Percy Jackson: Sea of Monsters
Twentieth Century Fox Film Corporation | Release Date: August 7, 2013
5.0
USER SCORE
Mixed or average reviews based on 262 Ratings
USER RATING DISTRIBUTION
Positive:
82
Mixed:
99
Negative:
81
Watch Now
Stream On
Stream On
Buy on
Stream On
Stream On
Expand
Review this movie
VOTE NOW
 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Check box if your review contains spoilers 0 characters (5000 max)

User Reviews

User scoreBy dateMost helpful
5
JacobDec 24, 2014
Sea of Monsters is both a step forward and a step backward for the franchise. For the film is well acted, well cast, and well directed. The first half of the film tries to be faithful to the book making the story flow, getting in necessarySea of Monsters is both a step forward and a step backward for the franchise. For the film is well acted, well cast, and well directed. The first half of the film tries to be faithful to the book making the story flow, getting in necessary information, and making up for a lot of the errors made in the last film. All of these smart moves make it frustrating when we get to the second half. Luke is reduced to a pathetic and easily beaten villain, the prophecy is poorly explained and handled, the Sea of Monsters is overwhelming despite the build up and title, and the way the climax would be handled it makes you wonder if the filmmakers remember they still have three more books. Nonetheless, this is an improvement over The Lightning Theif giving us something that is more true to the spirit of the book than the predecessor. Don’t know if they’ll get a third film given the poor performance of this film critically and financially but if the franchise keeps improving we may soon get the Percy Jackson film fans want.… Expand
1 of 1 users found this helpful10
All this user's reviews
5
mrmonsterJan 19, 2014
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.
1 of 1 users found this helpful10
All this user's reviews
6
LeZeeJan 3, 2014
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 butI 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
1 of 1 users found this helpful10
All this user's reviews
6
RevRonDec 3, 2013
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 anThis 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
1 of 1 users found this helpful10
All this user's reviews
4
aion01Aug 17, 2013
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 justThe 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.… Expand
1 of 1 users found this helpful10
All this user's reviews
4
zeNapNov 11, 2013
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 asHuge 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
1 of 1 users found this helpful10
All this user's reviews
5
charli123430Feb 4, 2014
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 onei 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
1 of 1 users found this helpful10
All this user's reviews
6
CasualCoolsebMay 8, 2016
Let's just say that watching this movie was fun. I mean, it's not bad either. It has some good effects here and there, but I have to admit that the plot isn't that good.
1 of 1 users found this helpful10
All this user's reviews
4
johannationAug 8, 2013
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 manThe 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
6 of 12 users found this helpful66
All this user's reviews
6
reviewmattOct 3, 2013
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?!
1 of 2 users found this helpful11
All this user's reviews
5
AlexProductionsSep 7, 2013
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 readPercy 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
1 of 2 users found this helpful11
All this user's reviews
5
TyranianOct 19, 2019
More or less of the same quality as the first, meaning very average. Some humour works.
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
5
eagleeyevikingNov 28, 2013
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.
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
5
DonoQcJan 27, 2014
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 notI 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.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
5
lukechristianscMar 13, 2014
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
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
5
Viper8787Apr 18, 2014
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.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.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
5
vikesh2206Nov 7, 2014
It lacks the energy from its predecessor and has a smaller scope. Even the CGI is embarrassing and distracts from the otherwise good acting and action.
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
4
Kai82Sep 13, 2021
The first movie was entertaining despite being a poor adaptation of the books. The sequel however is a weaker movie and awful adaptation. It is basically a weaker re-imagination of the book that has not the creativity, great characters,The first movie was entertaining despite being a poor adaptation of the books. The sequel however is a weaker movie and awful adaptation. It is basically a weaker re-imagination of the book that has not the creativity, great characters, emotions, story and impact. I freely admit that they capture the humor well and have some great jokes. However they make some horrible choices story wise specifically at the climax which would have killed all tension in the sequels (that never came). I give a synopsis at the end with a spoiler warning if you are interested. For reference: The Percy Jackson novels by author Rick Riordan are a series of really successful fantasy adventure novels. The first series contains 5 books and this movie is the adaptation of the second book “The Sea of Monsters”. It transfers the Greek mythology to our modern world and the USA while being original, creative and enjoyable. I read all books and liked them very well. The story starts with a competition at camp Half Blood that reminded me more of American Gladiators. After this the camp is mysteriously attacked which should not be possible as they are protected by a magical barrier. This is the beginning of the adventure and I wont spoil more than the set up. To be fair it follows the events of the book but changes a lot. The statement the books are better is a no brainer here. They fail to capture what made the story and characters great in the books. To be fair this movie has its moments but not enough to convince me. The characters are a mixed bag. I feel bad to criticize them if they do their roles as intended by the director aka script. Logan Lerman as Percy Jackson is a good actor but not made for this role or weakened by the script. Alexandra Daddario is excellent in this movie but wasted as she does not much here. Leven Rambin as Clarisse works excellent and is for me a hidden gem of the movie. Douglas Smith as Tyson and Brando T Jackson as Grover are good and deliver their roles. Jake Abel as Luke Castellan is mixed too. Great actor but caught in a poor script for his role. I like Stanly Tucci as Dionysus. He is the best representation of the book characters. I am a fan of Anthony Stewart Head since Buffy and wished they used his character Chiron more like in the books. Here he is basically an extra. I end the actors evaluation with a good performance in a weak script summary. The visuals and special effects however are excellent. Especially the mythological monsters look great. Overall this is watchable even if it butchers the source material. It is not Avatar the last Airbender bad in this regard but also no faithful adaption. I recommend the books instead. Now to the mistakes and harmful changes with a “Spoiler warning”: Firstly they kill or defeat the final boss in part 2 of a (potential) 5 film series and Percy does it alone. Kronos in the books was a thread to all Greek gods and a menace they feared. It was not sure that all the gods together could defeat him and his army of followers. Now just Percy alone manged this with ease. How could you see Kronos even as a thread after this. Then the main characters are morons. They did not destroy the sarcophagus which is the source to bring him back. There was no pressure, time limit or obstacle preventing it. A main point of the book was that Chiron was removed as the gods saw him as potential traitor to them (Kronos is his father). Annabeth is demoted and does barley anything in the movie (Try to name something big she accomplished). She is the brains of the team and a skilled fighter even the best of them would not underestimate. Percy is actually far more skilled and it is Clarisse that is envious of him in the books (He has a beginners talent level at fighting others have to train hard for). Tyson was already Percys friend and like a brother for him from the beginning of the book. They left out an encounter with Circe, the Sirens and a voyage on Queen Annes Revenge (Blackbeard's ship). Also Luke had not a small yacht as base. It was a huge cruise ship full to the brim with Kronos followers and mythological monsters. Also protected by the older sea gods that ruled the oceans before Poseidon (He could easily sink it otherwise). Grover was by the way already captured at the beginning of the book and one reason for the team to go on the adventure was to rescue him. Luke is a far more deep character in the books and his journey is as remarkable as Percy’s. I think that covers a lot of the mistakes.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
5
ItsLOLcianoSep 5, 2014
It doesn't really matter if you red the book series or not. As a huge fan of the books, I red all of them at least twice, and I have to admit: this movie was a fiasco. It feels like either they didn't have enough time to plan the movie orIt doesn't really matter if you red the book series or not. As a huge fan of the books, I red all of them at least twice, and I have to admit: this movie was a fiasco. It feels like either they didn't have enough time to plan the movie or simply weren't prepared for it. The movie just throws characters at you and tries to establish a relation between them and the story. It's ridiculous. Also, they changed the story in a way that you are not able to actually enjoy it if you read the book. The only thing that saves the movie from having a 4 or 0 score is the way that scenes are made. It feels like they] did their best to make the movie look very cinematic and epic; however, even though it is indeed epic, you can't pay attention to the epicness due to the badly written story. If you didn't read the book - I highly recommend you to read it - , you may find the movie enjoyable, but not as the first movie was. PJ fans, if you didn't watch this movie before, don't watch it now. The first one is better.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
5
YellowKirbyMar 11, 2016
While a marginal improvement on its predecessor, Percy Jackson: Sea of Monsters still fails to become a worthy adaptation of its source material, with wooden acting and poor special effects; using cheesy plot devices to rush the plot along.While a marginal improvement on its predecessor, Percy Jackson: Sea of Monsters still fails to become a worthy adaptation of its source material, with wooden acting and poor special effects; using cheesy plot devices to rush the plot along.

In short, you'll be better off reading the books and staying away from this terrible and disappointing franchise.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
4
EpicLadySpongeJan 26, 2016
A complete letdown on its predecessor. However, I can't fuse a lower score on this movie due to how great 2013 was and all. We expect "The Titan's Curse" to be better soon.
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
5
MonkiReviewsJun 22, 2017
Slightly better than the original. The story and acting have improved, but not enough. It feels so much like the original. It is actually worth watching it overall.
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
5
JPKDec 7, 2019
Meh
Though it was interesting to see the abandoned Six Flags New Orleans in the film, Sea Of Monsters has a sloppy script that disappoints.
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
5
ZJHFeb 5, 2019
I can’t understand **** but this movie’s CGI is good so I give 5 stars.
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
5
Experiment626Dec 26, 2020
First movie was passable. This one not so much. They should have never aged the kids.
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
4
iCampoRamilJan 8, 2023
Mira que la primera no es demasiado buena, pero se lo perdono por la parte mitológica, que mola bastante. En esta, sigue habiendo alguna referencia chula, pero peor traídas, personajes muy mal aprovechados, la premisa del villano es absurda,Mira que la primera no es demasiado buena, pero se lo perdono por la parte mitológica, que mola bastante. En esta, sigue habiendo alguna referencia chula, pero peor traídas, personajes muy mal aprovechados, la premisa del villano es absurda, efectos malísimos... Un cúmulo de malas cosas.

· Cosas buenas: a mí las referencias mitológicas me encantan, tanto si son buenas como malas, actoralmente no está mal, tiene buenos guiños y entretiene.
· Cosas malas: personajes muy mal aprovechados y nerfeados para que el prota sea el prota, aunque no está mal actoralmente están mal dirigidos, el último tramo es horrible, sobre todo por un CGI que se mantiene malo toda la película, le falta la energía de su predecesora.
· Conclusión: está bien para verla, sobre todo si te gustó la primera parte, pero no se parece lo más mínimo, una pena.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
4
HeroicAge616Nov 1, 2021
Sea of Monsters improves on its predecessor but still has no true direction.
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
More From This Movie

39 Critic Reviews

5.0 User Reviews

Details & Credits|Trailers

Current Movie Releases
By MetascoreBy User Score
1 77 Project Hail Mary
2 75 Send Help
3 73 Hoppers
4 72 The Sheep Detectives
5 68 Crime 101
SEE ALL
Essential Links
New on Amazon Prime Video
New on Netflix
Coming Soon to DVD/Blu-ray
SEE ALL