Percy Jackson e gli dei dell'Olimpo - Il mare dei mostri

Percy Jackson: Sea of Monsters feels like a cheap ripoff of the Harry Potter series made for younger kids or teenagers who read the books and would like to see it on the big screen. The script is awfully written, some of the dialogues were bad. Some of the funny scenes earlier in the film feel forced and the jokes were not delivered properly by the characters (found out the screenplay is actually written by the screenwriter who wrote Green Lantern).

The storyline is weak and feels out of place. There's simply not enough adventure in the Sea of Monster'S' and the actual quest felt a little too rushed for the audience to feel satisfied. Furthermore, the big finale near the end of the film feels disappointing and lame. Not sure about the novels as I've never read them before, but it seems as if the gods doesn't seem to care much about their half-blood kids (Poseidon seemed to be ignoring Percy despite his many attempts in communicating with him)...There's no appearances of the Greek Gods - Zeus, Poseidon or Hades throughout the film...despite the fact that there's an issue of utmost urgency that requires their immediate attention. One could even question why bother making the half-bloods in the first place?

Most of the plot elements felt contrived or questionable...they're just simply there for the sake of the plot (sorry for mentioning some of the plot element, I just couldn't help it):

-Out of nowhere, Luke just 'magically' found the Tomb of Kronos?

-A powerful crucial magical item such as the golden fleece is only guarded by a Cyclops on an island?

-The film's title mentioned Sea of Monster'S', but in the end the audience just get to see just a monster that looks like a maelstrom?

-How Grover managed to reach the island in the first place?

-How Luke and his crew gets to have a rat-scorpion hybrid monster as a pet in the first place?

-Seriously, if Kronos was defeated that easily, then why it needs 3 powerful Greek Gods to defeat him in the first place?

-Annabelle mentioned that Poseidon's powers don't work in the sea of monsters since the sea is not within Poseidon's domain of power, but Tyson managed to heal his wound?

Not to mention, the film ends in an unsatisfactory cliffhanger as well.

There's some character development in the film, especially Tyson, Percy and Luke. The acting performances from actors were fine and the film is entertaining in some parts of the film, but it certainly didn't reach the heights and complexity of the adventures in the Harry Potter series. While fans of the book series might love the film, but for general audiences, this fantasy action adventure is certainly a miss.

I love the Percy Jackson books, it's one of my favourite book series. Thought the first film was alright, but a mediocre version of the books. When I heard that there was going to be a second one, I was very skeptical that it would work considering the number of bad changes they've done to the Lightning Thief.

But once I learned that screen writers Scott Alexander & Larry Karaszewski were hired to adapt it (who aren't credited for some reason), I began to feel hopeful for the Sea of Monsters. Alexander and Karaszewski had previously worked on the bio-pics Ed Wood, The People vs. Larry Flynt, and Man on the Moon. I thought that they'd look up the books and do justice to Percy Jackson.

Just came back from seeing it and I really like it, thought it was better than The Lightning Thief. I didn't think that it was a great film, some of the dialogue felt awkward to me, but overall I had fun and felt some justice was done. Yes, there was some changes made to the Sea of Monsters but nothing as bad as the previous film. I enjoyed watching Stanley Tucci (Mr. D), Anthony Stewart Head (Chiron), and Ron Perlman (Polyphemus).

Definitely see it if you like the books. Now I'm hoping to see the next films in the series!

This movie was a major disappointment in my opinion. I've read the books and I loved them so I thought the movie would be pretty good too! I was wrong. Problem one is that it was a little too slow. They could have easily shortened 10 to 15 minutes of this movie but yet unnecessary parts were added. Problem two is that the acting was just not good. They could have done a much better job and at least tried to act in character. The biggest problem is that this movie was just stupid. It took them up until the last 20 minutes to reach their destination and to get to the whole point. Up until then there were just time wasters. The only good thing about this film is the special effects. I saw this in 3-D and i give it applause for its amazing graphics and special effects. Other than that though, this movie isn't worth seeing, it has countless flaws and problems. Don't waste your money on it.

Greek mythology returns in "Percy Jackson: Sea of Monsters", the sequel to 2010's "The Lightning Thief". Based on the novels by Rick Riordan, the series puts a spin on the rich mythology by blending it with modern society, which is kind of interesting.

The bulk of all the characters here are demigods/half-bloods (offspring of gods and humans). But the protagonist is Percy Jackson, a demigod son of Poseidon. Previously, he along with his besties Annabeth (daughter of Athena) and Grover (a satyr), stopped Luke, the Lightning thief, from destroying Olympus. Here, Camp Half-Blood (demigods' safe haven) are under threat after Thalia's tree, the boundary that protects the camp, is poisoned. The only thing that can heal it is the Golden Fleece which is located on an island in the Sea of Monsters, or what we like to call the Bermuda Triangle.

The movie is quite action-packed and pits our hero against a variety of Greek monsters. I loved the scene where the half-bloods had to face the Colchis bull. The mechanical bull was quite extraordinary and that scene was entertaining. However, I felt that the climax was a bit of a letdown as all the tension that had been generated zipped away so quickly.

Characters come and go. In "Sea of Monsters", much of the ensemble cast that make up the deities from the previous film are absent. We will see no more of Zeus (Sean Bean), Poseidon (Kevin McKidd), Hades (Steve Coogan), Persephone (Rosario Dawson), and Chiron (Pierce Brosnan). That means most of the experienced actors are out (not to forget Uma Thurman as Medusa). In replacement, we get Dionysus portrayed by the reliable Stanley Tucci. The gods Hermes and Chiron have replacements (Nathan Fillion and Anthony Head, respectively). We also have the clumsy but humble Tyson (Douglas Smith), Percy's cyclops half-brother, and the self-eccentric Clarisse La Rue (Leven Rambin), demigod daughter of Ares.

The movie had lots of scenes involving special effects. It was okay but it wasn't excellent. Some of the creatures were stunning (the hippocampus was amazing and eye-candy) whereas some looked pretty cheap and effortless (Kronos).

Under the direction of a new director, the movie is more faithful to the source compared to the first movie's similarity to the book (although by a tiny bit). But that's not to say some of the scenes diverge from he book. The movie is quite well-paced and during the ride, there are plenty of laughs to enjoy.

Overall, "Percy Jackson: Sea of Monsters" is quite an enjoyable film. It's not better than the first and it's not worse than the first. It has quite an interesting premise and some fine action sequences.

Rating: 6/10

Final Verdict: "Percy Jackson: Sea of Monsters" is a decent sequel that provides plenty of action scenes and laughs, with passable acting and okay visual effects.

Keying in my first review in IMDb after watching a premiere show for the first time.

Percy Jackson: Sea Monsters is a decent effort as a sequel to the lighting thief. It is not entirely necessary to watch the first part to watch. The story is good on its own. However I did notice that there were many dialogs just out of line. The script might have over worked to make it humorous.

The visual effects are not up to the mark overall but some places are pretty sweet and worth watching in 3D otherwise the depth is not that great. With that one can easily notice work of CG in not so important parts of the movie.

The actors have done well and delivered the script good that the subtle jokes and wits were understood and 95% effective. I was pretty much impressed by the actress in the lead and supporting roles than the men.

Overall, the movie is a good watch but not a great effort. If you really into 3D movies, I would watch in on the big screen with the expectation some weakness in CG. Otherwise I would wait for BluRay. I give it a 7 of 10.