When you talk about the rating for Clash of the Titans, you have to specify which era you're actually referring to. Are we looking at the 1981 Ray Harryhausen classic with its jerky, charming stop-motion Medusa? Or are we talking about the 2010 Sam Worthington vehicle that basically spearheaded the "converted 3D" craze that everyone eventually grew to hate? It’s a mess. Honestly, the way people rate these movies says more about the state of Hollywood at the time than it does about Greek mythology.
Both films are weirdly divisive. The original is a nostalgic powerhouse, yet modern critics often find it slow. The remake was a massive financial hit that seemingly everyone spent the next decade complaining about. If you're looking for a simple "good" or "bad" label, you aren't going to find it.
The 2010 Remake: Numbers vs. Reality
Let's get into the weeds of the 2010 rating for Clash of the Titans. If you look at Rotten Tomatoes, you’ll see a dismal 27% "Rotten" score from critics. That is brutal. It’s the kind of score usually reserved for low-budget horror sequels or vanity projects. Yet, the audience score sits significantly higher, and more importantly, the movie raked in nearly $500 million globally.
Why the gap? Critics loathed the script. They hated the 3D conversion, which was famously rushed in about six weeks to capitalize on the Avatar hype. Roger Ebert, the legend himself, gave it a measly one star. He called it "an bloodless, mindless, soulless exhibition of 3D technology used as a gimmick." He wasn't alone. Most reviewers felt the movie was a "B-movie" trying to wear an "A-list" budget.
But here is the thing.
Audiences kind of loved the spectacle. If you were fifteen in 2010, seeing a massive Kraken rise out of the ocean while Liam Neeson screamed "Release the Kraken!" was peak cinema. It didn't matter if the character arcs were flatter than a pancake. It was loud. It was fast. It had monsters.
📖 Related: Big Brother 27 Morgan: What Really Happened Behind the Scenes
Breaking Down the PG-13 Label
The MPAA rating for Clash of the Titans (2010) is PG-13. This was a strategic move by Warner Bros. to ensure the widest possible audience. The film contains "intense sequences of fantasy action violence, frightening images and brief sensuality."
It’s a "hard" PG-13 in some spots. The scene with the Stygian Witches is legit creepy. The Medusa sequence, while heavily CGI-reliant, has a tension that pushes the boundaries of a family-friendly film. However, you won’t find much blood. Most of the "ichor" or monster fluids are gold or black, a classic trick to keep the rating low while keeping the body count high.
The 1981 Original: A Different Kind of Score
When people search for the rating for Clash of the Titans, they often stumble upon the 1981 version and are shocked by how well it holds up in the eyes of critics. It currently sits at a 66% on Rotten Tomatoes. Not a masterpiece, but a solid "Fresh."
This film was rated PG. Back then, PG was a broader catch-all. You had the mechanical owl, Bubo, which was clearly for the kids, but you also had some surprisingly "adult" moments. There is a brief scene of nudity involving Andromeda that would likely push it toward a PG-13 today.
The real rating here comes from the craftsmanship. Ray Harryhausen’s work is the soul of this movie. Modern audiences might find it "fake" looking, but film historians give it high marks for being the end of an era. It was the last major film to use stop-motion as its primary visual effect.
👉 See also: The Lil Wayne Tracklist for Tha Carter 3: What Most People Get Wrong
Critical Nuance: Then vs. Now
- Metacritic Scores: The 2010 version has a Metascore of 39. That indicates "generally unfavorable reviews."
- IMDb Trends: Both movies hover around a 5.8 to 6.9 out of 10. This suggests that while critics hate the remake, the general public finds both movies to be "average" Saturday afternoon entertainment.
- The 3D Factor: You cannot discuss the rating of the 2010 film without mentioning the "3D tax." Many people rated it lower specifically because they felt cheated by the blurry, dark visuals in theaters.
Why the Disconnect Exists
You've probably noticed that "action" movies get a raw deal from professional reviewers. The rating for Clash of the Titans suffered because it was released during a transition period in cinema. We were moving away from practical sets and toward "green screen" environments.
The 2010 film felt hollow to many because it lacked the "weight" of the 1981 version. In 1981, when Perseus fights the giant scorpions, there is a physical object on the screen. In 2010, it's all pixels. Critics are sensitive to that. They value the "art" over the "thrill."
On the flip side, a younger viewer might find the 1981 rating for Clash of the Titans misleading. They see a "good" rating, turn it on, and get bored by the twenty-minute dialogue scenes about Pegasus. It’s a matter of perspective.
The Sequel's Impact
Interestingly, the sequel, Wrath of the Titans, managed to perform even worse with critics (26%), which retroactively made some people appreciate the first remake more. It’s a strange phenomenon where a bad sequel can actually "bump up" the perceived quality of its predecessor.
Factual Context and Parental Guidance
If you are looking at the rating for Clash of the Titans to decide if your kids can watch it, here is the honest breakdown.
✨ Don't miss: Songs by Tyler Childers: What Most People Get Wrong
The 2010 version is noisy. There is a lot of screaming. The monsters are designed to be "edgy" and "gritty." If your child is sensitive to jump scares or "ugly" creatures (like the scorpions or the charred-looking Hades), maybe wait until they are 10 or 11.
The 1981 version is much more of a "fairy tale." It feels like a storybook coming to life. While Calibos is a bit scary, the tone is lighter. It’s a better choice for a younger audience, provided they have the patience for a movie made forty years ago.
Moving Beyond the Star Count
The rating for Clash of the Titans shouldn't be the final word on whether you watch it. Movies like this are "mood" films.
Do you want to see a peak-era Liam Neeson wearing shiny armor and chewing the scenery? Watch the 2010 version.
Do you want to see the pinnacle of 20th-century visual effects artistry? Watch the 1981 version.
Critics often miss the point of spectacle. They want Citizen Kane in every frame, but sometimes you just want to see a guy fly a horse and kill a giant snake-woman.
Actionable Takeaways for Movie Night
- Check the Platform: The 2010 version is often available on Max (formerly HBO Max), while the 1981 version pops up on Turner Classic Movies frequently.
- Skip the 3D: If you’re watching the 2010 version on Blu-ray or streaming, stick to 2D. The 3D was a post-production rush job and it ruins the lighting of the film.
- Double Feature: If you have the time, watch the first thirty minutes of the 1981 version followed by the 2010 version. It’s a fascinating look at how storytelling in Hollywood changed over three decades.
- Ignore the 27%: Don't let a low Rotten Tomatoes score scare you off if you just want a popcorn movie. It’s not "good" cinema, but it’s high-quality "distraction."
Basically, the rating for Clash of the Titans is a battle between technical appreciation and pure entertainment. You have to decide which side you're on before you hit play.
To get the most out of these films, prioritize the 1981 version for a rainy afternoon where you can appreciate the art, and save the 2010 version for a loud, late-night viewing when you don't want to think too hard. If you're interested in more mythology-based cinema, look into the production history of Jason and the Argonauts next, as it set the standard that both Clash films tried to follow.