Release the expensive and unnecessary remakes!

Before ranting about the lack of creativity in Hollywood these days, I should probably point out that director Louis Leterrier's Clash of the Titans is a very entertaining and fantastic-looking film.

It's rather pointless and silly of course, because any movie featuring the mythological Greek gods is going to be hard to take seriously. That's not, however, an insult.

Clash is exactly what you would expect from a modern-day remake of a movie from the early 1980s. Everything is a little more serious, with the stop motion animation and bad, poofy haircuts replaced with heroic-looking characters fighting computer-animated beasts.

Several scenes look and feel like they're right out of a video game, but I guess that's just their way of reminding you that if you really enjoyed the picture you can buy the video game when it comes out this summer.

I'd be lying if I said that I didn't have a good time at Clash - it's a perfectly acceptable big-budget adventure and is much better than Leterrier's last film, 2008's mindless The Incredible Hulk with Edward Norton (not to be confused with Ang Lee's smart Hulk from 2003).

Although I assume that most audience members will get what they want - big, loud action scenes without a lot of exposition - I can't quite figure out why anyone wanted to make a pointless remake of Clash of the Titans.

There's nothing new here, either, as film producers have been digging movies from the 1970s and 1980s up and remaking them as fast as they can.

Within three months we will get new versions of A Nightmare on Elm Street, The A-Team and The Karate Kid, and while they might turn out to be perfectly good movies, I can't help but wonder: Why?

Why expend all the time, money and effort rehashing old movies when you could bring new, exciting stories to the screen. I know the answer is depressing: People are allegedly more likely to spend upwards of $10 a ticket on a title with name recognition than something they've never heard of, and they usually change enough plot elements so fans don't get a complete reprise of the original.

It always seems to lead, much like film versions of popular books, to discussions about why the new version is superior/inferior to the original/book.

People tell me "Well, the book was much better" so frequently that I honestly wonder if people only go to see film versions of books they like so they can talk about how the book was better.

With that said, I don't know that the Clash remake is better than the original. It's more serious and less goofy, but I think fans of the original enjoyed its goofiness. Younger audiences will probably prefer the new version, but I'm not sure they would have even heard of the original without the remake.

In a way, though, it's kind of sad to see so much talent wasted on this Clash. Liam Neeson, Ralph Fiennes, Sam Worthington and Gemma Arterton are all talented actors who have starred in much better - and more original - movies. I'm still holding out hope for better from Leterrier, who debuted with the fantastic film Unleashed (starring Jet Li and Bob Hoskins), but has yet to make another film even half that good.

So, I guess I recommend Clash of the Titans, if you're in the mood for a pointless, loud action movie you'll forget before the week ends. It's exactly what you would expect from the trailers and, well, the whole Kraken attack is pretty cool.

But at the same time, isn't there a movie you've been wanting to see that might contain a few surprises?

Clash of the Titans is rated PG-13 for fantasy action violence, some frightening images and brief sensuality. It is currently playing at the Regal Cinema 7 in Boone and the Parkway Theater in West Jefferson.