"Release the Kraken"

I know this happened over the summer,† but guys – we need to talk. And you know why.

(*ahrm*, cause of Liam Neeson)

Not content with mere oceanic wizardry, Liam Neeson assumed the mantle of the All-Father this past summer. (i'm not mixing mythological world-views here, either – they made that Greek pantheon ridiculously Nordic – but we'll get to that).

I'm trying to figure the movie out. Yes, STILL trying to figure it out. Not in a qualitative way, so much as an ontologically. I have no idea what the movie was trying to do. I mean yes, in the most obvious way – it was trying to dig up the old, amazing Clash of the Titans, take it out for a spin, dust off those money-makers, let them shine a little bit; throw in some 300-stabbing, punch of the action with a little tres-d. A little weekend fun, shall we say. Not a crime.††

That's all very clear, all very whatever – summer action movie, nostalgia banking / generational tribute, etc etc. But what about all the other stuff? Let's start with the genies:


The Genies

(1) Where the hell did these guys come from??

(2) In the credits, they're not listed as genies; not the main one at least. He's credited as Suleiman. We will ignore how Suleiman was the opposite of a genie; instead let's consider that they're not going into nearly enough detail about this Greco-Genie war one of the Greek soldiers alludes to, and also that Suleiman blows himself up to destroy the Medusa.

If what they're doing with genies is not the most heavy-handed-but-opaque (impasto, digamos) reference to American engagement in Iraq and Afghanistan, I don't know what is. But what are they doing with it?? I have no idea. It's just there. It screams WAR, then it blows itself up, and then you're like, "Wait, did that guy just... blow himself up...?"

See, 'cause it's really confusing. I'm not entirely sure he blew himself up. Wasn't he being turned to stone? Maybe when you're a genie, getting turned to stone makes you blow up? Because you're made out of trees? From the desert? Where all the trees are? Wait, was he being turned to stone? Didn't they just refer to the fact that's he's genderless in the previous scene? Should he even be allowed in there, cause of the curse or whatever?

At least this allows us to return from "undecodable reference to war" to "bad writing," which is easier to cope with – Summer Action Movie. Now we can take that folder out of the cold case file and stamp it: SOLVED. Oh, but this brings us to:


The Pantheon

This is what I mean when I say they've Nordified the Greco-Roman pantheon: The movie is about Ragnarok, and Christianization.

(1) Ragnarok
What are they doing with Hades?? I don't think they even mention him in the first movie, and now he's the guy in charge of the Kraken? Liam Neeson turns around, all deific, ordering the release of the Kraken in the bossest possible way, and he's talking to this crumbly, Iago-Hades? Poseidon's getting totally robbed, I'm not down with that. And this wacko sibling rivalry? The worst Hades ever did was kidnap Persephone, as far as I'm aware. None of this paradigm-shifting chthonic uprising. What is that? They're mapping Loki onto Hades, with his unbinding and assault on Asgard-Olympus. It's ridiculous.

Let's also remember that Liam Neeson is a wizard, so really they're casting him as Odin. In this context a proper and perfectly logical decision.

Now; before I move on. I'm sure some people would prefer to go straight to the monotheistic interpretation – Armageddon, the battle of Heaven and Hell – but trust me, follow the Nordic thread a little bit:

(2) Christianization
Every time you read about Norse myth and folklore, you get people talking about Christianization. Questions of when the sagas were written, by whom, to what end, etc. – like with Beowulf. From my understanding, Christianity pokes the stuff in the tail the whole time, because most of the literature is post-Christian era, and then you get to hear all about Ragnarok, the death of the gods, and humanity's (presumably Christian) persistence.

Oddly enough, the recent Clash of the Titans paints a similar picture to the one above,‡ except instead of describing the triumph of Christianity over the Pagan North it's anarchically Atheist.

I mean, it's not that odd, that's my whole point. What's odd is that it does it. And again, as with WAR, what is it saying about RELIGION?

"RELIGIOOOON!" the movie shouts, imitating Mel Gibson in impassioned exclamation.

It says nothing. Actually, scratch that‡‡ – it at least says more than it does about WAR. What it does say, incessantly, through its bratty Perseus and his whiny "I hate the [G]ods! blah blah," is that he renounces his faith and will live on without it, how about them apples. And then Liam Neeson, in a highly unwizardly act, does not lock him in his secret laboratory to swim around with the weird flesh-devouring tadpoles, but instead gives him a flying black hot-rod and an immortal girlfriend,

Even though he's just renounced this funky pseudo-Christian Greco-Nordic pantheon in favor of Atheism, thus condemning your crazy Christian parallel universe faith to the same fate as its polytheistic forbears!

...
"I think that's a really good point."


Why thank you total stranger, I agree with me, too.




†That said, it does take a long time for news waves to reach the ocean deep, where I live. It's not like outer space – there's all these molecules up in here causing interference.

††Not like what we do to these poor Scandinavian movies. (1a, 1b), (2a, 2b). I'm not even criticizing the caliber of the American versions, (not at the moment), it's just that there's a rankling quality to something so unnecessary. Two years? Five years? After thirty years – then – I'd say a remake is permissible. That is, in principle; I'd still say it's rarely legitimately warranted.

‡Yes, in all its confused, unfounded, 8th-grade essay glory. In just that way. But also in what it's saying.

‡‡A~nd done.