Well... I didn't HATE it. I wanted to love it. I was pleased that we finally got Thalia and ASH was great as the new Chiron (although he's barely in the movie) and Stanley Tucci is always a delight. And everyone agreed the one scene with Fillion as Hermes was the highlight of the movie (and he got the only big laugh in our theatre). I did my best not to get annoyed with the changes from the books, because I know that they need to change things to make it work in a movie length, or even just in the medium. Portable MIST in a bottle? It was already explained in the first movie that mortals can't see the weird stuff, and that Mist is just a naturally-occurring phenomena. Was it just easier to not have to CGI his eyes all the time? (I will say that I found Tyson way less irritating than in the book, a definite change for the better.) But regardless, I felt it was super predictable even with all the changes, and I was annoyed that they basically only encountered one sea monster in a story called SEA OF MONSTERS. Polyphemus doesn't count. (Yay for Grover in the dress, though!) I wanted the Circe stuff, the sirens, etc. I don't understand why they just randomly decided to make Silena Beauregard as a baddie. Did they just open the book and pick a random camper's name?!
I'm rambling. It's early. Basically I liked the actors but not the plot. Lerman as Percy is always awesome and these movies would fall apart without the cast.
I had a lot of the same thoughts about the movie. I really liked the first half and hated the second half because it was like at some point they just ditched character development to be all KRONOS. I really, really thought the sirens were an important part of the book and there was no need to leave it out. Also, I felt it lacked the real sadness of Tyson's 'death' because Percy and Annabeth traveled for a while after he thought Tyson died and in the movie it was like 5 minutes and during battle so not honestly enough time to let it sink in. I just wan't feeling Percy's "this is my brother and it was my responsibility to take care of him" thing from the book. I also really missed Tyson's "I asked daddy for a brother and he gave me you" stuff. I felt Tyson should have been portrayed as more... mentally deficient as in the books because he's, what, 8? And intellectually disabled. And they sort of just made him naive but not in need of actual protection. In the book he needs Percy to take care of him, and that was missing from the movie.
I also felt like Annabeth didn't do much in the movie since they took out Circe and the sirens both of which were huge Annabeth scenes. I felt like, why the heck is she even there? The movie could make me ship Clarisse/Percy which I have never ever had feels for in the book just because they made Annabeth a non-character.
Also, what was with Kronos eating Luke? Why is he still going to serve Kronos after this if Kronos ATE him??
ASH as Chrion was perfection and so was Stanley Tucci, all the things you said. I loved the parts at camp. I just with the whole movie had lived up to those parts.
I'm rambling. It's early. Basically I liked the actors but not the plot. Lerman as Percy is always awesome and these movies would fall apart without the cast.
Reply
I also felt like Annabeth didn't do much in the movie since they took out Circe and the sirens both of which were huge Annabeth scenes. I felt like, why the heck is she even there? The movie could make me ship Clarisse/Percy which I have never ever had feels for in the book just because they made Annabeth a non-character.
Also, what was with Kronos eating Luke? Why is he still going to serve Kronos after this if Kronos ATE him??
ASH as Chrion was perfection and so was Stanley Tucci, all the things you said. I loved the parts at camp. I just with the whole movie had lived up to those parts.
Reply
Leave a comment