Percy Jackson: Diebe im Olymp

The Percy Jackson books were some of my favorite books growing up, and when a movie came out, I couldn't wait to see it. However, the film stays as far away from the source material as possible, which makes me wonder why the heck this movie was made.



There were certain things the movie just couldn't get right that I didn't think need changing. For example, in the book, Annabeth is blonde, Percy is 12, and when the car crash happens in the beginning, Grover was supposed to be unconscious. While it was true that Luke is evil, Percy doesn't fight him at the end. He fights Ares, the god of war.



The acting is decent, and Logan Lerman is a decent Percy Jackson. The special effects are cool, and the fights are really entertaining. The comedic elements are there, and the chemistry between the three actors are likeable.

In the end, it's just a popcorn flick for the family. It may not be the best movie ever made, but it's decent enough to enjoy. I just wish the movie stuck closer to the source material.

I have to admit it, I haven't read the book, but regardless of whether it was faithful or not, this rarely ruins a movie or TV adaptation for me. That said, I can understand the disappointment of those who loved the book. However, I really enjoyed this film, it is hardly the best movie I have ever seen, but I personally consider it one of the better movies of 2010 that I've seen so far, and that is saying a lot considering how disappointing some of the movies have been.

Where the film is lacking is in the storytelling. There are those who say that it gets bogged down by too many mythological references, and I have to say I kind of agree. Percy Jackson and the Lightning Thief had a brilliant concept to work from and a fairly original one at that, and while the references were very interesting and cleverly incorporated, the writers could have simplified a little how much they included. Back to the storytelling, it does have a lot of exciting moments, such as the scene at the museum with the fury, in Medusa's lair, the fight with the hydra, in the underworld and the climax, but some parts in the middle half drag and feel clunky, and I personally could have done with less of the scene in the casino.

Complaints aside, the film looks incredible, the special effects are excellent and the cinematography and scenery are clever and skillful. The music only adds to the excitement and the dialogue has some very nice moments with some humour from Grover and with Gabe when he is seen on television talking about Percy's disappearance and both Medusa and Persephone are deliciously seductive in looks and in dialogue. The film also moves briskly in general, and the direction is decent. Personally I liked the acting, Logan Lerman is surprisingly appealing as Percy, and Brandon T.Jackson is lots of fun as Grover. People have said Alexandra Daddario was too old as Annabeth, I wouldn't know, but she looks lovely and is very spirited in the role. Pierce Brosnan was surprisingly good as Mr Brunner/Chiron, though it was a bit of a shock seeing him with a horse's lower body, Rosario Dawson is fabulously sexy as Persephone and Sean Bean is okay as Zeus though he doesn't have much to do. The real joys however are with Uma Thurman, who gives a delicious turn as Medusa, and Steve Coogan who was a big surprise as Hades.

Overall, I actually liked this film, it was fun to watch, while nothing absolutely outstanding or mind-blowing. 7.5/10 Bethany Cox

If you don't think too much about how it's not true to the books, the movie is actually quite entertaining. Logan Lerman is a great actor and a great Percy, but he was definitely too old for the character.

Which is one of the first major icks. In the books the characters are kids, Percy is 12, but played by a full on adult. There's a lot of other things the movies have changed but regardless of those, I still enjoyed the movies and it's too bad they were cut short.

The premise of this movie - that Greek gods were real and have offspring in the modern world - is interesting. But the execution of this idea felt very rushed in this movie. I haven't read the book, so can't judge where the blame lies for this.

The movie is an enjoyable way to kill a couple of hours, but isn't as engrossing as other movies of this genre.

Several big stars feature in cameo roles and for anyone who knows a fair bit about who celebrities are, this tends to distract from the movie. Uma Thurman, Brosnan, etc., aren't really given the screen time to build a strong character for themselves. Perhaps the best of these is Steve Coogan playing Hades, but even here you send most of his screen time thinking "oh look, it's Steve Coogan" rather than being drawn into the movie. It could have benefited from having the minor roles played by less known actors - as it is, their appearances tend to detract from the main characters who actually do a good job with the material they have been given.

But these are minor concerns - the biggest problem with this movie is that Percy finds out he's a demigod and suddenly seems to develop gifts with no effort or training, just by virtue of knowing his past. At the start of the movie, he already demonstrated an exceptional ability to remain underwater for long periods of time. But after finding out he's a demigod, he develops strong sword fighting skills with no training or effort (the start of the fight between the red helmets and the blue helmets, before the water "thing"), and later is capable of manipulating water in a couple of scenes without being taught this skill or having any difficulty or doubts about his ability to do it. This is just preposterous. The mythical/other worldly framework is generally used to provide a context to display human failings, struggles, and virtues. Instead, in Percy Jackson, this framework is used to simply give the lead character a loose justification for overcoming other mythical creatures. He doesn't have to question how to use his powers, nor does he have to put any effort into developing these powers.

Like I say, the movie isn't so bad as to make it unwatchable, but they really missed a chance to make this movie have a strong impact by failing to give it any depth. It is all just the bells and whistles of CGI and having mythological creatures just to have some interesting looking battles and a trip to the underworld. It could have been so much more. Whether this is a failing of the movie, the books, or both, is up to those who have read the books to decide. But the movie reeks of jumping on the Harry Potter bandwagon in an attempt to get box- office success, while ignoring the fact that those movies were built on books that had some depth to them. That is what gave them their cultural poignancy. This movie lacks it completely.

I went to see this movie without any expectations. I haven't read the books and I only read one review in the paper.

Yes, there are parts borrowed from other movies, but what makes this movie different is that it doesn't take itself too seriously, like Harry P. It was as if most of the actors were instructed to 'Ham it up'.

I didn't look at my watch during the movie (two hours), which is a good sign that I am enjoying going along for the ride.

What I didn't like was that most of the mythology was missing. Like it was assumed knowledge. All it did was not allow me to connect to the main characters because I didn't know enough about them (from the film).

The music wasn't overbearing, but went nicely with the film. Nothing memorable except "Highway to Hell".

S/Fx were done to an acceptable level, especially Hades (the place not the God). But the Gods were too human for my liking.

Maybe the producers are hoping this film will fill in the void being left by Harry P. The hero in this movie looks about the same age as Harry in his last film.

I don't think it is a repeat watch (DVD).