Percy Jackson: Sea of Monsters Is Just a Sleepy PG Adventure

How would those Bronze Age storytellers who shaped and handed down the myths of Ancient Greece fare in a modern screenwriting seminar? All that elusive, improvisatory strangeness, that alien sense of causality, that emphasis on origins, not just of franchisable characters but of everything in the natural world, right down to the sea foam that came into being when the Titan Kronos ripped off his father's genitals and chucked them into the surf, birthing Aphrodite from the union of ocean and sperm.

Hesiod's madness, I fear, would have to be expurgated, made explicable, the ore of folklore pounded into the salable tchotchke of Young Adult plotting. In Percy Jackson: Sea of Monsters, Kronos lives and rages, an igneous marvel of special effects, but if he's still into hilarious castrations, this sleepy PG kids' adventure doesn't dare hint at it. He's a Titan in name only, a dumb stomping monster rather than some unknowable force from creation's dawn. Unlike weird, discursive myth, screenwriting is too economical to allow his rampaging to build to something disgusting or ridiculous or beautiful. He's not even afforded an inventive defeat, being brought down by—spoiler, presuming you give a shit—the same dumb sword Percy Jackson has carried since movie one, Percy Jackson and the Derp of Derp. Here, killing the father of goddamn Zeus is less a to-do than kabooming the Stay Puft Marshmallow Man.

It's a compliment, I guess, that the stubborn familiarity of this conclusion—all noble sacrifices and meaningless resurrections—is capable of disappointing. That means the rest managed to raise some hopes, if not quite expectations. Before it descends into Percy Jackson and the Things That Happen in Movies Like This, the adventure at times clicks into the inventive groove of Rick Riordan's Percy Jackson novels, which at their best are touched with the high strangeness of the ancient tales that inspire them. (The books, about the offspring of the Greek gods and mortals, rarely feel like off-brand Harry Potter the way the movies do.)

Details

Percy Jackson: Sea of Monsters
Directed by Thor Freudenthal
20th Century Fox
Opens August 9

Jackson's mission is to filch the Golden Fleece from a Cyclops in the Bermuda Triangle. To that end, director Thor Freudenthal stages a rousing attack by a clockwork bull, a gears-and-fury beast whose mouth hinges open to reveal a flamethrower, and presents a magical animated infodump where all the gods of Olympus are rendered in stained glass. (Hey, if it's good enough for one god, it's good enough for all of them!)

The Stygian witches turn up as cab drivers in a frenetic goof of a sequence, squabbling as always over that lone eyeball and suggesting the free-spirited grossness of Peter Jackson's The Frighteners. Then there are the sea-beasts: first a beauty of a swimming horse, streaked like that Fruit Stripes zebra, and then the great maw, stomach, and guts of Charybdis herself, who it turns out is responsible for every boat and plane that's gone missing in the North Atlantic. To escape her digestive tract, Jackson mans the machine guns of a U-boat crewed by the living corpses of Confederate soldiers—a development that the film, to its credit, never attempts to explain. And the villainous Cyclops is a treat, the heroes' encounter with him smartly shot and just the right amount of scary.

But even Homer nods. Much of the rest is a deadly bore, with the too-old-to-pass-for-teens stars playing characters with one trait apiece—and failing to bring that trait to life. Usually when you see actors this pretty and this vacant standing around this awkwardly, you expect them to take their clothes off. Logan Lerman's Jackson exhibits none of the troubled complexity of the ADHD-addled boy of the books; the filmmakers forget key tenets of his character just as often as the movie's villains forget the basics of his parentage. Seriously, if you kidnapped the son of Poseidon, would you imprison him on a yacht—in the ocean?

The god-kids all live together in a summer camp called Not-Hogwarts, where counselor Dionysus (Stanley Tucci, as funny as the script allows) dresses like Captain Lou Albano and moans that angry Zeus changes all his wine into water. The kids, meanwhile, compete in elaborate wall-climbing contests right out of the Real World/Road Rules Challenge. Then the story starts, with a ferocious attack on their camp—and Percy's dear, smart friend Not-Hermione (Alexandra Daddario) figuring out (on her iPad!) that the Fleece of the Argonauts is the only way to stop the blah blah something something.

Not-Hermione's one trait: She hates Cyclopes, for reasons the books make clear but the movie can't be buggered about. That means, of course, a young Cyclops must tag along on the adventure, and Not-Hermione gets to glower at him and then learn a lesson about not judging people just because they're monsters. That Cyclops is just another kid-flick hunk, this one with white-boy dreads like he's in some one-eyed jam band. The story contrives to give him a human set of peepers for about half the movie, and much of the rest of the time, he's wearing sunglasses, which is a perfect encapsulation of modern screenwriting's approach to rich, inscrutable myth: "A Cyclops? Love it! But does he have to have one eye?"

1
 
2
 
All
 
Next Page »
 
My Voice Nation Help
4 comments
scott.sgl
scott.sgl

You nerds need to lighten up - this review is hilarious; BTW is all this resurrection shit in all these YA/superhero spectaculars the fanboy version of religious fundamentalism? I like my dead characters to stay dead - just sayin'........

irishmaecanlas
irishmaecanlas

I don't understand why people keep making bad reviews and comparing it to harry potter maybe if you (the author of this *badword* review) read the book you wouldn't have compared it to harry potter sure maybe it is like harry potter but come on we all know thats the only way to make it look like the book example annabeth the * not hermoine* of course annabeth has to be smart she IS the daughter of athena

Raider_Hater
Raider_Hater like.author.displayName like.author.displayName 2 Like

Does anyone else find this writer's work (at least in this case) to be clumsy, difficult to read, pompous, and irrelevant?  If you're going to write a piece that draws the reader's attention from the subject at hand to the writing itself, at least make sure it is due to the writing being stunning (in a good sense).  Reading these few paragraphs in order to get a decent review of the film  is like trying to determine if a drink is good by sucking on it through a block of concrete.

DenMom
DenMom

No, I found the review really funny.

 

Now Showing

Find capsule reviews, showtimes & tickets for all films in town.

Box Office Report

Join My Voice Nation for free stuff, film info & more!

Movie Trailers

Loading...