Immortals
Immortals Review: Story, Cast, Rating & Final Verdict
Last updated: April 14, 2026
Movie Overview: Immortals
| Movie | Immortals |
| Release Year | 2011 |
| Director | Tarsem Singh |
| Genre | Fantasy / Action / Drama |
| Runtime | 110 minutes |
| Language | EN |
Quick Verdict: Hit or Flop?
Is Immortals (2011) worth watching? According to our cinematic analysis, the film stands as a ABOVE AVERAGE with a verified audience rating of 6.0/10. Whether you're looking for the box office collection, ending explained, or parents guide, our review covers everything you need to know about this Fantasy.
Cast & Character Study
The performances in Immortals are led by Henry Cavill . The supporting cast, including Mickey Rourke and Stephen Dorff , provides the necessary layers to the central narrative.
movieMx Verdict: Is it Worth Your Time?
What Works in the Movie
While Immortals does not fully realize its potential, it still contains moments that may appeal to viewers who enjoy Fantasy films.
- Interesting concept or premise
- Some entertaining scenes
- Supporting cast delivers occasional highlights
What Doesn't Work
Despite its strengths, Immortals has a few issues that may affect the overall viewing experience, particularly in terms of pacing and narrative consistency.
- Uneven pacing in certain parts of the film
- Some predictable plot developments
- May not appeal to audiences outside the Fantasy fanbase
Story & Plot Summary: Immortals
Quick Plot Summary: Released in 2011, Immortals is a Fantasy, Action, Drama film directed by Tarsem Singh. The narrative transports viewers to imaginative worlds filled with magic, wonder, and epic adventures. This summary provides a scannable look at the movie's central conflict involving Henry Cavill.
Story Breakdown
The title presents its narrative with careful attention to pacing and character development. Theseus is a mortal man chosen by Zeus to lead the fight against the ruthless King Hyperion, who is on a rampage across Greece to obtain a weapon that can destroy humanity. The story unfolds naturally, allowing viewers to become invested in the outcome while maintaining engagement throughout.
Narrative Structure
- Opening Hook: The title establishes its world and central conflict efficiently in the opening act.
- Character Arc: The main character shows growth throughout the story, though some supporting characters could have been more fully realized. Henry Cavill's arc is present but occasionally predictable.
- Climax & Resolution: The climax brings together the narrative threads, providing resolution while staying true to the established tone.
Ending Explained: Immortals
Immortals Ending Explained: Directed by Tarsem Singh, Immortals wraps up the main storyline while leaving some interpretation to viewers. The ending highlights the core fantasy themes developed throughout the film.
The emotional resolution focuses on the transformation of its main characters, particularly in scenes involving Henry Cavill. The interpretation of the ending may vary among viewers.
Key Elements of the Ending
- Narrative Resolution: The story resolves its primary conflict while leaving room for interpretation.
- Character Development: Character motivations become clearer by the final scenes.
- Thematic Message: The ending reinforces the fantasy themes introduced earlier in the film.
The final moments of Immortals reflect the creative choices of the filmmakers and align with the tone of the narrative.
Who Should Watch Immortals?
Worth Watching If You:
- Enjoy Fantasy films and don't mind familiar tropes
- Are a fan of Henry Cavill or the director
- Want solid genre entertainment
Box Office Collection: Immortals
| Metric / Region | Collection (Approx) |
|---|---|
| Production Budget | $75.0M |
| Worldwide Gross | $226.9M |
| Trade Verdict | FINANCIAL DISAPPOINTMENT |
Immortals Budget
The estimated production budget for Immortals is $75.0M. This figure covers principal photography, talent acquisitions, and visual effects. When accounting for global marketing and distribution, the break-even point is typically 2x the base production cost.
Top Cast: Immortals
All Cast & Crew →









































Where to Watch Immortals Online?
Streaming Hub🎟️ Rent on
Amazon Video
Apple TV Store
Google Play Movies
YouTube
Fandango At Home
Spectrum On Demand🏷️ Buy on
Amazon Video
Apple TV Store
Google Play Movies
YouTube
Fandango At HomeImmortals Parents Guide & Age Rating
2011 AdvisoryWondering about Immortals age rating or if it's safe for kids? Here is our cinematic advisory:
⏱️ Runtime & Duration
The total runtime of Immortals is 110 minutes (1h 50m). Ensuring you have enough time for the full cinematic experience.
Verdict Summary
Analyzing the overall audience sentiment, verified rating of 6.0/10, and global performance metrics, Immortals is classified as a ABOVE AVERAGE. It remains an essential part of the 2011 cinematic calendar.
Frequently Asked Questions
Is Immortals worth watching?
Immortals is definitely worth watching if you enjoy Fantasy movies. It has a verified rating of 6/10 and stands as a ABOVE AVERAGE in our box office analysis.
Where can I find Immortals parents guide and age rating?
The official parents guide for Immortals identifies it as R. Our detailed advisory section above covers all content warnings for families.
What is the total runtime of Immortals?
The total duration of Immortals is 110 minutes, which is approximately 1h 50m long.
Best Movies to Watch if you liked Immortals
How Immortals Compares & Where it Ranks
Critic Reviews for Immortals
Total failure of doing a movie with the aesthetics and success of "300". Mediocre story, bad planned action scenes, tons of Fx, poorly developed characters and tons of stereotypes.
Everyone talks about how _Immortals_ is a _300_ ripoff, and don't get me wrong, it absolutely is, but I haven't yet seen anyone talk about how it's also a bit of a _God of War_ ripoff. I'm actually quite fond of historically-set mythology films, but I don't believe the problem with _Immortals_ isn't the setting or the genre, it's the motivation behind its being made the way it was. The _300_ movie exists to be an adaptation of the _300_ comic book, the _Immortals_ movie exists because the _300_ movie made money. (Don't get me wrong, I know that the real motivation behind both these, and of any other studio film, is money. But someone involved somewhere has to want more from their movie than that. And _Immortals_ doesn't give me the vibe that anyone did). I can handle _Immortals_ doing what _300_ does. Hell, if enough people rip an idea off over a long enough period of time, in movies, we call that a genre. My issue is that it **only** exists to do what _300_ did, yet it does **all** of it so much worse. There are maybe two fights in _Immortals_ that last for longer than 30 seconds, even with all that slow-mo stretching the runtime, and neither are filmed as well as the ones in _300_. It's nowhere near as fun, it's not superior in any technical category, it's harder to tell what the fuck is going on. Even the acting, which is NOT _300's_ strong suit, is worse here than it is there. There were maybe flashes where you could glimpse a cohesive idea that desired to form, but it never even got close. _Final rating:★★ - Had some things that appeal to me, but a poor finished product._
Immortals is like stepping into a Greek mythology fever dream where everyone looks like they just walked out of a tanning booth, but hey, it works for the aesthetic. The movie is a visual powerhouse, with Tarsem Singh crafting a bold, surreal take on mythology that feels more like a painting in motion than your average action flick. The fight scenes are undeniably the highlight, stylized, brutal, and dripping with energy. Henry Cavill shines as Theseus, delivering a performance that feels grounded amidst the chaos, while Mickey Rourke's Hyperion brings an intimidating presence, even if his character lacks complexity. Where Immortals stumbles is in its story, which feels more like a vehicle for the visuals than an engaging narrative. The characters are serviceable, but most lack depth, leaving you wanting more from the emotional stakes. That said, if you’re here for striking visuals, intense action, and a unique twist on Greek mythology, it’s still a fun ride. Think of it as a movie you watch for the spectacle--not for the substance. Worth watching if you’re in the mood for a stylized, no-strings-attached mythological adventure.
The megalomanic Hyperion (Mickey Rourke) is bent on releasing the imprisoned Titans from their gilded cage deep inside the mountain. Using a magical bow and arrow he's stolen from Ares (Daniel Sharman) he is about to cause havoc when Zeus (Luke Evans) engages the services of Theseus (Henry Cavill) to help thwart his plans and thus save the Greeks from tyranny. With some sagely advice from John Hurt, he now embarks on a lively series of escapades that allows the full panoply of mythological beasts, a shirtless hero and lots of entertaining visual effects to fill a couple of hours. No, the acting isn't really great nor is the script, but it's a vehicle for some beautiful people to present some intricately choreographed action scenes whilst the CGI boys do their best to create an atmosphere that's ideal for this story of the mortal trying to save the day. Rourke delivers well, if really quite sparingly, as the menacing baddie and there's always Stephen Dorff to add to the bevvy of hunks on display here. If you like the genre, and I do, then this isn't really very substantial and the story all rather weak, but this isn't really about a story it's about a computer-enhanced aesthetic showcasing some handsome people plundering ancient legend for our entertainment. It's not "Clash of the Titans" (1981) but it's not terrible, either - and that metal roasting cow - yikes!
movieMx Verified
This review has been verified for accuracy and editorial quality by our senior cinematic analysts.
This analysis is compiled by our editorial experts using multi-source verification and audience sentiment data for maximum accuracy.










