The basic plot of the stories is about a young pre-teen boy, Percy Jackson, and how his father is Poseidon-Lord of the Sea. The novels center around "Half-Blood" children of the Greek Gods. Modern day Olympus is at the top of the Empire State Building in NYC. Medusa (a horrific Uma Thurman in the movie) calls herself Auntie Em and runs a garden statue store. (wink, wink) And the Gods are at war, and only Percy Jackson can save the world from them and the Titans.
The books are amazing, and when I heard about the movie version being made I was apprehensive. I'll admit it wholeheartedly that I am a book snob. I love books more than movies. More than a lot of things, actually. So I'm always disappointed when they make movies out of books I love, because they never quite get it right. People warned me straightaway when the Bridget Jones movie came out, saying to avoid it at all costs, because I am a fanatic about the books. And so I have.
I've loosened up over the years though. I'm not quite as uptight. I mean, you kind of have to after the job they did with Harry Potter. There are some movies in the HP series that I adore, and others not so much. But considering what they were working with, the directors and writers have done an amazing job. And of course I understand that things need to be cut for time, and not everything is going to be the same as on the pages.
What I don't understand are the major changes that occur from book to movie. I heard the movie "My Sister's Keeper" is one of the worst offenders, with a radical change to the end of the movie. Not having read the book or seen all the movie, I can't really comment too much. But why would a screenwriter have to change so much to a very successful book? The same thing goes for the new "Gulliver's Travels" movie with Jack Black. When I saw the trailer I had no idea what that movie was supposed to be. I almost screamed when I saw the title. Maybe they catered the script around Black, a comedic actor. But it seems to me that they shouldn't forsake literature because they have to hire an actor who can only do comedy.
So anyway, going back to Percy Jackson...I was so angry. And annoyed. And disappointed. And not surprised that they most likely won't be making any of the other books into movies. The first thing to irk me was the kid playing Percy. Percy is around 13 when the book starts-an awkward kid who is bad in school and shy and awkward. The kid in the movie looked around 18-some Emo kid with perfectly flat-ironed hair and an attitude to go with it. His best friend Grover, a coward and shy creature (yes, creature) in the book, was changed into a hip-hop kid with an attitude and a love for the ladies.
The absolute worst casting was the main girl, Annabeth. Gone was everything I liked about her in the book-a normal girl, a smart girl-hell, her mother is Athena-and in her place was a beauty queen with long flowing hair and an instant attraction to Percy. What??? You know how it is-long slow motion camera shots of boy and girl staring at each other...ugh.
The movie dragged, and lacked any charm of the books. The director was Chris Colombus, who made the first Harry Potter movie, which I love. I was surprised at how this movie turned out. For someone who usually gets the whole pre-teen market, he fell way short on this one.
Not even the presence of Sean Bean (one of my major crushes) as Zeus could get me excited about this movie. I'm wondering what Rick Riordan, the author of the series, thought of it. I know most authors are diplomatic when talking about movie versions of their books, but I wish for once they would be honest and say, "Hey! That's not MY Percy Jackson!"
So, I would recommend the books if you like young adult literature, and love mythology and adventure. But please, stay away from the movie lest you get the wrong idea about this excellent series.
YAY!
Nay!
No comments:
Post a Comment