Am I missing something?
OK, am I missing something here?
Jason returns to take back his kingdom from the man who murdered his
father, but he doesn't even know what that man (the current KING of the
land) looks like?
Jason rescues a man in the river, camps with him and his soldiers and
just starts babbling on about his plans to overthrow the kingdom.
Ummm...these are soldiers with their commander. How does he know
whether they're loyal to the king or not? Pretty big gamble.
Jason spends enough time in this land to build a ship and recruit a
crew but NEVER in that entire time does he put 2 and 2 together that
the guy he helped in the water is actually the guy he wants to
overthrow...he never discovers what the king LOOKS LIKE?
Jason sails with this crew, along with the king's son the prince, but
none of the crew mention to Jason that this guy is the prince???
Everyone, myself included, complains today about how so many of today's
blockbusters are all special effects and no plot. But it seems to me
that the exact same can be said about this movie as well.
I'm scratching my head over here....
osamjose watch Heart Of America movie
you made me get back my best movies.
rehabrian watch Bullitt movie
guruve watch Witness For The Prosecution movie
superb classical movie without graphics.
jundiaz2013 watch Little Miss Marker movie
hope this is a better version of the later one. the other is not so good .
hardey1 watch Entre Les Murs movie
hercules is a story of a half man, half god who was hated by his step mother, Here.
A fantasy world full of wonders
I have long had a soft spot for "Jason and the Argonauts", and Ray
Harryhausen's work in general, ever since I was taken, as a child, as
part of a friend's birthday treat, to see the film on a double bill
with "The Seventh Voyage of Sinbad". This would have been in the early
seventies, nearly a decade after it was first released in 1963, but in
those days children's films seemed to have a longer shelf-life than
they do today and it was quite common for cinemas to wheel out the
familiar old classics every school holiday. (My friend's birthday fell
in July, so his parties normally included a trip to the movies).
Jason is the son of the King of Thessaly who is overthrown and killed
by the usurper Pelias. (In the original Greek myth Jason's father is
called Aeson, but here he is named Aristo). The film tells the story of
how Jason voyages to the land of Colchis to find the fabled Golden
Fleece. In this quest he has the help of the greatest heroes of Greece,
referred to as the Argonauts after their ship the Argo. The film ends
rather abruptly after Jason, with the help of Medea, the beautiful
daughter of the King of Colchis, has succeeded in obtaining the Golden
Fleece; it does not deal with their return voyage to Greece or what
happened to them when they got there. (Read the myth if you want to
find out). It seems, in fact, as though Harryhausen may have been
planning a sequel which in the event was never made.
Epics telling tales from Classical antiquity were popular in the cinema
of the fifties and early sixties. Most of these, however, ("Spartacus",
"Cleopatra", "The Fall of the Roman Empire") were inspired by actual
historical events rather than by mythology, which would presumably have
required more sophisticated special effects. Special effects, however,
were Harryhausen's stock-in-trade, and "Jason and the Argonauts", like
his other films, is famous for the various monsters he manages to bring
It was, of course, these monsters which caught my eye when I first saw
the film. Tom Hanks famously said of it "Some people say "Casablanca"
or "Citizen Kane"...I say "Jason and the Argonauts" is the greatest
film ever made!", and on that summer afternoon nearly forty years ago I
would not have dissented from that opinion. Now our tastes and critical
judgements tend to change with the passage of the years, especially
between childhood and adulthood. I would not, for example, be quite as
ready today to rank among the deathless classics of English literature
either "Take Jennings, For Instance" or "Biggles Defies the Swastika"
as I would have been in 1971. When, therefore, "Jason and the
Argonauts" was shown on British television recently- the first time I
had seen it since my childhood- I wondered whether it would still seem
as good as it did all those years ago.
As Wikipedia puts it, "The almost universal use of CGI has effectively
rendered stop-motion obsolete as a serious special effects tool in
feature film". Stop-motion might occasionally be used in cosy
children's films like the "Wallace and Gromit" series, but in a film
like "Jason", which was a blockbusting spectacular in its day, the
technique now has a distinctly retro feel to it. Some of the effects in
this film do not really work as well as they probably once did- the
Harpies, for example, do not look at all convincing. Most of the other
monsters, however, are just as satisfying as they ever were- the bronze
giant Talos, the sea-god Poseidon who arises from the waves to help the
Argonauts through the Clashing Rocks, and, most of all, those seven
skeletons against whom Jason battles at the end. (This was the sequence
which I remembered most vividly).
The acting contributions are all adequate, although none of them really
stand out. (The one exception is perhaps from Nancy Kovack- otherwise
best known to me as Darren's bitchy ex-girlfriend Sheila in
"Bewitched"- as the seductive Medea). This is not, however, the sort of
film you watch for its acting, but for its ability to transport you
into a fantasy world full of wonders. As such it still works very well,
even in today's GCI-dominated world. 7/10.