A trip to the sea... with some monsters

I know that the next post was supposed to 'A History of Violence' but Est hasn't uploaded it yet. We're kinda behind and should've uploaded at least one more post. I've got to write another post and hopefully that should be up within the next few days.


A childish adventure, to the middle of the sea, to claim back some sheeps skin from a woman that wanted to turn me into a pig.
This is basically the story line for Percy Jackson 2. Upon finding out that Pierce Brosnan had quit while he was ahead... the chances of this film being a success were gradually falling.
I loved Percy Jackson and the lightning thief, Steve Coogan made me laugh quite a lot and that Anabel character was bad ass. In this film her character could be considered superfluous. She does nothing of note besides insult the cyclops half brother of Percy.
Thing is- anyone who studied classical civilization and read Homer would know from reading 'The Odyssey' that Polyphemus is also the son of Poseidon. Odysseus taunts him when he is trapped on the island and pokes out his eye, provoking Poseidon to respond badly to Odysseus.... so i'm left wondering who Tyson is.

Now I'll admit that I haven't actually read the books, so I can't follow the plot, but as i'm told that the film and the book are very different, I'm glad that I didn't.

So to judge and review the film. Luke is back as the villain, along with his side kicks, Chronos, Polyphemus and other half-blood side kicks. I loved Nathan Fillion as Hermes, he was exceptionally good at it, but overall I just felt that the film was lacking. Perhaps with the loss of Pierce Brosnan, they tried to fill his gap with the comedy introduced by the character Dionysus, but it wasn't the same. The guy that replaced him had less presence and less importance. The film was certainly lacking the main events, such as the action that you get from being in Medusa's lair.
So I'm trying to work out why the film is so bad in comparison. Is it because they diverted from the story line so much and therefore lost some of the action? Or is it because the first film was so good that they were never going to outdo it?
I remember seeing the adverts for it and i wasn't all that convinced about it. I can now say concretely that it is not as good as the first one and they should've quit while they were ahead. They have left it open for another film and I will be on the other side screaming for them to not waste the money. As we all know, Sequels, are never as good. Even if there are many books, as proven by 'The Two Towers' and all Harry Potter when Chris Columbus stopped directing them... they just aren't as good. Harry Potter had 8 films, so by the last 2 it was decent. The Return of the King picked up the falling world of Tolkien that The Two Towers had left in.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5KoOtiuSjuI

I'm not saying that this was a bad film, certainly not as bad as some of those that I have just mentioned, but it was way off the standards of the first film.
I know it's a family film and it does appeal to young children. It is the kind of film that you watch when you are forced to reunite with your family on Sundays or when it's your cousins birthday and you have to put in an appearance.
I'm gonna be honest and say that I still watch the first one quite a lot. I like watching it on my days off or in the evenings, but i don't think that i will be doing that with this one.

For those of you that haven't seen it:

Percy Jackson basically hasn't done anything useful or worthy of note since returning the lightning to Olympus. He constantly gets between the god of war's daughter. When Luke sends a bull (Hephaestus's) to camp half-blood, we learn two things... 1) Tyson is flammable and really strong, 2) Luke has poisoned Tallia's tree and that is how the Bull managed to force his way in. Tallia is the daughter of Zeus and she was killed by a cyclops on the edge of the border of camp half-blood. Her spirit protects the boundaries and doesn't let anyone that isn't a half-blood in.

In order to save the tree and keep the grounds protected, Percy and co set off on a quest to go to the sea of monsters and get the golden fleece (commonly associated with Jason and the Argonauts). Percy was not chosen by Dionysus, Clarice was (god of war's daughter). They end up teaming up together when they get swallowed by the monster (possibly Charibdis?).
Long and short of it is that Luke wants the fleece to restore Chronos, the Father of Zeus, Hades and Poseidon who is a Titan. Chronos was killed by his three sons because he used to eat all his children. Luke shoots Percy when he has the fleece, except that Tyson takes the bullet or whatever it is and falls in the river. Of course because he is a son of Poseidon, he is healed by the river and therefore is around to fight the final battle. Luke restores Chronos and consequently gets eaten by Chronos. Percy defeats Chronos, in the meantime Anabel dies (told she was useless) and the fleece is used on her. They return with the fleece to camp half-blood and use the fleece on the tree, which also revives Tallia. The prophecy, therefore becomes complicated and could relate to either Percy or Tallia.

That is it in a nut shell.
If you want to watch it... feel free. I wouldn't put it on your list of 1001 movies you must see before you die.