‘Percy Jackson: Sea of Monsters’ Review

Published 11 months ago by

Logan Lerman Percy Jackson Sea of Monsters Percy Jackson: Sea of Monsters Review

Percy Jackson: Sea of Monsters is the follow-up to 2010′s Percy Jackson & the Olympians: The Lightning Thief – both big screen adaptations of Rick Riordan’s five part Percy Jackson book series. After preventing a world-threatening civil war between Zeus and Poseidon, the celebrity status of Percy Jackson (Logan Lerman) has started to fade. New demigods have been upstaging the titular hero, most notably the daughter of Ares, Clarisse La Rue (Leven Rambin), causing Percy to question whether his earlier victory was nothing more than beginner’s luck.

That is until the magical barrier protecting Camp Half-Blood is breached and Percy is once again called upon to defend both human as well as demigod kind. Joined by his friends Grover Underwood (Brandon T. Jackson) and Annabeth Chase (Alexandra Daddario), along with half-brother Tyson (Douglas Smith), Percy sets out for the Sea of Monsters (aka the Bermuda Triangle) in search of The Golden Fleece – a magical piece of fabric capable of healing the barrier (as well as anyone or anything else on the verge of death). However, along the way, Percy and his fellow travelers come face to face with an old enemy who has a nefarious interest in the Fleece – as a means of enacting revenge on the ancient Olympians.

For the second installment, Thor Freudenthal (Diary of a Wimpy Kid) has taken over franchise directorial duties from Chris Columbus – and the result is a film that will easily satisfy pre-teen fans of the book series (or any of the twenty-something actors involved). However, Sea of Monsters isn’t nearly as well realized as the previous installment – meaning that older moviegoers who enjoyed The Lightning Thief may find that Freudenthal’s entry stumbles in its efforts to offer anything more than shallow, and kid-friendly, adventuring.

Brandon T Jackson Logan Lerman Alexandra Daddario Percy Jackson Sea of Monsters Percy Jackson: Sea of Monsters Review

Brandon T. Jackson, Logan Lerman, and Alexandra Daddario in ‘Percy Jackson: Sea of Monsters’

The first installment leaned heavily on the grand scale of the larger Percy Jackson storyline, where the titular hero has direct contact with mystical creatures and heavy-hitting Gods Zeus, Poseidon, and Hades – making it a guilty pleasure for fans of Greek mythology and fantasy adventure (read our Lightning Thief review), in addition to the target children/teen demographics. This round, the story is much more narrow, primarily focused on stale teenage character drama to fill in the gaps between CGI creature encounters. Unfortunately, even when the onscreen action ramps up, many of the skirmishes are brief and underwhelming – not to mention surprisingly short of interesting mythological creatures.

Younger filmgoers will still be able to appreciate the middle-of-the-road action adventure and respond to the banter between Sea of Monsters heroes and villains (as they should). Yet, Freudenthal falls short of the bar set by Columbus, failing to elevate the material in any meaningful (or particularly interesting) way, and as a result, limits the number of viewers who will find worthwhile payoff in his film.

Instead, viewers will get an often silly and brainless quest story, bouncing from one over-the-top set piece to the next – where the heroes are mostly flying by the seat of their pants and can rarely claim any authority over their successes. In place of careful world building and smart implementation of Greek lore, Sea of Monsters is mostly concerned with keeping its characters in motion (not to mention preparing the way for a third film) – rarely taking time to set up or pay off any of the numerous ideas that are haphazardly thrown into the mix. Familiar (and oftentimes clumsy) story mechanics, along with a few underwhelming twists, move the plot forward – while heavy-handed (albeit magical) tools help Percy (and the film’s writers) escape any dead ends.

Douglas Smith Leven Rambin Brandon T Jackson Logan Lerman Alexandra Daddario Percy Jackson Percy Jackson: Sea of Monsters Review

Tyson, Clarisse, Grover, Annabeth, and Percy in ‘Percy Jackson: Sea of Monsters’

The cast is serviceable – though the main trio is each provided with significantly less of an arc this time. Percy is understandably offered the meatiest storyline but he spends the majority of the film in self-doubt and longing for his Olympian father (previously portrayed by Kevin McKidd), who is nowhere to be found this time. Lerman makes the most of what he’s given but the actor, who has turned out strong portrayals in the past (The Perks of Being a Wallflower), is poorly utilized and some of his more introspective scenes border on melodrama instead of engaging insight.

Annabeth (Daddario) and Grover (Jackson) are also trimmed down to shallow sidekick caricatures – after enjoying two of the more engaging arcs in the original film. In Sea of Monsters, Annabeth is relegated to butt-kicking love interest duty as well as saddled with a cringeworthy storyline about prejudice and grudge holding. Sadly, Grover fares even worse: he’s merely a cog in the machine with no actual development – made essential with a throwaway line explaining that only a satyr can locate the Fleece.

Newcomers Tyson (Smith) and Clarisse (Leven Rambin) help to freshen up the cast but neither character provides anything but one-note counterpoints to the returning heroes. Similarly, while fan-favorite Nathan Fillion makes a brief appearance as Hermes (replacing actor Dylan Neal) – the only Greek god willing to be involved this round. Sadly, his part is riddled with so many goofy nods to the audience that any attempt at adding something meaningful is lost in between all of the campy one liners.

Nathan Fillion Logan Lerman Percy Jackson Sea of Monsters Percy Jackson: Sea of Monsters Review

Nathan Fillion as Hermes in ‘Percy Jackson: Sea of Monsters’

Percy Jackson: Sea of Monsters is playing in 3D as well as 2D theaters but the film doesn’t do anything particularly unique with the format. While there are a few moments where the 3D shines, many of the film’s visual effects and monsters are pretty rough – meaning that even when the 3D looks good, it’s hard to be fully immersed in the onscreen action. For that reason, selective 3D filmgoers are safe skipping the added cost; though, diehard fans of the series, along with anyone who doesn’t mind premium ticket costs, might find a few memorable 3D moments to justify their upgrade.

Freudenthal’s Sea of Monsters is a step down for the Percy Jackson franchise in nearly every single way imaginable. The scale is smaller, the characters are less interesting, and the film makes poor use of its rich book and Greek mythology source materials. Young movie (and book series) fans will likely find enjoyment in watching their favorite heroes and actors back on the big screen for another Percy Jackson adventure but the movie provides next to nothing for anyone outside of that core demographic. As mentioned, the film spends a significant amount of time planting seeds for the next entry in the series, but it’s hard to imagine that many moviegoers will be as anxious for part three, The Titan’s Curse, after sitting through this Sea of Monsters.

If you’re still on the fence about Percy Jackson: Sea of Monsters, check out the trailer below:

517834065 3 620 439 Percy Jackson: Sea of Monsters Review

-

[poll id="658"]

___

Percy Jackson: Sea of Monsters runs 106 minutes and is Rated PG for fantasy action violence, some scary images and mild language. Now playing in 2D and 3D theaters.

Let us know what you thought of the film in the comment section below.

Follow me on Twitter @benkendrick for future reviews, as well as movie, TV, and gaming news.

Our Rating:

2 out of 5
(Okay)

TAGS: percy jackson

108 Comments

Post a Comment

  1. WOW….surprising Ratings…Great Review,though.

    • While it may not have followed the storyline of the book, I felt it was still an amazing movie. I love the Percy Jackson series and movies and even though Sea of Monsters may not have met most people’s expectations, it certainly fulfilled mine. Sure, the actors are too old. Maybe it leaves out details from the book. But the effects and sets are amazing, as well as the acting. I enjoyed this movie and would definitely buy it when it comes out on DVD.

      • +100

      • how did it not follow the storyline in the book there where only a few changes in it but you hardly expected it to copy the book word for word

        • she said that bro, pay attention. But I agree with you all the same.

        • Dude — the entire first third of the book was deleted! That’s NOT just a few details.

          Tyson’s character is completely different. Polyphemus’ reason for capturing Grover is completely different. Circe, Circe’s island (NOT the dorky amusement-park thing), and the guinea pigs were left out altogether. Most of the good parts of the book were left out altogether.

          The end brings everything where it needs to be for Titan’s Curse, and it was still fun to watch, but I found myself repeatedly thinking, “Gee I wonder what’s going to happen next,” because they’d obviously chucked the original plot over the side.

          • Yes. You explain my thoughts exactly. They left out half of the book and changed it. To those saying “This movie is the best ever! It’s so original!” please read the book and rethink your review.

        • are you kidding??? the movie missed a scene from the book every five minutes! it missed the beginning scene at percy’s school with the cannibals, the taxi scene was pushed back to an entirely different part, that climbing scene at the beginning was not even in the book,there were 2 mechanical bulls, they missed the chariot scene, they completely excluded tantalus,the satyr that led the quest is new, percy doesnt learn the prophecy, or even visit the oracle,grover is on the cyclops island from the beginning of the book, bottles of mist dont exist, when they leave camp they were supposed to go straight from the lake to lukes boat,not take the taxi,the matter eating tape replaces the vitamin things, they excludes the monster donuts and the hydra scene, they go straight from lukes boat to clairesses boat, which never ends up in the stomach of that monster, where tyson stays behind and then they use the life boat, they skipped the cierces island scene,instead they just tried to cram it in by making it some cheesy amusement park,which would result in major plot holes if they ever make a movie of the son of neptune, kronos isnt ressurected for christs sake,riptide isnt the cursed blade, much less is the prophecy even partially incorporated into that book, they missed the sheep scene, the mountain climbing scene,luke isnt even going after the flece, tyson doesnt get shot, luke never even appears on the island, the cyclops(not going to try to spell his name), death was excluded, not to mention completely wrong, annabeth was chrown into a wall, not poisoned, they excluded the whole miami scene, (a big one), and all that is without even looking at the book for refrence.

    • I think that this is a brilliant movie the storyline follows the book closely and the actors where great. some people may give off that there wasn’t enough action i don’t agree to this as even in the book it lacked action

      • the story line does not follow the book closely because half of the story was thrown in from other books, kronos rising(albeit not in the right way) the great prophecy and several characters were misplaced on the princess andromeda because they should not have been there. they kept the plot as close as they did in the first movie which is to say the end game remained the same but the means of getting there was way different and even if the end game was the same it all happened for different reasons than it did in the book which takes a hell of a lot of characterization away from all of the characters especially percy.

      • Dude! Half of the book was thrown out of the window and the producers obviously decided to try and anger true fans of the book because they told the story the the opposite of how Riordan told the story of Percy and his friends. You call that, “following the book closely”?

      • What film were YOU watching? The storyline doesn’t follow the book at all. Guess it was yet another director who thinks it’s his job to “put his mark” on the material instead of filming the story that Mr. Riordan actually wrote.

  2. I can’t imagine the pain you must have went through to watch this movie!

  3. wow, i didnt really care for the first, thought it was weak but slightly enjoyable, so if this one is even worse? pass, for now at least.

    How hard is it to make good greek mythology films? i enjoy the clash of the titans series but even that could use a lot of improvement. Seriously? this is all they can give us? there are a lot of stories that would make great cinematic adventures and yet all we get is poor sequels to already poor films and no retellings of either the odyssey or the illiad? Come on hollywood!

    Though as an afterthought, i still wouldnt mind another Clash of the titans movie with sam worthington, i just hope it is of way greater quality than 1 and 2.

    • It’s hard to make a good greek mythology film. and the Percy Jackson films are loosely based on a book series by Rick Riodian.

      • Also in genreal, making any movie takes time and hard work. even with terrible movies, are all by people who worked hard on a movie.

  4. Absolutely hated the first one. I’m not even going to bother with this one.

    • Good. Don’t. Waste of money

  5. Haven’t seen any promotion for this flick.

    The flick will flop this weekend.

    • I wouldn’t count on it. It’ll make big bucks from the teens, because I don’t know who you are or what you do, but I see promotion everywhere I go. posters, billboards, trailers on every website, and I went to the premiere last night and it was sold out afterwards.

      • I haven’t seen much of anything about this flick on Social Media.

        At its most hopeful, this flick will come in 3rd after “Planes” and “Elysium.”

  6. I am a huge fans of the book, and there’s a huge part of me that feel really sad that whoever produce these so-called “adaptation” of the book don’t even consider on bringing Riordan on board in making them.

    The book was great not only because of the interesting premise of demigods and the Greek-even later Roman and Egyptian-Mythologies, but because Riordan makes it such an enjoyable adventure that could be enjoyed by teens and adult alike. It was witty, edgy, and actually have strong characters and storyline. His storytelling is also very fun.

    But somehow, these producers decided to “hey, let’s do the opposite of how Riordan tells his story!” Let’s make a boring adventure, with uninteresting characters-as long as attractive young actors and actresses play them-, and mediocre effects. It’s not an enjoyable “popcorn” movie for me.

    Such a waste. This “franchise” needs to be wiped out of the cinematic history, and someone needs to make it the way it’s supposed to be, with Riordan on board.

    • I’ll make it some day.

    • Well said! A very big +1!

    • Riordan actually was involved with both of them, he even berated Craig Titely for cutting out some characters in the first film. there are set pics of him there guiding the actors performances and everything. maybe they’ll reboot this in 50 years, but the audience just won’t be there anymore. I’m just being realistic.

      And for the record, I and my whole family loves these movies, especially my wife. So obviously they’re doing something right.

    • i feel so disappointed…. i thought they will make it right this time….i mean look at the characters) they don even look the same age as the characters in the book….

    • Riordan has posted on his website that he doesn’t really want anything to do with the movies. He said that it might influence his view for the books, which is something he doesn’t want.

    • Hear, hear! It’s really frustrating, because the books are so good. Clearly the people making the film didn’t understand what they were reading.

  7. Does anybody else think the giant horned creature lookd like the devil from “This Is The End”

  8. I loved the movie, I thought it was thicker, deeper, and had a more consistent storyline than the first. granted, its obvious that Chris Columbus was a better director, and they should have grounded the movie more with Catherine Keener and Sean Bean to connect the story better, and also, the acting from Logan Lerman could’ve been better, which is weird because he did great in the first one and Perks, but whatever. Also, Percy Jackson is a character, and the character has long hair, the hair from the first. sooo grow your hair out Lerman. But Stanley Tucci was fantastic, the Oracle was great, the animation was really cool, and Kronos at the end had amazing CGI. They also nailed the training sequences at the beginning of the film. and although I love Pierce Brosnan, Anthony Head was a perfect and superior replacement. Nathan Fillion referenced Firefly, and that’s always awesome. Their version of the Chariot of Damnation was hilarious and interesting, Missi Pyle and Yvette Nicole Brown was perfect casting. But above all, the most incredible moment of the film was Charybdis, THAT I will never, ever forget.

    I walked out of Percy Jackson: Sea of Monsters with a huge grin on my face because I had just experienced a classic adventure tale, one that I would gladly love to go on again and again. And I believe I will! I might catch this flick again before Elysium arrives.

    • you just clinched it, I’m watching this film and I hope I see it through those eyes.

      • I’m glad I helped! Hope you like it! what does “clinched” mean in these terms?

  9. I thought the movie was very entertaining. It was a let down as the book goes, but I understand that with making a movie, some scenes may have to be cut. I do not particularly like the addition of some of the scenes that weren’t I’m the book but I feel they were important to make viewers who haven’t read the book get more action. I appreciate the way we got to see how Percy is trying to contact his dad because that’s very important in the movie. Overall, I liked the movie a lot and I will be going to see it again on theaters. And I hope they continue tools the next installment because the third book was my favorite of the series.

  10. It is a children’s book so styling the movie to make it enjoyable for kids makes more sense than making it violent and way too explicit

    • Isn’t it ironic that people are shunning us fans of the books for getting upset about the movie? When in truth, it’s the book’s fandom they really need to please?
      They name a movie after the series, and who are the first ones to know about it? The book’s fans.
      We are almost always the guarenteed audience, the ones who gush about how amazing the books are, the ones who want to gush about how amazing the movie is. The movie is supposed to be an ADAPTAPTION of the books- not a plot rewritten by people who don’t seem to know what the plot really is.

      The readers of the books are the ones who know just how deep the books really are, how everything is connected together, and how the PJO series has the capability to give Twilight, or The Hunger Games, or the Harry Potter series a run for their money. And so it is CRITICAL that the movie please the fans of the series- the ones whom I should remind you all- who made the series popular enough to even be made into a movie in the first place!

      You disappoint the fans, and the entire thing collapses in on itself. Why do think Harry Potter was so popular? Or The Hunger Games? Or even Twilight? The plots were amazing by themselves, and if they had any confidence in the story’s popularity, they would have stuck to the plot as closely as possible.

      I am majorly disappointed by these movies- all of the characters’ personalities were thrown out the window, and the actors weren’t the best. I love the books- all of them. And the fact that. I had ADHD is a reason I feel so connected with it.

      There were so many reasons I loved the series- and none of them were in the movies.
      I have felt cheated out of a movie, that if it had followed the plot AT ALL, I would have showered it with praise. I fear that since the movies were made such a big deal, that there will not be a remake in my lifetime, which in that case: I can guarantee you that I will NEVER promote this movie as an amazing adaptaption, because in truth, it was not even close.

      I have been sitting here trying to find at least ONE thing I liked about the movie, but I cannot name a single one. Which goes to show you, that the only things they got from the book was names, and loosest goal of the books: retrieving the lightning bolt, and retrieving the golden fleece.

  11. I’m glad people liked this film, so they’ll continue to make more. And as a species we can all slowly die a tedious death. I never read the books, nor do I plan to. Any writer whose imagination stops at ripping of the Greek myths is surely not worthy of the name.

    • What award winning novels have you wrote that so much better than these books?

      • You’re right I’ve never wrote a book or made a film so I guess I have no right to express my opinions on anything I watch or read again. thank you, I didn’t know that’s how it worked. By the way, what’s YOUR next block buster called, again..?

        • Godzilla

          • Hahaha….I love you !
            Great answer !

    • Rick Riordan has also written mystery novels for adults… but anyway, the books are enjoyable. Might not always be the most original, but I love the whole series and his Egyptian mythology series The Kane Chronicles. Riordan has a fun way of taking mythological figures and putting them in a “modern” setting.

    • Ya but if you actually read the books you’d know that he’s not “ripping [*off] of the Greek myths”. The myths are just what the story is based around and it actually works well. How can you form an opinion on the books or even the author if you won’t even read the books?

  12. Why would they make another film without the same director wth c’mon studio get prgm.

  13. movie goers tend to blame the director for directing a movie based on a book or book series. i totally understand loving a book and then a movie is not like the book at all. it’s frustrating. but at the same time, i think all you movie goers, who read a book before the seeing the movie, need to blame the writers. the writers or the writer are the ones who writes the script, the dialogues, the characters, and the overall main plot. while a director does need to take part of the blame, because they are the ones who decided what things needs to change in the script, what the film needs to add, and what they think about the script as a whole. but most of the time, the writer or the writers are the ones who is responsible for adapting a book into a movie. people tend to forget that the writers are the ones who decides what to write and then be reviewed by the director, the producers, and the studio. so yeah, this movie isn’t pulling me, based on the trailer. i’ve read all the books and i just feel like the 2nd movie is a kids movie, not for all ages. which is a shame.

    • It’s an ADAPTION. It’s not gonna be exactly like the book. Things have to be cut/added to make it a movie. Yes some movies come out good but let’s face it, not all are going to be and it’s still a good movie regardless if its relation to the book. Stop being so judgmental because you read the books. I read them all and I’m still quite pleased with both movies because I’m able to accept the fact they won’t be perfect to the book. People need to stop being picky. And, add in to fact it was low budget because no one went to see the first one or complained about it to much not leaving enough room for expansion to make it better.

      • That’s the whole point. It’s supposed to be almost identical to the story. And if I go to see a movie that’s based off a novel and it’s radically different than whats on paper I’m going to be disappointed. If a director or producer wants to put their own spin on something then make your own movie without throwing in the title of a book to interest the readers.

        • Then stop seeing book movies.

          • if fans of the book stop seeing the book movies then the movies have virtually little to no audience. its important that they at least stick to the basic storyline of the book or they are not going to make as much money as they could, since obviously the movies are only being made for money.

            • Isn’t it ironic that people are shunning us fans of the books for getting upset about the movie? When in truth, it’s the book’s fandom they really need to please?
              They name a movie after the series, and who are the first ones to know about it? The book’s fans.
              We are almost always the guarenteed audience, the ones who gush about how amazing the books are, the ones who want to gush about how amazing the movie is. The movie is supposed to be an ADAPTAPTION of the books- not a plot rewritten by people who don’t seem to know what the plot really is.

              The readers of the books are the ones who know just how deep the books really are, how everything is connected together, and how the PJO series has the capability to give Twilight, or The Hunger Games, or the Harry Potter series a run for their money. And so it is CRITICAL that the movie please the fans of the series- the ones whom I should remind you all- who made the series popular enough to even be made into a movie in the first place!

              You disappoint the fans, and the entire thing collapses in on itself. Why do think Harry Potter was so popular? Or The Hunger Games? Or even Twilight? The plots were amazing by themselves, and if they had any confidence in the story’s popularity, they would have stuck to the plot as closely as possible.

              I am majorly disappointed by these movies- all of the characters’ personalities were thrown out the window, and the actors weren’t the best. I love the books- all of them. And the fact that. I had ADHD is a reason I feel so connected with it.

              There were so many reasons I loved the series- and none of them were in the movies.
              I have felt cheated out of a movie, that if it had followed the plot AT ALL, I would have showered it with praise. I fear that since the movies were made such a big deal, that there will not be a remake in my lifetime, which in that case: I can guarantee you that I will NEVER promote this movie as an amazing adaptaption, because in truth, it was not even close.

              I have been sitting here trying to find at least ONE thing I liked about the movie, but I cannot name a single one. Which goes to show you, that the only things they got from the book was names, and loosest goal of the books: retrieving the lightning bolt, and retrieving the golden fleece.

      • +100

  14. This movie is not enjoyable to anyone who read and loved the books. It changes nearly everything, taking out important things and putting in stuff that doesn’t belong, trying to tack on stuff that belonged in the first movie but was noticeably absent. No.. this movie doesn’t even deserve one star. It deserves NEGATIVE one star.

    • But if you hadn’t read the books you’d love it. the film industry isn’t an adaption industry, it’s an industry of entertainment. I read the books, and I Loved the movies. that’s right, LOVED. because I understand how difficult it is to adapt something like this and cater to the fans. The fans aren’t god, and actually neither is the novel. it’s nearly impossible to adapt a series perfectly, the only movie to achieve that is the Lord of the Rings, which was only possible because the source material IS perfect, Percy Jackson while being original, awesome, amazing, and truly entertaining, is still flawed, and therefore is not perfect for a screen adaptation. So it’s inevitable that some things will be different.

      If you didn’t like the first one, (because it was different), why did you see the second one? hope that it will be “better”? Well the first one was a Chris Columbus film, it was awesome. no movie would really have the chance of being adapted “better” than the first, even though the first was different too. the truth is that the whole series will likely never be a straight translation from page to film, so I wouldn’t recommend watching them if that’s all you’re interested in seeing.

      Or try this; go in thinking, nay, assuming that the whole movie is going to be completely different, and then any connection to the books at all will bring a smile to your face. see the movies in a light-hearted way, not a hard-core straight-laced way. Let the movie be what it is, instead of trying to fit some military standard. This is what I do with movies based on a book, I always look at it as an interpretation, not an adaptation.

      Now I’m just trying to offer some friendly advice, don’t see this as me telling you what to do, or demanding you stop complaining, because I can see you are only voicing your opinion, which you have every right to do. But perhaps if you gave my theory a shot, you’d have a more enjoyable time at the movies.

      :D

      • What….why even make an adaptation if it’s not gonna be the same story?

        • Because its still an entertaining story, and will be regardless of inevitable changes to film. you don’t just give up just because a few people might not like the way it’ll turn out. and again, try not to look at it as an adaptation, none of them are, they are interpretations or a translation so to speak, they are not using the books as bibles because they would not work. If they were identical to the book the movies would be 3+ hours long.

          • While I slightly disagree with the what you said about it being interpretations, because I understand there needs to be some of that, I will say that they don’t need to be identical to the book but they should do as the book did. They should introduce characters at the same time the book did, they should create a plot line that follows that of the book; that is the purpose of an adaptation, to put the book on the screen.

          • Basically, regardless of how you feel about the movie, and adaptation of a book should follow the books plot line without deviation. Little things are, of course, open to interpretation and it will still be an entertaining movie if it follows the books. As you said though, not everyone will like it, so they should make it like the books and then even those who didn’t read it will get a chance to either like it or dislike it.

            • I think people will like/dislike it anyways. It really wouldn’t make a lot of a difference. The fact of the matter is, Harry Potter was the bestselling YA book of ever. so it got a budget of 125 million. Percy Jackson nobody gives a crap about, (except the fans) so it got 90 million. Fox isn’t trying to ADAPT the books. they are translating the books into kids movies, movies That I among many happen to enjoy. So therefore yes, you are correct, an adaptation of a book should follow it without deviation, I agree. But most novel based films aren’t adaptations. They are films they use the basic premise and inspiration of the novels. Examples include; Hoot, Jack Reacher, Eragon, The Bone Collector, Along Came A Spider, The Host, The Golden Compass, The Spiderwick Chronicles, Beautiful Creatures, etc. Some are good, (Reacher), some are TERRIBLE (Eragon), but not ONE of them is an adaptation. Only 3 fit the bill for adaptation. Narnia, Lord of the Rings, and Harry Potter. HP pushes it too, because it strays BIG TIME in the later movies. A movie is only as good as its director, and let’s face it, Peter Jackson is a genius. If he was doing Percy Jackson, you’d have your adaptation. But then you might ask, what about Chris Columbus!?!? He did the first Percy Jackson, why wasn’t it accurate? Well, I can answer that with two words. Craig Titley. Well, those aren’t words so much as a name. Craig Titley was the screenwriter for See Spot Run, Scooby-Doo, and Cheaper by the Dozen. Then he did Percy Jackson & the Olympians: The Lightning Thief. Yeah. Was the script bad? Youuu betcha. Was the movie good? I loved it. Because it was well directed. For the sequel they pulled a flip-flop. Craig was let go, and they hired Mark Guggenheim, the writer of the Flash, Aquaman, the Amazing Spider-Man, Law & Order, CSI: Miami, and the TV series Jack and Bobby, which starred Logan Lerman, a truly great show if I remember, a mystery about two brothers and their live intermixed with a documentary in the future about one of them being President, but you don’t know which brother. The idea of the show was to figure out where their lives would lead them and who would be the President you keep seeing in the future. I can’t remember which one…

              But in any case they had a great writer, who wrote a near perfect script that had to cut for budget and time by the director of Hotel for Dogs and Diary of Wimpy Kid, Thor Freudenthal. Yeah. So if you want a perfect adaptation go take it up with Fox, because they aren’t giving the PJ series a big enough budget. in fact perhaps the best way to get a sequel closer to the books is to get people to watch the second one a lot. I know I will! the bigger the gross, the bigger the sequel.
              But for now, I have a nice little film series that is an INTERPRETATION of the Percy Jackson franchise, and for now, is good enough for me.

              • I agree with what you said whole heartedly and even though these movies drive me nuts it is nice to see it on the big screen being a fan of the books. My last remaining question is: why do you need a big budget to follow the plot of a book?

                • Not always no, but Percy Jackson is an action spectacle. for example, in the third one, do you think they’ll really do a scene with a giant trash monster in the junkyard if they have no budget? nope. Luckily there are smaller set pieces in Titan’s Curse than in Sea of Monsters, which the entire thing would have been CGI from the novels. i.e. the Guinea pigs, Scylla, Sirens, sheep (they wouldn’t use REAL sheep), and an army of invading Centaurs. Obviously the coolest sequence from the book was clearly the battle between Clarisse’s Skeleton crew and Scylla/Charybdis, and granted they changed it a bit, but it was AWESOME in the movie, so they do KNOW how to do some things. Now I believe they have the writing thing down, one big thing for me was the prophecy, which (as much as I loved the first) was the most crucial thing left out of The Lightning Thief. And this time they got it, word for word despite the age change, and I’m proud of that. I’m also proud of the writer leaving the film open-ended like the book, with Thalia’s awakening and a Percy V.O. explaining how he might not be the child of the prophecy. It made me smile, as did the awesome flashback scene in the beginning, which gave me a little taste of the ages from the books. it made me feel like the characters were truly lost and truly helpless, and so props go out to the casting director for going goonies instead of glee.

                  Having said all those things they need 2 elements to make the sequel better, (even though SoM rocked);

                  1. A big budget. If they we want a serious version of Percy Jackson, the next film is the perfect story to begin that, sort of the “Goblet of Fire” for this series. Its darker text involving the Zombie Terminator’s and the Nymean Lion sequence are ripe for legitamate suspense and darker fantasy. Horror scenes involving Annabeth holding up the sky as a physical form of torture will be difficult to show without the CGI necessary to do so.

                  2. A better director. Someone far more experienced and less kid friendly than Chris Columbus would be way better for this franchise. #1 choice is obviously David Yates, the man who took Harry Potter seriously through the 5-8 films. Although he is bested by Alfonso Cuaron where Potter is concerned, Yates is the appropriate choice to ground the PJ franchise in darker roots. Ultimately they need a director who can bring out these character’s inner emotions, namely Percy, Nico, and Bianca. The terror of not knowing oneself and being trapped in Lotus Land, breing lost and without guidance for years and years, Percy being able to relate to that due to being abandoned by his father. These emotions are too powerful to be conveyed by someone like Thor. We deserve someone better, namely David Yates, or Chris Weitz.

                  In conclusion, I actually thought Percy Jackson: Sea of Monsters was a HUGE step up from the first, mainlybecause of a fantastic script by Marc Guggenheim, and memorable performances from Stanley Tucci, Anthony Head, and Nathan Fillion. I loved the film, and it was so entertaining, I’ll see it again. But in order to up the ante and keep the bills rolling in, Fox will need to bring in some serious talent to set this franchise upright as the way is paved for the inevitable Manhattan finale.

                  • the whole cgi thing you talked is EXACTLY why they should have never done the movies in the first place and instead done a cartoon television series. i dont know a whole lot about animation but it probably could have been done cheaper than all the cgi required.and if you get on websites with a large fan base for percy jackson you will see a large number of the fans want to see a cartoon version of the series because not only will it interest the book fans but if you put it on nick or cartoon network it will cater to those channels viewers as well giving it a load of extra fans. also as a cartoon series you would have more time to get the book right and not have to leave out bits and pieces to fit the story into a two hour movie. and bonus because you can get in all the things the fans are upset about not getting to see in the last two movies, annabeths hat, seaweed brain and wisegirl, blue food, and all the other little jokes that really bring the series to life which unfortunately the movies are missing.

                  • Ok yes they need a bigger budget especially for book 5 WITHOUT A DOUBT because otherwise it won’t look right. But I think you’re missing my point. I’m not bothered that everything isn’t the same or that the budget is small or the cgi is meh. I’m bothered that they are still choosing to deviate from what happened in the book. The ending scene with Kronos wasn’t necessary to put in nor was, well to be honest, the whole ending as it was in the movie. How Talia was done was good I won’t argue that but things like Grover being kidnapped, Tyson just showing up at camp, the WRONG prophecy because while the great prophecy is talked about the words are not spoken until book 5, the empathy link between grover and percy; all things that would have been easy to fix and yet Fox just threw up their hands and said “Nahhhh let’s do it our way.” I understand they are trying to sell a movie but not everyone likes a movie and not everyone likes a book. So why not make the movie like the book when in truth the odds are relatively the same.
                    OH and agreed, new writing is needed. They’re missing character personas (especially in percy and annabeth) that need to be in the story

                    • I liked the writing, I think maybe you missed that, and mag, despite our differing opinion on the films, I agree with you wholeheartedly on the tv show idea. You’re absolutely right! They should do that! but make it traditional animation, not the stupid 3D s***. even pixar wouldn’t make it look right, it’d have to be standard 2D print, all the characters would have to be scale too, not like making Atlas look 50 feet tall because thats how imposing he feels or something like that you know? Cartoons pull that s*** sometimes and I hate it. I would suggest the companies that make Avatar the Last Airbender, but I don’t think this would look good as an anime. The productyion companies that made the old Redwall tv show would be perfect for this!!!! You have a great idea here mags!

                      As for mechagodzilla however, I believe they did do the right prophecy, I know when you watch it it FEELS wrong, it did to me too, but I went back and looked at it, and it is the EXACT same prophecy word for word except they change 16 to 20. The only other thing they change there was the fact that percy believes the prophecy is coming true in the second film, but at the end he tells chiron about it and chiron explains that perhaps it hadn’t happened yet, and when Thalia shows up, Percy’s V.O. explains that maybe Chiron was right, and Thalia is the child of the big 3 that “A single choice shall end their days Olympus to preserve or raze.”

                      Little things like that made me so happy. How about you two? straight up ignore the faults of the series (and I agree, there are many), just for a second tell me that when you watched 1 and 2, what stood out as, “I love that, that’s cool!” What did you like about them?

                    • actually they changed more than the age in the great prophecy. they changed “heros soul” to “evil soul” which is actually a huge change because it takes out a good chunk of the final resolution of the whole series, that chunk being the redemption of luke and all the other demigods who started the second titan war.

                      and as for things that stood out that were done well in the first movie i cant really think of anything because all the scenes that were in the books were riddled with weird little inconsistencies and the same goes for the second film. but as movies i liked the first film much more than the second

                    • Each book had it’s own prophecy (which is why they go on quests) and the one they revealed in the movie isn’t revealed until Last Olympian. This is what they should have used:
                      You shall sail the iron ship with warriors of bone,
                      You shall find what you seek and make it your own,
                      But despair for your life entombed within stone,
                      And fail without friends, to fly home alone.

                      Ummm…there’s nothing I’ve really been over joyed with. It’s cause this series is kinda like my Harry Potter so it’s hard for me to see past the faults

                    • Okay, so turns out I couldn’t reply to you two down there, but this is like my harry potter too, only I love the movies. mag basically twisted my question into a way of being negative and avoided it, and mechagodzilla, no only did you not answer it, but now I question the last time you read the books! the prophecy they revealed in the movie is not the one in sea of monsters, true, but it is the GREAT prophecy, the most important one that they need to establish as early as possible! 5 prophecies is just too much predetermination to keep movies exciting. one prophecy will keep you guessing, but even in the books the 5 prophecies became predictable, not fluid, and just redundant, as in fact the sequel series has also become, reiterating the same themes and relationships whilst also over complicating the plot with far too many characters and confusing story arcs. the movies simplify things the avoid all that nonsense. And as great as the Last Olympian was, I even think Riordan was losing his touch there too. Although I need to read his Egyptian series.

                      And mag, I understand your concern about the whole “evil soul” thing, but I think you won’t have anything to worry about. (not that you’ll listen to me anyway), but it really doesn’t change anything except leaving out the fact that luke is DESTINED to be redeemed. it doesn’t mean that’s not what will happen. it proabbly will happen! they simply changed the words the make Percy believe the prophecy was to be fulfilled that night in Circeland, and then provide even MORE surprise to the twist that Percy might not be the child of the prophecy after all (even though theres actually more than one child involved in the great prophecy) he then thinks it may be Thalia, and that is GREAT exposition for the 3rd film. Can’t wait to see Artemis’ hunters!

                      I know they screwed up a few times, but can’t you cut these guys a break? They really are trying REALLY really freaking hard to make a good movie and you’re just knocking it down. I bet if they were here you couldn’t say you hated it to their face. And if you did, you’d regret it by how disappointed they’d be, in all their hard work, over 2 years of casting, filming, editing, and everything, they still couldn’t please you. Just keep your hopes up for a good 3rd film! and mag, if that one’s not good, just say, on a screenrant comment, “You know, it’s too bad, but this movie just was not for me. Maybe the next one will be better.” and leave it at that. do you NEED to shove your opinion down everyone’s throat? Just maybe it would be better for people if we just were more subtle about things sometimes.

                      So let’s try this one more time. Did you hate, despise, loathe, EVERYTHING about Sea of Monsters? was it really one of the WORST movies you’ve ever seen? Was there NOTHING, nothing at all that entertained you? If so, then I’ll let this go, because there won’t be any point in trying to convince you anymore. I promise. Just really, be honest. EVERY little THING? Nathan Fillion? Mr. D? Chariot of Damnation? Charybdis? all of it? and don’t say “well this was okay but..” just tell me what you liked about it, if anything straight up, no if’s, and’s, or’s, or but’s.

                    • Yes I know that was the great prophecy I’m well aware of it all I’m saying is that in the book series that they hadn’t revealed it yet and instead start each book with it’s own prophecy. But my point is they shouldn’t have used it! Part of the books is wondering what the great prophecy is not just what might happen and I think they could have done it either way just as easily.
                      No I can’t really cut them slack because unfortunately they aren’t allowing any. I can’t look over changed plots, added scenes, things that change the whole book. I can get past how the camp looks or that grover uses crutches because I don’t care about that stuff. But big picture stuff means more.

                    • Yeah, I guess I know what you mean, but btw, I really like that Grover uses crutches, it gives him characterization and its also a good way to hide his legs from the public. the mist isn’t THAT good. oh that’s another good thing about SoM is they added Nectar, and the mist, and both were done perfectly. Nectar was actually supposed to be in the first one where Percy wakes up veryyy similar to the way he did in the book, with Annabeth right above him as he wakes and she gives him Nectar right then. Even some of the lines are the same. I wish they hadn’t cut that out, that was a good scene. they also had a part where Grover explains the Thalia story (minus the tree part), which is interesting that they almost did that, but I see why they cut it, its really random, and the lines in the scene are awful, despite Brandon T. Jackson’s decent acting. It’s weird, check it out, he’s like monologuing this really dramatic story and Percy just kind of accepts it without asking any questions, its reallly stupid.

                      Another note, did either of you notice in the trailer for The Lightning Thief there’s a black truck with a chaingun on it firing outside? It’s almost as if Ares was THIS CLOSE to being in it, and if you pause the frame, its definitely a shot from the movie, but its not a deleted scene. Idk what happened there.

      • First if you are going to make a movie adaption for a book you need to get it somewhat right or its just a slap in the face to the entire fan base who fell in love with the books making the movie possible. but most importantly there are three major things that need to be carried into a movie adaption of a book. first and foremost is the plot. you dont have the story without the plot and its very important to keep it intact because otherwise the movie just becomes a glorified fanfiction. secondly the characters need to be the characters. the biggest problem with the percy jackson movies is they dont do the book characters justice. i hardly recognize the characters i have grown to love in the movies because they are simply not there. grover might as well just been given a different name because he is the farthest thing from book grover. annabeth in the sea of monsters was a major let down because she was nowhere near as talented, intelligent, and skilled in fighting as she is in the books, she also comes across a bit boring in the movies if you ask me. and dont even get me started on percy, his character was utterly butchered to the point where he is down right selfish, which if you take his fatal flaw into account that should make him a naturally selfless person as he is in the books. and the third thing that needs to be carried through is the basic lore the book sets up needs to stay in tact as well. this one is a bit more flexible but the percy jackson movies just show a blatant disregard for things set up in not only the books but in greek mythology itself. an example for this would be the nectar storyline. honestly i believe that was changed purely for comedic purposes but it just came off as infuriating and dull. now i understand that movies cannot always be the same because they are different medians. i get that and i accept that but there is a fine line between changing and taking things out to giving an almost complete disregard for the book and its plot and characters. as a fan of the book series i feel offended by these movie adaptions because they paint these beautiful books in a bad light. now the movies themselves may be decent movies but as book adaptions they are utter crap.

        • But people LIKE these movies, so therefore they aren’t painting them in a bad light. I love the books, and I think it’s a fantastic adaptation. And I straight up disagree with everything you just said. no explanation required.

          • you must not pay very close attention to the fan base because a good number of the loyal fans hate the movies, yet still see them because they are percy jackson. sure you get a number of the fan base saying they liked them but they only like them as movies separated from the books because as book adaptions they know they are utter crap. and if you bothered to look at critics reviews they all tend to say the same thing that these movies are decent but they are certainly not a movie anyone would really want to see more than once or twice. and if people really liked these movies a lot they would do better in the box office and yes they are somewhat painting the books in a bad light because most people who are reviewing the movie have never read the books and never make the distinction of how the movies do not follow the books.

            • okay now you’re making more sense. But the critics DO most likely understand that the books aren’t straight up the same as the movies, they understand that they are pretty different, as most other “adaptations” are. So they’re not reviewing the books, they’re reviewing the movie. But all the same, I loved the movies, and I’d love to watch it more than twice. I’m saying some things are better than you think they are, and there are many people out there like me, who see things in a positive light. Try it next time when Titan’s Curse comes out, which is currently in pre-production.

              • First i just want to talk about what you said about the nectar and the mist from the movie and say they are far from perfect because the movie completely changes how they are viewed in the book. the mist is already there its always there they have no sprayable mist because they dont need it. the nectar thing though really made me mad for some reason. nectar in the books is used for only gods or demigods and the demigods only use it for healing purposes because if they have too much it will burn them up just like mortals. they movie made it seem as though everyone could have nectar and they kind of were just like nectar shots for everyone and turned it into a comical thing and if the movies followed the books more closely they wouldnt need to turn random things into comedy because it would be naturally funny but instead things like this just feel forced and anger book fans.

                secondly if i was talking to the people who made this film i probably would tell them my opinion because i am not one to lie to a person to appease their feelings. seems harsh i know but its the truth.

                thirdly the only things that i really enjoyed the first time i watched the movie was the nathan fillion scene and also mr d. and really the only reason i enjoyed nathan fillions scene was because it was nathan fillion if it was anyone else it would not have been as good and the same with mr d stanley tucci did amazing. and yes i saw the movie twice and will admit the second time it was more enjoyable but it was still a mediocre movie for me at best.

                and finally I’m sorry if it felt like i was shoving my opinion down your throat its just i get very defensive when anyone says this was a good adaptation because i strongly believe it was not. these movies just take way too many artistic liberties with these books and totally butcher all the things about it i hold dear and that will never be ok with me.

  15. The first was already a patchwork of gimmicky Greek mythology motifs and immature teenagers, so… if this is worse, I’ll pass.

  16. I’m quite staisfied that they finally gotten my hair right. I am disgusted that they didn’t really follow the book. I suggest that the director MUST read the book completely well, and do the adaptation right if they ever make the next movie. The movie is quite good, but not really good if based on the book. I got my hopes up too high when I saw the trailer, thinking Thor is doing it right, but no. I must go now. Percy is waiting for me.

  17. The makers of this movie did a great job making a great book series for all ages into a goofy kids movie…

  18. My wife went to see this movie with some of her friends last night and see said it was just bad. It was an improvement from the first movie but that wasn’t saying a lot. She said a lot of the people there either left the movie 45 minutes into the movie or just fell asleep. Sounds like I picked a good night not to go, LOL

  19. I am upset because I am a really big fan of the Percy Jackson series. The first movie was a let down and the second is just the same. If they stayed true to the story lines, there might’ve actually been a great movie. I really don’t know why Grover is on the quest with them, or why Kronos was released in the end…and is Thalia even there? I’m really disappointed. I wish that they’d just read the books and try to do everything possible to stay true to them…not do what they want and put pieces from a different book in the series (Kronos being woken up…? And Kronos had a host and that was LUKE.) into the movie. Glad they got Annabeth’s hair right, though. That makes up for a lot.

    • They can’t get everything right unfortunately Anna E, and of course they read the books, they made everyone read all of them, except Alexandra Daddario, she only read 1 and 2. Ultimately audiences don’t care about inaccuracy, just the fans, and they’re trying to make the best movie possible. the thing with Kronos in San Fransisco can still happen, Kronos is back in his coffin, and the finale was incredible, you can’t deny that. I loved the movie, I loved the first movie! I think they’re doing a great job and everyone needs to lighten up about these changes. read my theory on how to watch movies that come from books up above, I think it’ll be helpful next time one of these (Titan’s Curse) rolls around. However if they cast Nico wrong I’m gonna flip s***.

      • oh and the Thalia thing happened exactly the way it did in the book, so I don’t know what you’re thinking of.

  20. As a fan of the first film and the entire book series I was excited for this film. When the trailer came out my panties hit the floor so hard that they ended up halfway to China but upon watching the trailer I felt that the narrative was just god awful and I had a feeling that this film was going to be worse than the first one because it had a sort of cheesiness about it.

    Turns out I was right. The first film was in my opinion a great film with great effects etc but when I went to see Sea of Monsters yesterday in 3D it felt like they had taken a giant s*** on us! I’ve read that people have said “oh the actors have had three more years of experience!” Utter b*******! The acting was awful! It was as if they were reading it right of the page and they weren’t really in character! Especially Alexandra! Her emotions and facial expressions seemed very fake and her acting just seems pantominey! Or like acting in junior high!

    The scripting was just really cheesy and it felt like I was watching a kids film. And whatever retard they got to do the background music just mucked it up! Usually in any movie the music goes with the scene and it’s that good that you barely notice it’s there but the music just feels out of place and it stands out as bad!

    To be completely honest it felt like diary of a wimpy kid. Thor Freudenthal is to blame because Diary of a Wimpy Kid is cheesy and has unrealistic acting and Sea of Monsters is like this. He shouldn’t have been let near this film because he has pissed it up.

    Saying that I love this series and it would upset me if they didn’t make a sequel because I need proper closure. I don’t want this to end up like Eragon and leave me on a giant cliffhanger and then not continue. If they do go ahead and film The Titans Curse then they should definitely get a new director. Honestly they should get the writer to direct it because that way it will stick closer to the book and he would know exactly in his head how he would want the actors to behave and what scenes to put in and what not to.

    Well rant over. First film was better in my opinion but still hope they make another to make up for this one. If you’re deciding weather or not to go see it then I would still recommend you go see what it’s like.

  21. I just want to point out that yes the book fans will go see the movie but most will find it infuriatingly inaccurate and a horrible representation of the characters we all know and love. speaking as a fan of the series myself i sat through the entire movie wondering who any of the characters were because they most certainly were not the beloved characters in riordans books. personally i find it almost insulting that this review said the fans of the books will enjoy this movie.

  22. It’s an ADAPTION. It’s not gonna be exactly like the book. Things have to be cut/added to make it a movie. Yes some movies come out good but let’s face it, not all are going to be and it’s still a good movie regardless if its relation to the book. Stop being so judgmental because you read the books. I read them all and I’m still quite pleased with both movies because I’m able to accept the fact they won’t be perfect to the book. People need to stop being picky. And, add in to fact it was low budget because no one went to see the first one or complained about it to much not leaving enough room for expansion to make it better.

    • exactly it is an adaption which means it should follow the book thats the whole point of an adaption. book fans understand that the adaptions can never be exact and thats ok we have made peace with that but these movies are different. the creative liberties were taken too far giving us two movies that are essentially bad fanfiction. To make an adaption of a book and to have it turn out as this way will not help because you will get a large number of the book fans not going to see it and an even larger number of people who didnt read the books will not go see it because lets face it with all the other movies out in theaters this one just looks lack luster and boring and if i hadnt read the books this movie would have not interested me enough in the first place to pay money in theaters to see it.

  23. The movie is supposed to be building a series but it just feels like a bad movie. The characters are all so bland ,with the exception of Stanley Tucci and Nathan Fillion’s characters, but that is only because the actors are great at what they do. Everyone else is bland. Where I should be rooting for Percy, instead I don’t care. When I should be hoping they get through things safely, I don’t care.

    Another thing is the dialogue was SO cringe worthy. There were a lot of times where I sat there going “Was this really the best they could do?” A line would be set up and I would say it in my head before the actors said it because it was the cheesiest thing I could think of. And the actor who played the bad teen-demigod was awful. He was so dull. I wasn’t scared of him at all. When he was supposed to be angry or dark or threatening, instead he came off as a mumbling bumbling stoic kid. There was nothing threatening about the threat they faced besides a stupid robotic bull they fight at the beginning of the movie.

    The movie was a mess. Which is sad because although I have not read the books I could feel that there was a lot of potential left on the table. Character arcs could have been more dramatic and meaningful. Action scenes could have been pulled off better. Some better actors could have pulled off roles well. Instead you get a very forgettable movie that will most likely stop the Percy Jackson franchise right in it’s tracks.

  24. Everybody tries defending this ‘adaptation’ goes with the ‘cannot adapt every word from the book’ argument, and I couldn’t agree more with that notion. But, couldn’t they make it, at least, as entertaining, adventurous, and witty as the book they’re adapting? I think the direction that Riordan took with the book is already great-it becomes an international best-seller because of a reason, right?

    I don’t get why these people who might just only read the plot summary out of the Wikipedia page of the book decided to make such a boring movie.

    At least if they’re too lazy to make a decent adaptation, put some effort to entertain people by making a good movie.

  25. I just came back from the movie theater and this is the WORST MOVIE I HAVE EVER SEEN!!!!!!!!! I am just about the biggest fan of Percy Jackson i can be and ive read the books 5 times each. I was expecting this movie to be amazing because it was a new director and the first one got so many bad reviews. BOY WAS I WRONG! here is a list of things that sucked about it: (spoilers)

    -percy looks like he is 20 not 13 (the age he is supposed to be)
    -Percy does not go to school in the movie
    -Percy never is introduced with Tyson before camp half blood at the school
    -Percy doesnt play dodgeball with monsters and blow a hole in the side of the school (at school)
    -The dont wear camp half blood t-shirts
    -you dont see the cabins
    -chiron is supposed to be white
    -PERCY IS SUPPOSED TO BE A CHILD DELEQUIT NOT A PRETTY BOY!!!!!
    -annebeth is supposed to be cooler
    -grover is just… not right
    -Percy is supposed to meet Hermes a camp half blood at night outside his cabin
    -hermes is supposed to make percy do the quest
    -Hermes gives percy vitimans at the lake
    -the gang is supposed to have 3 hippocampi not one
    -the princess anddromadon is supposed to be a cruise ship
    -percy is supposed to have dreams about grover and kronos
    -the people on the cruise ship are supposed to be ghosts
    -luke is supposed to be hiding in one of the rooms there with kronos
    -They are supposed to fight a crab
    -WHERE THE HECK IS CERCES BEAUTY RESORT
    -WHY DIDNT GROVER AND PERCY TURN INTO GUINEE PIGS??? (MY FAVORITE PART)
    -where is the beautiful island with the sheep and the fleese?
    -where is the cave?
    -where is the wedding dress grover is making
    -Kronos forms back to life
    -Kronos forms his own body
    -annebeth gets stung with a giant scorpian
    -luke is forshadowed to have died at the end
    -Percy just stabs kronos and sends him back to the tomb
    -thalia
    -The backstory of Thalia and luke and annebeth and grover
    -WHERE IS ALL THE AWESOMENESS THAT I AND OTHER PERCY JACKSON BOOK LOVERS LOVE????

    I AM VERY UPSET!!! the only thing i really liked about this film was the name, the tomb of kronos, and the hippocampi.
    Anyone who watches this just be aware.

    When Kronos was constructed outside of luke i started crying because it was just to much. :(
    Anyone who wants to remake all of the percy jackson movies i would love you and so would all the percy jackson fans and it would turn into a harry potter franchise.

    But then again we wouldnt want that cause its our book and we (well i) dont want anyone liking it but not seeing it as anything but the movie.

    Thanks :)

    • You cried? really? you CRIED? well go home. THIS WAS ONE OF MY FAVORITE MOVIES OF THE YEAR! I am a superfan of the books and I thought this movie was perfeccttttttt. I reread the whole series twice this summer including the Heroes of Olympus and I had a party with my girls and we went and LOVED it!

      -Logan Lerman is hot hot hot
      -Clarisse was awesome
      -Chariot of Damnation? WOW, awesome!
      -That guy from the Lovely Bones and Hunger Games and Devil Wears Prada was SOOOOOO good as Mr. D, I’m so happy he was in this one!!!
      -Brandon T. Jackson is hilarious as Grover, funnier in the first, but whatever
      -who cares about the dodgeball!!! They had the WALL!
      -Light em up!
      -ummm Nathan Fillion anyone? Winning!
      -He referenced Firefly! I almost died!
      -Two arguing snakes on a pole!!! LOLZ
      -Chiron is white in the movie you dumbass
      -Annabeth is blonde!
      -the coordinates to the Sea of Monsters in the taxi
      -BEST. FLASHBACK. EVER.
      -The Princess Andromeda looked perfect!!!!!
      -They snuck out and Tyson made a ton of noise and aww it was sooo Tyson. and while we’re on the subject…
      -TYSON. straight up
      -DAT BULL. It was like an Decepticon yo!
      -Oracle!!!
      -Prophecy!!! and it was the same one too!!!!
      -who cares about ages, they look awesome!!
      -Charybdis was so cool I almost died.
      -Ironclad ship! That was one of my favorite parts of the book, where they were SKELETONS not ghosts, and so what!!?!? In the movie they were zombies, does it really matter?
      -KRONOS
      -KRONOS
      -KRONOS
      -KRONOS
      -OMG KRONOS that was so awesome. Glad he got back in the coffin!!! That means I can see him again!!! I hope he posesses Luke!
      -Golden Fleece was neat!
      -THALIA GRACE LOOKS SO COOL IT HAPPENED JUST LIKE THE BOOK OMG I LOVED IT.

      idk what all the fuss is about, it’s just a movie, chill. can’t wait for #3!!!!

      • i have a hard time believeing you even read the books in the first place if you think this was a perfect adaption

        • Fine, quiz me or something. Ask me a question that I’d like only knwo if I read the books. Like something that I couldn’t find out online.

          • I just realized that, good point Sheldor. But the movie was okay.

          • o gawd, shut up cole! wht are yu doing, stop speakin for me! he’s my bro everyoneeee. cole get off here.

  26. The movies aren’t supposed to be like the books. They wouldn’t be interesting if they were. Just because the harry potter movies fallowed closely to the story line of the books doesn’t mean you should expect every book turned movie should are going to be the same way.

    • Yes. yes they are supposed to be like the books. here are several examples of movie adaptations that have done it right. hunger games, twilight (as bad as they are they did stick to the books), beautiful creatures, perks of being a wallflower, lord of the rings, inkheart, and I’m going to go out on a limb here and say that mortal instruments, the fault in our stars and divergent are all going to follow closely to the book based on what information we have. so dont you dare say that to follow the books would be boring because thats the thing you are supposed to do when making a book to movie adaption because if you dont you will seriously piss of your major fanbase.

      • Exactly. Die Hard #1 is BASED off of a book titled Nothing Last Forever, meaning they took inspiration and plot points from the book, but went in a different direction than the book, it is not an ADAPTATION of Nothing Last Forever. ADAPTATIONS (film, stage, ect) ARE SUPPOSED TO FOLLOW THE SOURCE MATERIAL. The reason I don’t like the Twilight movies (in addition to the fact that K-Stew can’t act) is that I didn’t like the source material, they share the same plot, so, generally, if one doesn’t like the original, they won’t like the adaptation. The problem with bad adaptations is that they throw a negative light on the source material for people who don’t already know it, “well, if the movie is crap, the book it’s based on must be crap too.” I think that is a HUGE reason that book fans despise studios that sleepwalk though book adaptations, it usually means they don’t respect the books, or the fans, they just want our money.

        • +1

          But I loved Percy Jackson: Sea of Monsters btw

      • Woah! Hold your horses there. You obviously have not read inkheart because that film was absolutely nothing like the book at all. Seriously it was completely different. To actually point out how big the difference was it would be worse than the difference between the Lightning Thief and the book. Just wanted to point that out there.

        • well thats a trust mistake on my part. my sister read the books and told me the movie followed it to a decent extent. so a mishap on my part but those other books i know for a fact i am not wrong about.

          • Yeah I’ve read all of those except beautiful creatures because I didn’t seem like my kind of book. Still need to read TLOTR, seen all the movies though.

  27. Also who cares if the book is different from the film! Fans are still going to go out and watch it because they’ve read the books no matter what the difference is anyway! It doesn’t matter! What really matters is the actual film itself and the film was a genuine disappointment.

    - The dialogue was cringe worthy and down right corny. (I physically cringed in my seat because it just seemed so awkward and alien coming from the actors mouths).

    - The acting seemed forced and fake from almost the entire cast bar the Hermes actor, Grover and Clarisse because they acted like they were in character and are obviously experienced actors. Logan Lermans performance was ok but it wasn’t exceptional.

    - Some things just sounded so cheap, especially when Mr D says “whatever”.

    - Not much excitement in fight scenes which is probably because they’ve tried to cram in as much as possible from the book.

    - The only really exciting scene was when the bull attacked the camp.

    - Music clashed with almost every scene and those little wooshie sound effects (can’t really describe) were out of place and seemed unnecessary. Especially when I think it’s when Percy is introduced to Tyson.

    - If they had a better script and a better music man then this film would have been great.

    • dont lie to yourself, this movie was perfect.

  28. To be honest I thought the sequal was miles better than the first movie, in all but 2 ways.

    Firstly the movie was alot closer to the book than the lightning thief was. In the lightning thief book the characters don’t spend 80 percent of the movie looking for persephone’s pearls. Where as percy finds it after nearly dieing by the hands of echdina. So because they spent nearly the entire movie finding the pearls they did not mention kronos at all besides being at the movie leaving out a large and critical part to the story.

    They also didn’t show percy fighting Ares, and finding out that Ares knew who stole the lightning bolt, which tell me the truth what would have been better, grover dancing to a lady gaga song, or percy fighting the god of war?

    Atleast in the sea of monsters they stayed more true to the story, andmentioned kronos’s part in lukes treachury, and added some seriously funny moments mainly Mr. D stealing credit for trying to get the golden fleece from Annabeth’s idea.

    Now to say what i didn’t like in the movie, besides the fact that they cut out mark hamill’s role in the movie, because who wouldn’t want him playing tantalus who was a very funny, and roadblock to the second book.

    The first major dislike about the second movie was them changing the raiting from pg13, to pg cutting out alot of the action, and pandering to 6 year olds, instead of older fans who started reading the serious from the beginning who wanted to see action.

    Secondly Kronos himself, as great as it was to finally get him into the movie setting up the stories for feature movies, what is it with hollywood featuring him as a giant lava monster, it was okay in the sam worthington movie, but why did they have to copy that in a smaller form in this movie, i mean kronos is a giant lava monster, and his kids are human looking that’s a big physical change, wouldn’t there be some monster look in Zeus, Poseidon, or his other kids? That really pissed me off what was so wrong having a regular actor play him there was no need for the monstours look.

    Finally something very contradicting to future plotlines is why would Luke continue to serve Kronos, and helping him overthrough the Olympians when Kronos betrayed his servant, and eating him the second he gets his body back, I mean if I was luke i would take the father who never visited him over the evil monster who tried to kill in thanks.

    In the books Kronos has to have Lukes body as a vessel because his immortal body has to heal over time to reform fully, and yet 2 minutes with the golden fleece over the coffin he is suddenly back to normal, surely the Olympians would have thought that was an option to bring Kronos back, and destroy it if the healing power was so great.

    Don’t get me wrong while there was a couple of things I really didn’t like in the movie, the movie in whole was still much better than the first movie, and I hope there is still a chance that they will make more sequals, but without the 3 year time span between each movie, and pandering to young audiences.

  29. It wasnt just a few scences here and there or some certain plots they cut out. The intro of the film and the book were completely different, grover is already captured, tyson meets percy at school, and the take the cab from new york to camp half blood, on top of that it was just percy who met hermes, clarisee who orginally got sent on the quest, chrion was fired, circe was a magican who turned men into guniea pigs, and grover was made into a bride for a cyclops that had the fleece, the only part they got right, on a island with man eating sheep. Theyre thrown in plots from the last olypiam, the titans curse, and hell even the labryinth. I have no jdea how they gonna revive the manicore for the next film, which is cruical to the meeting of the di angelos. Really bug le down, kronos didnt rise, that the whole threat. Ive never seen a movie that has completely and utterly diverted from te storyline as much as this. True books and movie are not word for word but tehrye especially not like this. At leasy with the first. The stuck to the plot, with this is like they decided to give up and market it to teh average movei goer, not die hard fans of the series, no direspected intentended to anyone else seeing the movie, by the way.

Post a Comment

GravatarWant to change your avatar?
Go to Gravatar.com and upload your own (we'll wait)!

 Rules: No profanity or personal attacks.
 Use a valid email address or risk being banned from commenting.


If your comment doesn't show up immediately, it may have been flagged for moderation. Please try refreshing the page first, then drop us a note and we'll retrieve it.

Be Social, Follow Us!!