User Score
5.2

Mixed or average reviews- based on 164 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Positive: 75 out of 164
  2. Negative: 51 out of 164

Review this movie

  1. Your Score
    0 out of 10
    Rate this:
    • 10
    • 9
    • 8
    • 7
    • 6
    • 5
    • 4
    • 3
    • 2
    • 1
    • 0
    • 0
  1. Submit
  2. Check Spelling
  1. Aug 7, 2013
    1
    Freudenthal’s Sea of Monsters is a step down for the Percy Jackson franchise in nearly every single way imaginable. The scale is smaller, the characters are less interesting, and the film makes poor use of its rich book and Greek mythology source materials. Young movie (and book series) fans will likely find enjoyment in watching their favorite heroes and actors back on the big screen for another Percy Jackson adventure but the movie provides next to nothing for anyone outside of that core demographic. As mentioned, the film spends a significant amount of time planting seeds for the next entry in the series, but it’s hard to imagine that many moviegoers will be as anxious for part three, The Titan’s Curse, after sitting through this Sea of Monsters. Expand
  2. Aug 9, 2013
    10
    I can easily give a 10 beacuse it's BETTER than the first in so many ways that i can't explain in 5000 characters. It's very nice, fun. It's a good movie for the summer.
  3. Aug 8, 2013
    4
    The thing with this one is that it missed a lot key points. Tyson doesn't appear like that. Why isn't Clarrise fat. Where the golden fleece is at, there in not part of the book was there an amusement park on the island. Where are the man eating goats. Where is the hamster woman. Chiron looks old while it only takes place one year later. Percy in the book is 13 while in the movie he is 16. I am very disappointed in the movie. I somewhat enjoyed it though. Expand
  4. Aug 30, 2013
    0
    I fell asleep halfway through. The mix of modern and ancient settings just don't cut it. Its ridiculous to see high-tech machinery in an ancient setting. The boss is too weak! No excitement at all. First Persey Jackson was way better.
  5. Aug 20, 2013
    3
    Very much one for kids and hardly any sea monsters as lead to believe. If you have children then its ok, if your really looking for excitement for an adult pick another film.
  6. Aug 9, 2013
    10
    Haters gonna hate and the demigods (the percy jackson fans) and the normal people will like. I don't care about the critics because, the normal people will like so badly.
  7. Sep 6, 2013
    2
    Watch in amazement as the main characters hold swords but never actually use them against their foes. Be astonished by the surprisingly terrible story and get ready to be angry at possibly the worst ending to a movie I have ever seen!
  8. Aug 11, 2013
    10
    Sea of Monsters shows what potential the franchise should have should it continue. It clearly demonstrates how a book adaptation should be: making it its own thing, while staying loyal to the overall plot of the original story, and maintaining continuity with the original film. Although some direction was better in the first film, overall this film feels more satisfying as an adaptation and feels better as a solid movie overall.

    You do not have to see the first film in order to understand this one. Right from the opening scene, through a very clever back story prologue, and voice over from Percy, we get a sense of what is going on in this world and are fully immersed. Percy, played by Logan Lerman, delivers the narration as if he’s telling us a legend, and one cannot help but feel immersed in the goings on. The opening story is intense, but is not too dark compared to how other films such as The Chronicles of Narnia: Prince Caspian would have handled it. On that note, the whole film is very family friendly and plays as a light fantasy adventure, that nevertheless has its deep morals integrated in. Using the Prince Caspian example, this film does not go as dark or as intense as that film went, yet it also does not go the opposite way in making it campy. With that being said, there are some weaknesses in the direction of the film. While it does not go down the Batman & Robin campy road, the action of the film feels a little too tame at some parts. It’s still enjoyable, but unfortunately, it just doesn’t feel completely executed to the point that it should be. Its nowhere near bad, but it still could have been better. The action is still fun to watch, but it never gets bloody or as intense as it even was in the first film. It plays out as a fun, clean fantasy, that despite the lack of brutalness, it still feels like one could immerse into doing those things should they be real.

    With regards to continuity from the first film, you will see a much more expanded Camp Half Blood in the film, the home of the main characters, however unlike the Harry Potter films, it doesn’t feel or look as noticeably different. The film feels like a sequel and does make the references to the first film, but still feels like it can stand on its own. While fixing up some cut characters and elements from the first film, the film also introduces the goings on at a natural pace without trying to lamely cover things up and consider earlier introduced things as retcon, which is more than can be said about Harry Potter, which merely puts things in its films without (for the most part) making any sort of real continuity or grounded connection with the other films, choosing instead to make each film stand on its own. Sea of Monsters has both a sequel and stand alone feel to it, which is how films should be. Why should sequels ignore what was previously established in the earlier films? The Harry Potters changed pretty much everything to fit the needs of the story without for the most part thinking of new ways to handle the story elements, in trying to maintain the books justice. While on the note of Harry Potter, one simply cannot compare it to any of the Harry Potters. Yes, there are similarities, but, being the huge Potter fan that I am, I barely thought of Harry while watching this movie. There will always be similarities and comparisons, but is not every movie comparable to another? Even some that people would not even think were similar such as the Pirates of the Caribbean trilogy being comparable to the original Star Wars trilogy. And let us not forget the Avatar/Pocahontas/Dances with Wolves or the Iron Man/Dark Knight trilogies similarities. They will always exist, but there will always be one person who has NEVER seen the first film to have the idea, and even some who have seen both ideas and may like the newer one that has the old ideas better because of how it is executed. Its NOT what it is, but HOW it is.

    HOW the movie “fixes” the first film is in the following ways:

    - A much more grounded and more better polished script. The first film felt that the script was rushed in and was hopeful to be more than its script. The structure and plot was thin and weak, and didn’t feel as immersed as this film does. This film feels like they really revised and mapped out what they wanted from the script instead of just seemingly writing the script over night without revisions. You get the sense that the film makers are passionate to get the writing right and make it make sense and enjoyable for those that haven’t even seen the first film.
    - Percy’s friend Grover (played by Brandon T. Jackson), is not annoying in this film like he was in the first film. This time he is more mature, yet still retains his comic characteristics.
    - The world is populated with many characters. Unlike the first, where there were merely just cameoized characters, and small things hidden in the real this one feels more like there actually is a hidden universe.
    Expand
  9. Aug 15, 2013
    3
    Por lo que vi en los avances de cine, esta pelicula prometia mucho mas, la verdad se quedo muy corta en cuanto a historia parece un refrito mal hecho de los clasicos mitologicos como perseo y la medusa....espero que no sigan saliendo mas de estas peliculas de Percy Jackson
  10. Aug 7, 2013
    9
    A poor mans Harry Potter. The movie is all around pretty good and the critics, as usual, should be ignored. Take Harry P. and knock the quality down a notch in everything and you get this movie. Still, that is a high bar and if you like and understand the whole Mt. Olympus god thing it all make sense and is a great 2 hours of entertainment for the whole family. Recommended.
  11. Nov 27, 2013
    0
    Wow! It took only 20 minutes to get bored of this movie!
    What can I say, acting isn't well how should I put this.. Top of the line?
    And the action scenes just makes me laugh, they've been done so poorly. Well that applies to all the scenes, not just the action part.
  12. Aug 7, 2013
    7
    Good cinematography. Action is alright. The fights are good but not great. Plot is meh. Pretty predictable. The acting is bleh. Mainly whether or not you'll like it will depend on your thoughts on the first one. I liked the first but I didn't think it was spectacular, and my feelings are similar for this one, so I'd suspect if you did like it you too would like this one. Granted, if you didn't like the first I see no reason why this one would be your pick. Expand
  13. Aug 9, 2013
    10
    I have admit that the plot was great for a kid with greek mythology movie. Doesn't have hard explications, doesn't have anything that makes me sad or makes me hate the movie. I think that was made in the right point.
  14. Oct 5, 2013
    3
    This film feels extremely rushed. It feels like a bunch of terrible scenes put together. Also, the dialogue is terrible. It's really cheesy. I don't recommend this unless you are a huge Percy Jackson fan.
  15. Aug 14, 2013
    3
    Not only was not a big fan of "The Lightening Thief", but I definitely hated this movie. It has cheesy effects, it's too childish, the acting is only good for the crappy material it's been given and it just shows that the books are way better than these past two flops. Overall, go watch Elysium or something else! Be sure to check out my YouTube channel "TheMovieManLife" for all things movies.
  16. Sep 28, 2013
    3
    Es orrible oir a este estupido hablando de sus aventuras, sin embargo los mounstros, escenarios y efectos, rescatan el mal sentido del humor y malas y predecibles actuaciones
  17. Aug 21, 2013
    1
    This movie is about as terrible as the previous one. Awkward dialogue, hollow monologue, bad acting in general and it is simply dropping dookie on the books it is ''based off of''. The humor is not funny, I felt no compassion for the characters whatsoever and every problem's solving felt as scripted as humanly possible. DO NOT WATCH THIS MOVIE EVEN IF YOU WANT TO HUMOUR YOURSELF IN HOW BAD IT IS.
  18. Aug 8, 2013
    8
    I had posted a more positive review before this, but now that my excitement has worn off i'm starting to notice a few more problems with this movie, even though I think it's a very good movie. This movie took what made the first movie good: the supporting cast and writing. The writing is pretty good in this movie, though the dialogue may not be the best, but it has jokes and humor that thankfully remind fans that this is Percy Jackson's type of humor. The supporting cast NAILS it as their characters; Mr. D, Hermes, The grey sisters, the supporting cast cameos manage to do so well in their roles. When it comes to an adaptation of a book, I think a movie can do well with it as long as it takes the basis plot, setting, and characters. This film manages to stay true to the book better than the first film, even if it isn't spot-on, though I feel that a few book elements are done a bit too early. if you've read the books, you'll notice what i'm talking about. i'm also glad that the director manages to stay true to the book a lot more, while also tying things with the first movie so that moviegoers who haven't read the book can still catch on. Considering the first film's bad accuracy, that's pretty hard to accomplish, and i'm glad the director managed to do it. My problems, however, are mainly two things; cgi and a certain plothole. The cgi, while colorful, isn't the best. It's very bland to me, but there has been better and worse cgi. Something I didn't understand is how exactly Luke, the main villain, managed to escape what happened at the end of the lightning thief. if there was an explanation, it didn't go into very good detail, unless I missed something. A noticeable issue i noticed after my excitement wore down is the acting and character development. The characters in the movie have little to no development, and each one is taken a bit as wooden. The acting, while okay, is a bit worse than the last film. I feel that the actors were trying to nail their characters in this movie, but just weren't there yet, if that makes sense. Finally, I feel that there were missed opportunities with fighting sequences. The bull fight was very well done, as was the fight on The Andromeda, but some I don't think utilized what it could do in the movie. for example, I feel that the fight against Charybdis could have been pulled off better, as with the fight against Polyphemus. Overall, Percy Jackson: Sea of Monsters surprisingly lives up to my expectations. The writing and the supporting cast are much better this time, the accuracy towards the book is nice, even though a few things are done a bit too early, and even though the cgi and acting isn't the best, Percy Jackson is a great movie, one of 2013's best films in my opinion. If you liked the first film, you'll most likely like the second. if you didn't really liked the first film, this one may or may not be good to you, depending on your movie preferences. In the end, this is a rare case of a sequel doing better than its predecessor, and if the Titan's Curse movie does well, my faith in this film series will be restored. Expand
  19. Aug 8, 2013
    7
    Seen in 2D. I actually enjoyed this a lot more than the reviews give it credit for. I thought that it was better than the first. Yeah, it wasn't nearly as good as the book was, that rarely ever happens, but I still had a great time with it. I must say that they shortened the part in the Sea of Monsters too much, taking out two great scenes from the book and adding a scene that wasn't as fun to replace them. Still, this was a good time, and was worth the money for me. Expand
  20. Aug 9, 2013
    10
    I can say that was a good job. I like the way that history was showed, i liked everything about, even with the Fall Out Boy's song that starts playing in the movie showing that the soundtrack was gorgeous. About the critics, I DON'T CARE, I LOVE IT.
  21. Aug 10, 2013
    7
    This review was originally posted on www.Pixcelation.com by Andrew Korkmas.

    …Don’t give me that look. Let me begin by telling you a story: my cousin once came to visit me and his brother, back when we were in college for a weekend. Being freshman, we were risk takers and didn’t always have the best of judgment. So one night, while some of us were out partying, the rest of us decided to
    go to the local cinema. Several apparently wanted to see a movie called “Percy Jackson & the Olympians: The Lightning Thief.” Many of us had never heard of said movie but we didn’t really have any other plans so off to the theaters it was in the world’s most uncomfortable car ride ever (only one of us had a car. It was a small sports car. There were six of us.) While the movie was nothing exceptional in the slightest, the majority of us did enjoy it. Well, said cousin came to visit me this weekend and when the two of us decided to see a movie, we noticed that the premiere of “Percy Jackson: Sea of Monsters” was tonight and decided to give it a shot. Now, let the record show, I went in with zero hopes and expectations for the movie, and in that way, the new Percy Jackson didn’t disappoint.

    The story follows the events of Percy Jackson, son of Poseidon. This time around, he and his team of half-bloods (sons and daughters of the different Gods of Greek mythology) must uncover the Golden Fleece in order to thwart the sinister attempt of Luke, the half-blood son of Hermes, from reviving the titan Kronos which would lead to the death of the Gods and the rest of world. The plot itself is nothing spectacular. My cousin and I joked that for the first one, we both had the entire plot predicted within the first forty-five minutes. That being said, if you are a fan of Greek mythology (which means you’re part of the target audience) then it’s easy to predict because you know the mythos. What’s more, you shouldn’t really care because you’ll be enjoying catching all the references.

    The acting….well, it’s also exactly what you’d expect. Most of the actors try but none seem to give a memorable performance in the slightest. Logan Lerman (Percy Jackson) and Jake Abel (Luke) in particular seem to give a rather exhausted effort. It’s as if they’re both chronic insomniacs who don’t seem to have much energy to give in their scenes.

    The special effects are pretty good. Most of the creatures look nice and while I didn’t see it in 3D, I could see it being the kind of movie that works well in the extra dimension.

    The directing is a surprise in that it’s actually fairly good. Not award-winning material mind you but it’s still nice and at times clever. Oddly enough, it might be one of the movie’s better qualities. Thus, this aids the action set-pieces which are also not half-bad either, which in turn is aided by the good CG.

    One thing that was of minor annoyance was the ending. I won’t spoil it but I will say that it leaves something major unanswered in an obvious attempt at another sequel.

    “Percy Jackson: Sea of Monsters” is by no means a terrific flick, but I wouldn’t’ say it’s a bad one either. It’s one of those movies where most everything is good enough to the point where they all work together to make for an entertaining experience, even if it’s nothing substantial under further analysis. Sure more time could been spent developing the characters, yeah the plot could been expounded upon, but the movie never set out to be like that, and not every movie deserves to be the next Oscar nominee or cult classic. Some movies are just meant to be enjoyed and ultimately, that’s the kind of feeling I got from it. If you liked the first one then you’ll probably like this one, and if it doesn’t sound like your thing, then don’t bother.

    “Percy Jackson: Sea of Monsters” gets a 7/10
    Expand
  22. Aug 17, 2013
    4
    The only good thing about this film for me as a reader is i can't predict what will happen next, but the worst part as a reader is I expected that this film will more like the novel, because honestly the novel is so much better. At least just give a little bit effort to make it more like novel.
  23. Aug 19, 2013
    2
    As an avid reader of the Percy Jackson books, my ten year old son had been looking forward to this installment in the film series for months. After finally getting to see it, he was unimpressed: "It wasn't that good. Too many things from the books weren't the same and a lot of it wasn't even there I was bored through half of it. Hopefully the next one is better."
  24. Sep 7, 2013
    5
    Percy Jackson and the Sea of Monsters is the sequel to the original movie "Lightning Thief," and just as lame. With a different director than the previous film, Sea of Monsters follows the series written by Rick Riordan. By comparison, I read the first book and the matching movie satisfied me, answering questions I had about the novel, on screen. As for this film, I felt that the combination of bad acting, and false drama, really just ruined my experience watching Sea of Monsters.

    As Percy (Logan Lerman) learns he has a Cyclops brother (Douglas Smith), he is forced to put up with him as they travel to Florida to find his friend Grover (Brandon Jackson). Captured by the half-blood Luke (Jake Abel), who has plans to betray his father and bring back Kronos using the Golden Fleece. It is up to Percy and the gang to save their friend, and the whole Camp Half-Blood.

    I went in to Sea of Monsters not really sure what to expect. The trailers couldn't seem to interest me and I did not hear much in the media about it. I wasn't sure whether I was more interested in the movie, or the guy smoking an e-cigarette in the row in front of me. Between the phoned-in, bad acting, and false sense of urgency in the film, I was definitely not a fan. I could tell the story line was meant to be scary and keeping you on the edge of your seat, but it really did not have that effect on the crowd.

    The movie was overly predictable and overall I was just very unimpressed. Also, I could tell that Sea of Monsters was really trying to make an action fantasy (much like Harry Potter) for kids, and just flat out failed. I noticed that Percy never actually used his Riptide sword on humans in the movie. When he would fight, he would hit the person with the butt of the sword so they could keep the film “PG”. I never knew that slashing a human was way too inappropriate for a child! The false sense of danger never worked for me as no one was ever really in danger.

    Overall I was just as bored with Sea of Monsters as the actors, and felt like it wasn't worth my 110 minutes. Wait for it to air on ABC or HBO and watch it then. As the first movie aired like every other week when it was released, you will have no problem catching it. Following the series, when the next movie is made, I really hope they again change directors, and produce a film worth seeing. Read the books and see the movie in your head as imagined by the writer, and you will have a much better experience.
    Expand
  25. Sep 10, 2013
    10
    un peliculón para disfrutar.. los actores representan bien todo,, a pesar de algunos cambios con respecto al libro,, se puede apreciar toda la atmósfera que se tiene que tener... yo la vería mas de una vez mas si te gustan las pelis de fantasía acción.
  26. Nov 11, 2013
    4
    Huge step down from the first movie in the franchise. Some parts were funny but the movie doesn't make sense. Why would Poseidon ignore Percy but not Tyson, Percys brother who also happens to be a cyclops. Bringing in Tyson was a bad move as his role was just pointless really. This sequel is not good but also not bad. The fact that it's called "Sea of Monsters" and there's just one "monster" in the sea just shows how much this movie lacks. Expand
  27. Nov 13, 2013
    0
    i'm not waiting until the last Olympian to get it right i'm done with these movies i know book based movies are never as faithful to the source material because there movies you got to make changes but by god this is a new level of bad THE LAST AIRBENDER IS A MORE FAITHFUL ADAPTATION THEN THIS THAT"S HOW BAD IT IS and as a stand alone movie it doesn't fair any better the whole "you make your own path" is a theme of the book but it's not shoved in your face like it is here the character acting is corny the plot is it's better then the first movie but that is not saying much if there is a another movie i'm running to the theaters to see it i'm going to wait until i can see it for free online i'm not giving another dollar for this the percy jackson series deserves better then this an i give a big middle finger to the end fight, want to know why? well read the book sea of monsters and then watch the movie and see why YOU MOVIE!! Expand
  28. Mar 1, 2014
    8
    Still feeling very much like a greek-mythology Harry Potter, "Sea of Monsters" is a very fun movie. It doesn't pack the intelligence or maturity of the series it so closely resembles, and the special effects here are disappointing and dated, but overall it is a lot of fun. The plot is nice, the characters likable, and the action and humor entertaining. Overall if you enjoyed the first movie or the book series then I see no reason why you should not like this movie. For those of you who have never experienced "Percy Jackson," just think of it as a not as well written, but still very fun, Harry Potter inspired series. Expand
  29. Mar 8, 2014
    3
    Oh my God, the first film was bad enough already. Before watching the film, I was optimistic and hoping that maybe this film would be an improvement. Turns out I was dead wrong. There is almost nothing interesting in the whole film and the acting was just bad.
  30. Jan 19, 2014
    5
    If you're a fan of the book series (like me) I would easily recommend it. If you haven't read the book, you might want to think twice before renting this. Otherwise it would just confuse you.
  31. Jan 3, 2014
    6
    I never liked either movie from 'Percy Jackson' duology. If it was released 20 years ago it would be considered a good movie but now it is children movie like 'Narnia' series. I am not denying anything about graphics, it was good though but the movie has not pleased me hence I decided to put into an average or below list.

    There's noting much special about the movie to praise. As usual
    the young team of demigods who are select begin quest to save their kind from rise of an evil force. So the path they choose to accomplish the mission will get affected by the obstacles which they must face. With all these troubles, takes them to the grand ending where the final exciting visual fx feast comes in a quite nice show.

    Like the first one, I already forgot once I finished watching it. So won't remember much to tell about it, decided to conclude my review of it here itself, right now...! That's it then!!!
    Expand
  32. Nov 11, 2013
    3
    The second film in the saga is even less fun than the first, no charisma, bad effects and petty. What is a shame because Percy seems to have something good to show.
  33. Feb 15, 2014
    2
    I didn't really have a major problem with its predecessor, it was just a fun, forgettable fantasy that is desperately trying to be the next Harry Potter but absolutely failed. As for "Sea of Monsters" it is completely bland, awfully dull with bad CGI and an unattractive plot and fantasy sequences, it is just trying to be the next Harry Potter and fails for sure.
  34. Aug 20, 2013
    7
    "Percy Jackson: Sea of Monsters" may feel awfully deprived at times, but despite this, the action and characters are definitely enjoyable to watch. Being a avid reader and interested in the books, the film was definitely suited for me (as were the Harry Potter film franchise). Despite finding numerous tweaks from the books, I really enjoyed the characters and the action packed sequences. With the CG sequences being very well done, and characters being being put into some depth (especially towards Percy and Annabeth's characters), "Percy Jackson: Sea of Monsters" is an entertaining flick. Expand
  35. Aug 19, 2013
    8
    Still A Harry Potter Ripoff in Many Ways It's Still A Decent Film For Kids, Teens, Adults And More, The Effects Were Amazing, The Characters Are OK, The Story Is Pretty Good
  36. Dec 3, 2013
    6
    This sequel felt like it was missing some of the magic (and star power) of the first film. The adventure in the film’s story felt pretty sloppy and a lot of the special effects were either decent or just terrible. Logan Lerman gave an extremely flat and lifeless performance and, while the film has some great and fun action sequences, “Sea of Monsters” ultimately felt like a Direct-to-DVD sequel rather than a film that made it to the theaters. However, Nathan Fillion’s very short role really stole the film. Expand
  37. Oct 3, 2013
    6
    It's a ok movie, but it feels like it is missing some things. The plot was predictable, and the villain was boring and gets on your nerves. Percy also looks like he's 12. But at least it was interesting?!
  38. Aug 9, 2013
    9
    This movie isn't so faithful to book because of the 1st movie The Lightning Thief. I guess it would be good But OK, by itself the movie is good and i think the director made the POSSIBLE to make us proud There are defects as at lot of movies
  39. Aug 14, 2013
    10
    I have never heard of the webzine Slant before, which could be why they.hate.everything. Seriously, this movie is not intended to be Citizen Kane. Lighten the eff up.
  40. Sep 27, 2013
    7
    Percy Jackson: Sea of Monsters surpassed my expectations. Quite often in a film series the film creators will test the boundaries in the second film and I think because the movie didn't seem to test the boundaries it kept true to the book and as a result was just as good as the first movie.

    This film is truer to the book series than the first film was, this is perhaps why many critics
    are giving it such a hard time having little to no knowledge of the source material and once again judging this as they would judge any random movie. I think perhaps adaptions should get a few bonus points or something when they stick closer to the source, the movie is aimed at fans and kids mainly I'm sure that if they were aiming at a wide audience they would have added a few random explosion scene which would have pleased the more ignorant critics.

    Although the movie was truer to the books it did cut out a few of the more interesting pieces out, I was dismayed to find that they cut Tantalus and the chariot races from the movie as well as the sirens scene which I believe would have both added a lot to the movie.

    Although the movie sticks closer to the books I felt that the transition from the first movie which was less true to the books caused some of the character development to be flawed. In the first film there was a stronger relationship between Percy Jackson and Annabeth Chase however in this film it was explored to a lesser extent as a result of sticking closer to the books.

    The acting just like the first movie was fantastic, the actors do a righteous portrayal of the characters especially that of the main characters. Surprisingly the minor characters are portrayed very well, far better than in the first movie and it makes the movie more engaging as a result. There was a nice addition in one particular scene with Nathan Fillion the renowned star of the cancelled television show Firefly who makes a reference to said show which really resonated with me a fan of that show.

    Just like the first movie the fusion of ancient and modern elements added a sense of fun and adventure which was exacerbated by the journey to the sea of monsters fueling the excitement especially in younger audiences and those like myself who are young at heart. The addition of the Percy Jackson style of humour throughout the movie was alluring especially to fans of the books who were worried that the adaption would get rid of it completely.

    Some have said that the CGI was poor, however I didn't once see any kind of slip up in the quality and there were no fatal missing pieces of scenery as I have sometimes seen in movies with higher budgets than this had. Much of the movie relies on CGI, the final battle scene especially and it is done flawlessly.

    All in all Percy Jackson: Sea of Monsters was just as good as the first movie and is especially aimed at the fans of the previous movie and book series. If you are a fan you must watch it, if you are of a younger audience or young at heart it certainly should be on your to do list. Quite a lot of the movie is setting the stage for the next movie which seems may be even better
    Expand
  41. Nov 28, 2013
    0
    why the hell did they want to make this movie,it is absolutely terrible with terrible things with terribles actuations,i hated it(and it was made by Chris Columbus wich made harry potter 1 and 2.
  42. Nov 28, 2013
    5
    It lacks the commitment from its predecessor and has a smaller scope. Even the CGI is embarrassing and distracts from the otherwise good acting and action.
  43. Jan 27, 2014
    5
    I love the Percy Jackson books. This movie is really nice for the first 30 minutes but after it's long. They should fallow the books, it will be a better movie if they did for the 3rd one. I recommend it if you like the first one, if not don't watch it.
  44. Dec 21, 2013
    5
    The truth is better than the first, but not by much, even so let it wait. There is almost no action and the end is shorter than the first battle between Percy and bull. There are bad special effects and little participation for Stanley Tucci (as in Jack the Giant Slayer), Natthan Fillion (though that appears a little fun) and even Brandon Jackson (one of the principals in the saga of the novel). The good the plot is well suited to the book, that leaves you doubt the end and that makes you crave and see the 3 (or for those who are lazy to read the third book), the direction of Thor Freudenthal is better than Chris Columbus (although the latter is still the producer of the film). The truth that most longed to go see the movie first Kane Chronicles (book by Rick Riordan having Disney cinematographic rights) to go see the third movie in this series. Expand
  45. Feb 3, 2014
    0
    Terrible acting, terrible story, and extremely predictable. The CGI is alright, but I expected a so called "Sea of Monsters" would have more than just one monster. Disappointing and predictable for fans of the book.
  46. Dec 29, 2013
    0
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Overall, this movie is a total waste of time and money. It was so far fetched from the book I almost cried. The camp half blood scenes were portrayed very well, however the movie just went downhill from there. There were so many little changes they could've made throughout the entire movie that would've pleased the book fans. For instance Grover was at camp tagging along on the quest when he should've been on his search for Pan. There is no encounter at Circe's island, and the siren scene is completely cut out which was a major bonding point for Annabeth and Percy. They didn't need need it though, because there relationship was already so overly-developed with her always crying on his shoulder, not being the brave, athletic, and smart girl she was in the book. The character Luke was ever present (even when he shouldn't have been). He reminded me of a weasel, popping up everywhere with his minuscule army, instead of the overwhelming one we read about in the book. Along with that Percy Jackson himself seemed almost shy, with a lack of witty retorts and remarks. Clarisse played her part well, with smart aleck and sarcastic comments yet she didn't look the part and had an attractive appearance instead of a rough and tough one. The only characters that truly fit their parts were Grover and Mr. D, who we barely saw at all. Aside from lacking character depth there was a strange encounter in the stomach of Scylla that does not appear at all in the book (again, how hard would it be to follow the actual storyline.) The biggest crash of the movie, though, is the fight scene with Kronos at the island of the fleece. First of all, Luke's army wasn't even supposed to appear on the island, not to mention how did they lug a giant golden sarcophagus up this huge hill. (Spoiler alert! Don't read next line if you're gonna watch movie!) Then, worst of all Kronos actually rises into his own fiery form, not even possessing Luke which is a HUGE dramatic part of the series. Then, percy even manages to cast him back to his sarcophagus with one slash of his sword. In conclusion, this movie was a horrible wreck, and will leave the book lovers (and other fans) with a frustrated vibe. Expand
  47. Jan 1, 2014
    0
    Did the writer of the movie even look at the book? They pronounce Thaila's name wrong! They use ugly actors who are too old! Tyson uses deodorant to hide his eye. What the hell did the script writer do to these perfect books?!
  48. Jan 2, 2014
    10
    I really like the percy Jackson series so far. I do have to say it could use more thrill and on edge factors. It is easy to predict what is going to happen next. I would really like to see what the next one will bring.
  49. Jan 29, 2014
    8
    Percy Jackson is unfairly compared to Harry Potter in both books and film. Frankly, PJ is the better written of the two franchises. Fewer plotholes and failures of story logic and more consistent characterization.

    That said, it DOES somehow feel a little "short". It doesn't quite have the "oomph" to make it to the "blockbuster" category.
  50. Feb 4, 2014
    5
    i really enjoyed the first movie but what the hell happened? Annabeth was not herself(she was kick-ass in the first movie) and the whole air of the set has changed the first made it seen like you had gone back in time and i think this one mixed the two and i did not work they should have kept it like the first, my only enjoyment in this film was the new characters mainly Tyson and how he acts like a child and throws Percy and Annabeth and that gave both more depth as characters, if they had not changed Annabeth and the air of the movie then it would have turned out to be as good as the first. Expand
  51. Mar 13, 2014
    5
    so far the sea of monsters was better then the lighting theif but theres no good graphics . of all it is magical and i like it but i did love this film
  52. Mar 19, 2014
    0
    Are you serious Chris Columbus??? This was an embarrassment to Percy Jackson fans everywhere. I hate you. You suck. This was even worse than the first one.
  53. Mar 18, 2014
    3
    El peor uso de la mitología griega que haya visto jamás. No he leído los libros pero creo que al menos deben tener algo más de profundidad los personajes. Un guión muy pobre.
  54. Apr 18, 2014
    5
    Wasn't as good of the first one. I myself was a fan of the first one but this one just didn't do it for me. There's no point in giving Percy a sword if he's not even going to be able to use it properly so that the movie can stay kid friendly. Action scenes were weak and dragged on too long.
  55. Jun 11, 2014
    8
    I really enjoy the Percy Jackson movies. It definitely makes me want to start reading the books. It may not have the most intricate story lines or best movie effects, but it is fun to see the different gods and creatures from Greek mythology living in our modern world. It is a really interesting and good adventure movie.
  56. Jul 20, 2014
    0
    one of the worst bookbased movies i have ever seen. If you are a percy jackson, youre almost gonna cry. Bad acting, terrible dialogue and they completely changed the story
Metascore
39

Generally unfavorable reviews - based on 33 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 5 out of 33
  2. Negative: 8 out of 33
  1. Reviewed by: Adam Markovitz
    Aug 9, 2013
    67
    Sarcastic quips and cynical attitudes abound, maybe as a way for the movie's makers to telegraph that they know this is all just so much kid stuff. But if the characters can't muster genuine awe for their adventure, it's a tall order to ask us to do it for them.
  2. Reviewed by: Neil Smith
    Aug 9, 2013
    40
    The final showdown whisks up the requisite excitement, but the open-ended coda feels like an optimistic throw of the dice from the franchise showing meagre signs of Harry Potter longevity.
  3. Reviewed by: Xan Brooks
    Aug 9, 2013
    40
    The kids are charmless, the adults bemused.