Percy Jackson: Sea of Monsters

2013

Adventure / Family

Synopsis


Uploaded By: YIFY
Downloaded 534,264 times
November 17, 2013 at 2:17 pm

Cast

Logan Lerman as Percy Jackson
Alexandra Daddario as Annabeth
Nathan Fillion as Hermes
720p 1080p 3D
807.67 MB
1280*544
English
PG
23.976 fps
1hr 46 min
P/S 64 / 403
1.64 GB
1920*816
English
PG
23.976 fps
1hr 46 min
P/S 47 / 192
1.64 GB
1920*1080
English
PG
23.976 fps
1hr 46 min
P/S 5 / 32

Movie Reviews

Reviewed by hastebahar 3 / 10

A Complete Embarrassment

If you haven't read the books, the review is not for you. This movie is enjoyable and entertaining for an action movie, and there are funny parts as well as suspenseful parts. If you have read the books, however, here you go. I'm just going to cut straight to the point here - this movie was a joke. From the acting to the attempt to bring Rick Riordan's world to life, everything was wrong. So wrong, in fact, that after the movie finished I sat there in stunned silence thinking, "That's it?". I didn't go in this movie with high expectations since the first movie was such a disaster. However, I thought that since Annabeth's hair was blonde and the trailer looked promising, this movie would be at least better than the first one. I was wrong. Let's just start with the actors; the only two that impressed me with their performances were Leven Rambin as Clarisse and Stanley Tucci as Mr. D. Even though Leven didn't look the part, her sarcasm and fieriness matched the Clarisse in the books. Mr. D was perfect, I only wish he had been in the first movie. The rest of the actors were either horrible or just mediocre. Logan Lerman was a bore as Percy, barely able to be the witty smart-aleck from the books. Brandon T. Jackson was simply a comedic relief and nothing else. I saw none of Grover's personality in him. Douglas Smith, while a good actor by himself, didn't play the Tyson I imagined. He was smart, spoke clearly, and was even attractive with two eyes. Come on Thor Freudenthal, can you cast anyone who isn't remotely good-looking? The worst was Alexandria Daddadrio. She conveyed no emotion, her lines were monotone, and the way she played the damsel-in-distress, Percy-obsessed girl was so unnatural. Since when is Annabeth the one who needs saving? Anyways, I know that book-to-movie adaptations are incredibly hard to cast, so pushing aside the disappointments with that, lets just go to the storyline. The beginning was good. I thought it was sensible, for time's sake, to cut out the whole dodge ball game at the beginning of the book and introduce Tyson in another way. The flashback to the original trio was good, the bull fight was just how I imagined it, but Grover shouldn't have been there. He should've been already away, looking for Pan. I don't understand why they had to have him in camp; this was honestly such a simple thing they could've done to please the fans. Chiron's exile from the camp was also a simple touch they could've added. Once they go on the quest however, everything turns into a big mess. Grover getting captured by Luke? Finding Clarisse in the stomach of Scylla? All of a sudden, Clarisse is agreeing with everything Percy says? Then, the most disappointing part of all, the entire Circe's island scene was skipped along with the siren scene, which was a major development point for Percy and Annabeth's relationship (but I guess they don't need any development since they had them almost kissing at the end of The Lightning Thief). The dramatic and highly unnecessary amusement park scenes with Luke were so ridiculous they had me laughing. Why did Kronos come out in his full form, and why on Earth was Percy able to defeat him with a simple slash of his sword? That made no sense at all and I'm sure that even non-book readers would be confused at how a sword, even a "cursed sword" could immediately defeat the most powerful Titan with one cut. Also, has nobody realized that the Iris message has been completely ignored in this movie and the previous? Why leave out a form of communication so vital to the books? Lastly, something that wasn't necessary but would've added a lot more comedy to the movie than Grover's lame one-liner's were the "party ponies" who rescue Percy at the end. The reviving of Thalia was well done, although I don't understand Clarisse and Percy's sudden bonding. In the books, those two hate each other for all five books, and I can never remember them exchanging a smile or an understanding nod. In conclusion, I felt almost as though the director was trying to stray as far as the book as possible. Why couldn't they have curled Annabeth's hair, had Tyson have slow and slurred speech, added the search for Pan to the story, and so many other little things that may have made up for the scene skipping and melodramatic almost- deaths. If you love the books, I say stay as far away from this movie as possible, unless you want to go home with a yearn to reread the entire series just to remind yourself of the characters and story and get the awful portrayal out of your mind. That's all I have to say.

Reviewed by jparker9899 2 / 10

Best Thing About This Is The Special Effects

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.

Reviewed by ztmillers-2 5 / 10

Decent

Right off the bat, I will answer one question I know many are dying to have answered: Did this one follow the book more? The answer: Yes . . . marginally.

I never hated the first movie for all of its deviations from the source material, but I can understand that some did. If the alterations made to the first movie annoyed you beyond belief, just know now that this movie only makes a slightly larger attempt to stick with Rick Riordan's material and you will probably not enjoy this movie much better than the first. If loyalty to the source material is not your first priority, I'd recommend you investigate this movie. You might just find yourself enjoying it.

The plot: Percy and his friends embark on a quest to save their home from being overrun by monsters. To do this, they must dive into the heart of the Sea of Monsters and retrieve a mythical object, The Golden Fleece, that has the power to restore power to the shields that protect their home.

NEGATIVES:

-Not enough time spent actually in the Sea of Monsters.

-A few corny lines of dialogue

-CGI wasn't always top-notch

-A few scenes left me wondering "what was the point of that?"

-The lack of Chris Beck's wonderful musical score, even though the new composer was alright.

POSITIVES:

+Good acting

+Lots of laughs

+Decent pacing

+Good character development

+Nathan Fillion

+The characters in the movie were all true to their book counterparts, even if a good piece of the plot wasn't

+A welcome amount of heartfelt moments

+Alexandra Daddario's beautiful eyes

Okay, that last one was just for me.

All around, it's a fun movie. The crowd that loves this movie will consist mostly of those who enjoyed the first movie, but anyone might as well check it out. There's a good chance you will be pleasantly surprised. (After all, how many movies are there to see in August? Really?)

Alright, Fox! Bring on "Titan's Curse!"

Read more IMDb reviews

388 Comments

Be the first to leave a comment