Amazon.com: Customer Reviews: Percy Jackson/lightning Thief
Your Garage Summer Reading Amazon Fashion Learn more Discover it $5 Albums Fire TV Stick Sun Care Patriotic Picks Shop-by-Room Amazon Cash Back Offer WienerDog WienerDog WienerDog  Amazon Echo  Echo Dot  Amazon Tap  Echo Dot  Amazon Tap  Amazon Echo Starting at $49.99 All-New Kindle Oasis AutoRip in CDs & Vinyl Best Camping & Hiking Gear in Outdoors STEM

Format: DVD|Change
Price:$3.99+ Free shipping with Amazon Prime
Your rating(Clear)Rate this item


There was a problem filtering reviews right now. Please try again later.

Showing 1-10 of 191 reviews(1 star). Show all reviews
on July 8, 2010
I managed to swallow Chris Columbus's changes to the first two Harry Potter movies, but the travesty he created from Riordan's lively, likeable "quest" novel I just can't ignore or forgive. All the great conversations, the truly funny situations, the believable universe, and the contemporarizing (is that a word???) of Greek mythology that made Riordan's novel (and the complete series) such great fun were completely ignored. What this movie is instead is a retread of every stereotypical "fallback" character, plot line, and dialogue ever presented in a movie for preadolescents. Obviously, the choice of young stars was to introduce two more attractive youngsters who have some potential--whether as actors or teen idols remains to be seen. But what was the point of making Grover an over-sexed satyr? Of making Persephone a hot mama? Of making the Lotus Hotel an older teen's idea of free drinks, free sex, free gambling? Of making the gods SO stereotypical of every bad B movie from the 1930s through the 1990s? I mean, Riordan created a great new consistent universe, and Columbus turned into a tired old grade-B (even C or D!)
stereotype.
Don't bother with the movie--get the audio books instead! Jesse Bernstein does a good job with the tone and feeling that Riordan created. (And yes, I'm an adult who's been reading and enjoying "quest" novels for many years. Riordan respected his audience, and created well and true for them; Columbus, on the other hand, "disrespected" Riordan's intent, and it shows.)
2222 comments|268 people found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse
on June 24, 2010
My son talked me into reading these books with him, and we loved them.
When we went to see the new Harry Potter movie, scenes for it came on during the trailers.

He recognized the story the second the preview started. He was thrilled, and so was I. What potential this unique and fun series had for a movie--or movies...I mean, they advertised that it was being brought to us by the people who make the Harry Potter movies.

The Potter movies stay so true to the book--taking care to absolutely keep things in the screenplay that are necessary to the plot line.

I wish I could say the same for this movie.

When it finally came out, we went to a movie theater in NJ that was right across the river from NYC.
We could see the Empire State building from the theater parking lot, and took it as a sign that the movie was going to rock. We were so psyched to see it.

When we left the theater, I thought my son was going to cry, and I couldn't un-scrunch my eyebrows--huh?? I felt so bad for him, for me, for Rick Riordan...

We understand that it's impossible to make a movie exactly like a book-- but this was a travesty.
Every important aspect of the story was by-passed for the sake of special effects.

It's almost as if the screenwriter had been given a verbal summary of what the book was about, and took it from there. So many important plot points were left out or down right changed to the point that it would be impossible to even think about a sequel.

It's such a shame. These stories have the "book made to movie" potential of the Potter series, or dare I say, a kids "Lord of the Rings".

If someone with vision had just read the books, the money used to make it could have been so much better spent.

It could have been knocked out of the park, but, alas, the ball was dropped and we all lost.
1818 comments|218 people found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse
on March 4, 2010
Pros: One or two redeeming acting performances, decent special effects.

Cons: Bad casting, failure to bring the world to life, lack of creativity, complete failure to capture either the tone or the characters from the book.

Percy Jackson and his friends are racing to the underworld, desperate to get the lightning bolt in time. As they reach Hades' residence, they are greeted by Persephone, wearing a ripped black lace, cleavage baring dress. They ask to see Hades, but Persephone makes a few suggestive remarks and then thrusts her breasts into Grover's face.

"I've never had a satyr ...(long pause) ... visit before," she purrs in a Spanish accent.

Grover (who has already been established as sex obsessed) is appreciative.

If this sounds like a scene that would remotely fit in with your concept of the first Percy Jackson book, then you might enjoy this movie. If not, then stay away, because it's pretty well a snapshot of the movie as a whole.

They went for a more mature feel for the movie - not just the characters' ages, but the content reflects this. The casting for this movie was completely wrong. It wasn't that the acting was bad, exactly, it was just that some of the actors were completely inappropriate for the parts they were playing. Grover is not a smooth talking, wise cracking, confident character. Sure, the guy playing him was funny, but he wasn't Grover. Annabeth was an even worse failure. They kept telling us that she was smart, the daughter of Athena, etc., but we don't actually get many instances of her acting smart. Instead, she seems like a generic tough, sexy action girl. In fact, every female character in this movie (with the exception of the mothers) is sexualized - Annabeth, the women at the Lotus Casino, the Aphrodite girls, Medusa (who is supposed to be ugly), Persephone. Female characters that could not be turned into sexy girls (like Clarisse) are cut from the movie altogether. It isn't that I have a problem with action movies that are about smashing heads and meeting beautiful women, it's just that this is so not what the Percy Jackson series is about.

By making this movie about the action, the creators have really undersold the wonder and magic of this series. I'm not a person who believes that a movie must mimic a book exactly, but there are so many missed opportunities here dealing with setting alone. For example, in the books each of the Olympian gods has a unique throne - Poseidon's is a fishing chair. This is something that could have been a great visual for the movie and could have been played up even more - instead the movie opts for identical marble thrones. In Camp Halfblood, we get generic military setting instead of the unique cabins and campers. In the Underworld, we get a generic hell instead of great details like the EZ Death line and the burnt out fields of Asphodel. Generic is the best word to describe this movie.

There were a few good points. The kid who played Percy Jackson really captured that character's impulsiveness and good heart despite being way too old for the role. The special effects were okay. Not great, but okay.

You might be wondering if this movie would be good to someone who has never read the books. The answer is no. It might not be such a huge disappointment, but it is still nothing more than a below average action flick.

I tried to decide if the few points of light were enough to give this movie two stars. I concluded that they weren't, because not only does this movie suck, but it completely ruins any chance for a decent series. If they make another Percy Jackson movie, then it will have to move away from this one completely to be any good. 1+ stars.
1010 comments|110 people found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse
on January 24, 2014
I had to stop this movie halfway through because it was so disloyal to the books that it angered me. I wish I hadn't wasted my money on the rental. I'm not even sure how they were able to use the rights to the title of the book.
0Comment|4 people found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse
on October 13, 2013
If they would have had the courage to stick to the script it would have made even more money in the box office because people would have been happy to see it over and over again! Instead some idiot took Rick's well written book and pissed on it! They added things in the movie that never happened while leaving out the great things that did! Rick's book was like a history lesson (wish I would have had it when I was studying Greek Mythology). This movie was a parody and a sad one at that!

Don't let that director near anything else you write Rick.
0Comment|4 people found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse
on August 27, 2013
I am not sure the film writer even read the book. The book was well written with a lot of humor, plot twists and surprises in it - all of which are missing from the movie. I am really not sure how anyone could mess up a good story as badly as has been done with this one. In short don't waste your time and money on this garbage movie.
0Comment|7 people found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse
on August 23, 2013
Gosh, what a horrid movie. Bad acting and a bad script and moving so slowly that you have to notice how bad both are. I won't be checking out any more in this series, that's for sure. Poor Pierce Brosnan wearing a horse's ass (literally) or at least having one CGI'ed onto him serves as a pretty good metaphor for this whole sorry movie.
0Comment|9 people found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse
on December 21, 2014
Terrible. Had to turn it off halfway through, which is something I never, ever do! And I tried to watch it immediately after reading the book in one day. Just, please, stick to the books. (And I'm by no means a movie adaptation hater, in general!)
0Comment|4 people found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse
on May 4, 2012
I read the book and watched the movie...I loved it!

THE BOOK!!!!!!!

The movie is SO STUPID!!! The resemblances? It has a kid named Percy...maybe some more... Why can't they make sea of Monsters? Here's why:

1. They don't show you Clairese
2. I don't think you can poisen a stupid gate...It is supossed to be a TREE!
3. I only watched it ONCE...and I'm pretty sure Percy destroys Luke...
4. Percy is in High-School...that defeats the whole "At the age of Sixteen" part of the Prophecy!

Also, there is no fight with Ares...I think we are missing something here! Not to mention Percy brings a phone to Aunty Em's Garden Gnome Imporium...which is stupid because having a cell-phone(or at least using it)is moreless saying "Hey Monsters! Come And Get Me!" Oh, and another thing, they don't even show Kronos! WHAT THE HECK!

Read The Book First! Then watch the movie and start complaining!
11 comment|5 people found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse
on March 3, 2015
Waste of time. I have not read the book and didn't like it, my daughter is a big fan of Percy Jackson books and she didn't like it either.
CGI is like in 90's, dialogs are dull and boring, actors do not even try to play.
0Comment|3 people found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse