Titans (beings as powerful as they are) to be released. But Zeus (Luke Evans) demands that the gods not interfere in the affairs of mortals and should get involved only if the Titans are actually freed.
And that’s it. The plot is so simple and linear that there isn’t a whole lot more I can say about it.
The movie can’t seem to decide how violent it wants to be. Sometimes it has no qualms depicting bloody violence in the battles, but other times, violent acts are shown off-screen or in such a way that the audience can’t see. It just bounces between polite and terrible violence so much that I nearly got whiplash.
And I know filmmakers aren’t afraid to show violence, especially after watching “Conan” earlier this year, so I’m not sure what all the light-footedness is about.
Overall, I’d say “Immortals” deserves missing unless you like movies about muscular men running around, killing things.
One thing I’ll give “Immortals,” though, is that it isn’t “Jack and Jill.” I may not have liked it, but it meant I didn’t have to see THAT.
Oh, I almost forgot. “Immortals” has a lot of silly hats and those are worth seeing because they’re so ridiculous.