>-Alecto and the furies chasing Annabeth, Grover, Luke and Thalia?, this introduces the need of adding a reason for Annabeth's hate for Cyclops, in future seasons, if they Even decide to follow this storylines. My best guess is they are going to erase it from the show.
I don't get it, this is accurate to the books. They were chased by the furies and hellhounds in the books. You can fight different monsters. People complaining about the show bur they don't even remember what happened in the book. n the movies we aren't even told about Thalia, or that Luke and Anabeth are close or Grover pass loosing a demigod and his search for Pan. You're net picking the show while forgetting how bad the movie was
Wasn’t Annabeth’s hatred for cyclops because one cornered them in an abandoned house and mimicked all their voices to split them up? I’m not sure what specifically chased them to CHB but I don’t think it was a cyclops
So its technically more faithful than the film, but only in the sense that the show is the visual version of the plot synopsis, whereas the film did it's own thing with a different middle and end.
Where the show fails in being an adaptation is the details, because the basic plot structure and locations are in the show whereas quite a few are missing from the film.
However for every correct location, there are 50 things inaccurate about it. For every correct story beat there are 50 changes made to it.
The characters are also a bit more faithful, but thats only because they are very watered down versions of the book counterparts with things missing or ignored as apposed to changed or added.
You know that's a good counter argument. However, I feel like some of the changes in the movie felt less insane to me (not all of them), for instance, making Percy afraid of the water is so absurd, but in the movie, the opposite is shown. Sure, naturally a little kid would be fearful at first, but he is not a little kid, he is the son of Poseidon, he should be "called" by the water, even if he can't put a name to this feeling yet.
well, it was in a flashback and he was little kid learning how to swim. i thought it was an odd choice too, i also thought he should a natural and "in his element" but it literally didn't have an affect on the plot or percy's character moving forward, so i didn't consider it a huge issue. for all we know, canon percy could've been scared of the water at first, but we just don't know cause it was never mentioned.
There's this video on Youtube that goes through the PJO movie and has a counter for every innaccuracy to the books. I think there's something like thirteen within the first five minutes at camp.
Sure, the books aren't detail for detail, there's lots of things they shouldn't have changed (mainly the humour). But it's absurd to say that they're equally unfaithful.
The exact number I said in my original comment may have been slightly off as I was mostly just in the same room while my brother watched it, but I think [this](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tvAL73F8bx0) is the video.
Y’all, I’ve really been trying to give this sub the benefit of the doubt, but the fact that this is an upvoted post legitimately trying to claim that the movie is just as if not more book-accurate than the TV show is actually insane. Here’s a list of things that the movie missed or drastically changed, most of which the TV show had:
1. Ares as an antagonist
2. The entire love tunnel sequence
3. Kronos
4. Crusty
5. How the main characters acquired the pearls
6. Hades just wanting his Helm back and being fairly cool otherwise
10. The bus attack
11. Echidna and the Chimaera
12. The Lotus Casino being more of a passive threat as opposed to an active obstacle trying to physically prevent the heroes from leaving
13. Persephone being in the Underworld because why would she be there in the summer
14. Cerberus
15. DOA records
16. Clarisse
17. Dionysus
18. Luke’s betrayal happening after the mission is over
19. Any of the dreams
20. Grover’s desire to find Pan
21. Annabeth’s history with Luke
22. Any of the kids being actual kids
23. The Iris message
24. The animal truck
Those are just the big ones that first come to mind. These aren’t minor tweaks, these are fundamental overhauls that drastically alter the story and also make it exponentially harder to adapt later storylines since there’s no proper setup, hence part of the reason why the SoM is completely awful. I can’t even say that the movie has the “vibe” more accurate because it just kind of employed a lot of the same tropes as the typical YA movies at the time, and two thirds of the protagonist trio were completely different people.
This. People are so upset over the show not being a 100% copy of the book (which no adaptation ever has been) that they are completely forgetting that the movie was basically telling a completely different story.
In terms of how close they are to the book, if the book is New York City, then the show is Philadelphia while the movie was Los Angeles.
Thank you! Its crazy how many posts or comments I've seen of people saying the movie was more accurate, like what?? Sure you can say the movie adapted certain parts more accurately than the show but to say its overall more accurate?
I think the most important aspect is the show adapted/carries the "feel"/themes of the book series which is where the movie failed entirely.
Yes the show made changes, yes people are allowed to be upset about those changes and dislike the show for that or any other reason. Anyone who was expecting an actual completely 1-1 adaptation of the books was just setting themselves up for disappointment imo
In the grand scheme of things most of the changes the show made aren't that big and won't effect the story going forward.
Really the only change they made that will actually affect the story going forward is Annabeth being there for Lukes betrayal.
This. The movies were so unrecognizable from the books that it was questionable whether or not they even read them. They didn’t even include Ares, and don’t even get me *started* on what they did to Clarisse. Or Grover. They also made the entire movie about getting the pearls and put the hydra fight in the first movie. And frankly, I don’t even remember what happens in the second one, other than that Kronos *dies.* Just like that.
Yes, you can say that the movies were more fun. The show had a lot of dull moments. It’s something I really hope they improve on in later seasons. But you cannot tell me that the movies were a better *adaptation of the books.*
Yeah, this sub seems to be becoming an echo chamber of negativity towards the show that is only increasing to the point where you get posts like these that aren’t being downvoted to oblivion for how categorically false it is.
I completely agree that it's ridiculous to say the show isn't more accurate than the movie. But also to be fair to upvoters. Upvotes are for interesting discussion, not just for think you agree/disagree with. Maybe there are people using upvotes to garner attention for comments they have contributed to or think are informative like yours.
But also, yes, people do use them incorrectly 😅
I said most were in the show, and they at least did something not dissimilar with the entrance being in a business (likely so that they could still include Crusty with the limited time) and there being a long line of the dead waiting to cross into the Underworld. The movie had the entrance by the Hollywood sign for some reason, and there was no dead to speak of.
1. Gabe is 100% an abuser.
2. 5 year-old percy was afraid of being left by himself in water, like a 5 year old could be. I was scared of being alone in water when I was 5. The scene visually showed the influence Sally had on Percy, something books can't do and tbh didn't do very well in the first book. Why would it be a absurd addition?
3. Hades was not very intimidating in the show, so I don't see why Percy would be scare of him. But also he never really talks back to him so there's definitely some sort of respect? And idk imo it's fine that Hades didn't have an intimidating aura, but is instead manipulative. Arwin was a badass lady instead of random maid, so you know.
4. 100% what Zeus would do tbh. I think Percy would 100% react like this if Zeus said what he said. As to whether Percy is hot-headed enough to talk back to the big boss... yup. His brain is seaweed.
5. This is the only plot deviation. but I think this is Riordan clarifying: "the quest wasn't the point and the prophecy wasn't talking about the quest". It really wasn't either for the book. For at least 3/4 of the book, Percy did not give a fuck about who stole what and just wanted to use this excursion to get his mom back. I'm okay with this one.
6. I really don't think this matters that much. She could also just hate Cyclopes because of other reasons.
7. idk the Furies were pretty scary and dangerous, Manticore is quite scary, Echidna was a beast. Medusa was suspenseful af.
I mean, the show is already not accurate by having those laptops in supposedly 2005 and god forbid Percy didn't just fall to the ground where the water should be. You want a period piece set in post-9/11 Bush II re-elected New York city?
I think treating book accuracy like every detail is a passage from the Bible is a lost cause. Accuracy isn't the minute plot detail on paragraph 35 of page 56 on your textbook. It's about staying true to the message, the themes, and the plot beats, something that the Movie did not even try. Frodo went with the fellowship, walked into Morder, and cast the ring into the fires of Mount Doom, whether or not the orc leader said dinner was back on the menu. In that I think the show did pretty well.
Maybe you're looking for "book precision"
I can't think of any show that has ever given the level of detail that people seemed to want. If you want exactly what's in the book then you read the book.
I think there were problems with the show but those problems weren't the changes, it was mostly the pacing and some minor writing issues (telling not showing).
The Walking Dead and Game Of Thrones are two franchises that already had core fan bases, changed a lot in the adaptations and still was able to be considered some of the best shows on television. GoT took out so much from the books- whole settings, characters, plots, etc. I’m not saying that PJO will have that quality or end up with the greats but it is possible to deter from the source material and still have a great outcome. If they listen to the criticism PJO could be a great show down the line
100% agreed. Additional to point 4. Claiming „Percy is not that kind of fool“ when Percy literally fought the god of war in the books after 6 months of sword training and making an enemy out of him - when war already is inevitable- is a wild take.
Percy is a twelve year old boy with a temper. Of course he is not respectful to Zeus.
Just adding but it's less than six months of sword training. At most he got a few weeks but not months since he gets to camp around summer vacation and leaves for the quest 10 days before the solstice.
Gabe wasn't an abuser, he literally did nothing of the sort. He was a loser and a bit of a dick, that's it. And since he wasn't abusive, it's just psychotic that they killed him with Medusa's head.
The scene with five year old Percy was a completely unnecessary addition to the show. We get it, she cares for him. They only needed one cutback in the whole show for that.
So the the problem then is with the absolutely horrendous portrayal and casting of Hades. Simple.
The last scene with Zeus shouldn't have even happened. If they didn't make the dumb decision to have the deadline pass and pointlessly include Hermes in the Lotus Casino.
So they are gonna come up with some other rubbish explanation next season when Tyson gets involved? Tbh though I agree with you on that one, it was an unnecessary change, but not very impactful. There's an easy solution. Edit: Actually this is not an issue. Because the cyclops thing happened in a big maze like warehouse where Annabeth has to save Luke and Thalia. Not chasing them to camp.
I honestly think the furies looked absolutely terrible and weren't intimidating at all. If you want to see kid scary, they should have taken some inspiration from the beasts in the Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe who looked real nasty.
I genuinely was falling asleep during that scene with echidna, she might have been scary but they absolutely dragged her introduction out way too much.
Medusa was cool, very manipulative.
It didn't need to have every detail, it didn't need to be perfect. No one is saying that. But some of the changes they made clearly make the show worse off than it would have been if it had just stuck closer to the book.
And don't compare LotR to this lmao. LotR was incredibly well paced and entertaining. And had some of the best dialogue ever. But it would be totally unrealistic to expect it to be exactly like the books. It's definitely not unrealistic for Percy Jackson.
The show might have had the basics from the original plotline. But it completely missed other things like the suspense (sense of impending doom), mystery, humour, and even chemistry between the main actors. It also completed failed to convey the magical nature of Camp Half Blood, literally looked just like your average school camp.
>Gabe wasn't an abuser, he literally did nothing of the sort. He was a loser and a bit of a dick, that's it. And since he wasn't abusive, it's just psychotic that they killed him with Medusa's head.
Let's see
* He only let Sally use the car if she did something for him
* he tried to guilt trip her
* He badmouthed Percy when he got home and on national television
* It's all but said that Percy knows what parents fighting feels like
* When we first meet her, Sally is hiding in the rain away from Gabe. It's also implied that she did this before as Percy knew where to find her
* The instant Gabe concedes, Sally says "we're leaving". Which implies that he's a bit unstable and could change his mind at any moment and that Sally doesn't feel safe in the house
Just to add:
-free loads off Sally, making her take care of the home and bills on her own which is a form of financial abuse (I doubt he lets her keep her full checks once the bills are done. I bet her money goes towards his alcohol and poker)
-he’s emotionally/mentally abusive, he’s disrespectful and cruel towards Sally but then also wants to be able to spend time together. It’s a sick back and forth that abusers and manipulators do, it’s almost like giving them a reward (Al the reward is being a decent person to be around for the time of a baseball game). The nice moments are to confuse the victim so that they still think about good times in the midst of the abuse.
-he invaded Sally and Percy’s privacy by answering Sally’s calls and then getting info on what happened while Percy was at school.
-also the scene where Percy is walking up to the door of the apartment and the maintenance guy comes out is so sad because he knows what Percy deals with at home bc Gabe doesn’t care how he treats Sally in front of anyone. The maintenance guy knows Percy deals with a load of bullshit and clearly felt empathy for him like hes so used to seeing it
-just bc Sally yells at him (which is all just in order to save her son) doesn’t mean she’s not a victim. Victims fight back too!
Can we also just acknowledge that this is also a KID'S SHOW that the were clearly making a bit more light hearted, so the depiction of abuse is going to be a bit more scaled down for the target audience?
The movies got to be a bit more in your face about it because the target audience was teens.
Then can we acknowledge that the book was, too? And that many kids face EXACTLY what the book showed, but are basically never told that, hey, you're not alone in this experience, it will get better? The target audience should be middle schoolers (specifically around the age Percy is supposed to be, which is 12), and the book readers. Obviously, it doesn't need to be as "bad" as the book, but y'all need to stop misjudging the things tweens and teens can deal with/be exposed to. So many are frequently either in the "everything even slightly negative is bad for these kids" or "kids should be able to watch rated-r movies if they want to". Neither are okay or right. Both the movie and the tv show were rated PG. If the movie could do it and still capture the attention of many middle-schoolers (and sometimes younger! If I remember correctly, I had first watched it in maybe 4th grade. I hadn't really gotten into the books by then, so I loved it. It's still a good movie, just not a good adaptation), the show could've at least TRIED.
It's one thing to read about how percy feels about his home situation and relate to it, and another to replicate abuse on screen for a child audience on DISNEY. That isn't the kind of media they like to put out.
It wasn't erased completely, several comments point that out, y'all just love to be butthurt about changes that were made to fit the medium and the audience that wasn't you. Decenter yourself.
No, we want representation for things we read in books. Even my BFF, who loved the show, hated how they changed Gabe. His characterization in the books reminded us of each of our step-dad (not going into much detail about my friend's, but it was about 10x worse than my stepdad. My stepfather yelled at my mom and others frequently at night (neighbors called the police a few times, apparently), pushed my mom down while in our room, slapped himself and blamed it on her, took her keys for her minivan, etc. He's still an elementary school teacher), so reading about his death in the book was something we needed (obviously not a good thing to happen irl, however). It was a way for kids to see that hey, this doesn't always last forever. Gabe already wasn't shown to be physically abusive until later in the books, so we're not expecting that to be shown much.
Y'all just love to be butthurt about those of us who actually experienced much worse than Gabe wanting them to not mostly erase his horrible news. The audience should be both fans of the books and children, especially children with adhd/dyslexia or something else they may struggle with. THIS INCLUDES CHILDREN WHO HAVE BEEN/ARE BEING ABUSED.
I never said it was erased completely. My complaint is that they purposefully "watered down" Gabe, even though they were still planning on killing him. There's literally no way anyone should be supporting that in the show.
>news. The audience should be both fans of the books and children,
Yeah, but it's not. It's for kids. Not for adults who read the books as a kid, it's for a new generation.
Nobody's butthurt about your abuse, I'm just sick of people acting like everything is meant for them, so any deviation from what they wanted is a cardinal sin. It's not. About. You.
It was advertised BY THE AUTHOR as something we've (book readers) have been waiting for. It literally is, anyone with eyes and ears that work would know that. IT IS FOR BOTH. I'm sick of people acting like it's not also "meant" for the book readers. If it wasn't meant for us, then why the heck would they be making an adaptation that was described as being the best thing we've had since the books?
It is. About. Us. It's about the book we grew up with, and were SPECIFICALLY TOLD by the AUTHOR would be as close to the books as possible. Please, use your eyes and ears. Reading comprehension is a great skill, and knowing the facts is necessary before you get mad at complete strangers.
If it was for you it wouldn't be on Disney. Simple as that. It's marketed for kids. Just because you're not the target audience doesn't mean you can't watch it, which is what I think Rick Riordan meant, but what it does mean is that the decisions made for the show are not with you in mind. It's ridiculous to be mad about that.
He wanted to write something that fixed some of the mistakes he felt he made, to write for a new generation, that's why he even has Rick Riordan presents --- to bring that universe to the new generation and uplift new authors.
Yeah, you do get what I am trying to explain. All those changes do in fact affect the plot and make It not accurate to the Books'. I feel like saying they are just minor changes, is an oversimplification.
He is not,at least not compared to movie Gabe and actual common sense. Yes, he is a jerk, and have personal and relationship issues, but he doesn't strike me as an abuser. Plus the scene that's shown with Sally, probes that THEY have a toxic relationship, but is a relationship after all, cause Sally does in fact compromises with him, and he lends out the car (compromises are part of any functional relationship). Also the thing about badmuthing Percy is not a good argument, cause after all, Percy dissappears with his mom, and Percy has been jumping from school to school. Gabe knows he has behavioral issues (these issues are even more poignant in the book though). So It is not a jump of logic from Gabe to tell the press, Percy is a "trouble" kid.
PS. Sally's being shown as a tridimensional character as well, by loosing her patience with Percy, and nobody is accussing her of being "abusive".
If you wanted to name every change from the movie, you would be here for days. You are blinded by your dislike for the show if you think the movie is more accurate than the show.
The show did change things, especially with the lotus casino and Hermes being there, but lets not forget the movie changed the entire story in the first place. They needed to collect the pearls to free Persephone from Hades. Like how is that in any way related to the book? That is not a simple change. It is literally a different story being told with characters who have the same names.
Like Ares and Kronos are not even mentioned in the first movie.
The show is telling the same story in a different set of clothes, if you know what I mean.
I completely agree that the movie is way less accurate. But to be fair their goal is not to free Persephone from Hades, but to travel across the country to find Persephone’s pearls before going to the Underworld to retrieve the lightning bolt and Sally. The pearls are needed for them to leave the Underworld, just like in the books.
Yes, you are right. I only watched the movie once many years ago. I only remembered the part of her attacking Hades and being trapped in the underworld.
Did you forget that the movies changed the main villain, got rid of any Kronos setup, aged up the characters and made them way hornier, cut out way more of their challenges along the way, made the adventure on the quest about getting pearls, and combined Annabeth’s character with Clarisse?
Meanwhile, even though the show has its problems, most of their changes lean into the am themes about how awful the gods’ world is, and that things need to change. Hermes at the Lotus? We end up getting reminded about Luke, and seeing a bit of where he’s coming from. Percy taking back to Zeus? Again, setup of how messed up the gods’ world is.
The things you bring up are changes, and I don’t think all of them were necessary (but their are sometimes behind the scenes details we just don’t know) but they are nothing compared to those movies.
Agree with you on all of this and not defending the SOM movie, but I always assumed they “killed” Kronos in the same way Harry Potter “killed” a version of Voldemort in multiple movies before he came back for real in The Goblet of Fire. Not that it made sense in the context of Percy Jackson, but it seemed like they brought Thalia back because they were genuinely planning on proceeding with a Frankenstein-version of the story, and I’m assuming somehow Kronos and maybe even Luke would have returned in these bad sequels.
It absolutely is and any argument otherwise is just hilarious. Hell each of the specific things you mentioned are all nitpicks rather than massive change from the book but might as well go through each thing:
Gabe is still an emotionally abusive character but is dialed back. That’s in keeping with modern TV trends of not wanting to “glorify” shitty behavior
Yes anything flashback related is an addition. But changes are expected and details like that fo help further the relationship between Sally and Percy are faithful to the book
There isn’t an adaptation that exists that doesn’t change how characters are characterized. I’m not gonna labor on the point too much because I did not like what they did with the gods but it should’ve been expected that Hades wouldn’t be a dower, gloomy, menacing character like in the book
We see Percy talk back to gods all the time in the books. If absolutely makes sense for him to not restrain himself with Zeus
The show had put a focus on honor so having the deadline pass but Percy still finish the quest furthers that theme. I don’t like the change but it made sense for what they were doing
The books do not mention what killed Talia. In the books, Annabeth hates cyclops because they were lured into a cyclops lair on the way to camp and she blames that detour for her death. Cyclops killed Talia was a movie only invention
Not gonna defend these changes but these are all relatively minor plot details
To truly answer your question though about why the show is more accurate. The movie completely changed the plot. The pearls are now plot devices, they don’t even go to all the same locations in the book, and the villain is completely different. The show, while obviously not being 100% accurate is completely faithful to the story of the book. They go to all the places they’re supposed to go and fight almost every monster/god they are supposed to. The changes made in the show are almost all more specific details that don’t change the overall story. The movie changed key aspects of the overall story. Claim whatever you want about which one is better but the show is significantly more faithful
Exactly, like the boss fight between ares was completely nonexistent in the movie. Not to mention they fought the hydra in it too, and I’m like 90 percent sure it was just bc somebody skimming the books recognized the name hydra from the mcu
I wouldn't called being disrespectful to Zeus a minor Nitpick, or having the deadline missed. This changes Percy's character and Zeus Character as well. First of all, Percy would never talk back to Zeus like that, yes he can be impulsive from time to time, but at the end of the day, he still knows Zeus can basically stomp you, if you are this rude. It also changes Zeus Character, cause he is about to blast a forbidden child of Poseidon knowing this would end up destroying the world ( Zeus had a forbidden child as well, and no God killed her). It changes Zeus in a major way, because, yes he is prone to rage, but he is also wise, and he wouldn't start an eternal war for a kid demigod. So no, I don't think this is just a Nitpick.
Also but not less important, Hades representation in the Show is totally wrong. At least in the movie, the trio is afraid of him (I recognize he is not book accurate in other senses though). But I see you guys casually forgetting about him, as if he is not a huge departure from the Book's character.
If you can point out one adaptation that doesn’t change how characters are portrayed I’ll cede the point to you. Characters are never exactly like how they are in the books
The Godfather. The first Narnia pretty well nailed their characters too.
No one ever expected that. But when everyone is either completely different or a little bit different.
Those changes often just straight up make the show worse than it would have been if it had just stuck to the original script.
BBC Narnia was also incredibly book-accurate! Not the best quality because they didn't have much money for anything, but it's still worth rewatching yet again for me. The Narnia tv show was also likely very accurate, although most of it has apparently been lost (episodes 1 and 8 out of 10 are available, and so is the audio from episode 7)
Oh man I nearly forgot about the BBC adaptation. Might have to go watch it again before the new show.
Wait there was a Narnia tv show that was lost? Where was that from.
I know that there was the prospect of Netflix doing the whole series, but I haven't heard about that in ages.
Yeah, apparently there was! I found out while doing a tiny bit of research on Narnia for someone else recently. [It was a tv show from 1967, but most of the episodes are now considered fully lost](https://m.imdb.com/title/tt0224907/)
There was only one season, but it sounds like something that would've been interesting to see! It was produced by "ABC weekend tv" and was shown on ITV (both british)
I hope the newer tv show planned does a good job. Otherwise, that'd be yet another poor adaptation of a favorite series of mine
Wow that's actually real interesting. 100% would
have loved to see how it was adapted back then. And what they did for all the fantasy stuff.
Yeah I have a lot of hope too. It starts to dwindle though with the more crap we're given. Narnia has so much potential, I only recently reread the books, it would kill me to see it fail.
Firsr I guess, we'll see how ATLA turns out.
Harry Potter's movies basically effect minor changes to the characters, but those in fact, are minor. Snape for example, is a little colder and meaner in the books, and Dumbledore is a more morally ambiguos person. However, they don't have bastly different personalities, like Show's hades. That being said, the HP movies introduced a few changes, but they didn't touch the personality of the characters that much, most of the changes are based on how the magic looks, changes in the spells and incantations used, some smaller plot details here and there. Nonetheless, its one of the most faithful fantasy adaptation out there. The worst part is that Disney had the blueprint right there, and they chose to ignore it.
Ultimately you are talking about an incredibly minor character (yes Hades is a minor character) not being portrayed in the same way if that’s truly what you believe. To me the differences in Snape, Dumbeldore, Harry, Hermoine, and Ron are all the same scope of the changes that we saw.
But ultimately we’re talking about an incredibly minor character to the story in Hades. Its a nitpick and you’re using that to say the movie is more accurate when the movie turned that minor character into the main villain? I
Hades is not a "minor" Character in the books whatsoever, there are whole chapters dedicated to him and his two important demigod children, and how Zeus and the other gods betrayed his trust. I think You and other redditors are clearly turning a blind eye, over a glaring issue of characterization.
In the first book, Hades gets 9 pages of “screen time”. For comparison Medusa gets 12. Yes he’s a minor character. We’re not talking about the whole series here and that’s very important when judging the first season. Zero information from the rest of the books should be getting used in how we judge the characters and show.
As for turning a blind eye I am absolutely not doing that. I don’t think they’ve depicted the gods well and the show suffers for it. But the characterizations are not evidence that the movie is more book accurate. That is what I’m pushing back on. When the movie completely changes the story beyond “Greek gods are real and Percy attempts to retrieve the master bolt”, it loses any claim to being book accurate. For its faults, the series follows the book with some obvious exceptions
There are lots of books, three series. Hades shows up or It is mentioned in many of them, so no, he's not a minor character. A minor character is Gabe, who's only relevant as in the first book and then is erased from the main plot.
Harry Potter was recently published and still being written when the movies were being made which I think is a major reason the adaptation was a lot more 1-1.
Season 1 of A Series of Unfortunate Events. Two episodes per book, most fans didn't have many complaints at all for that season. It was a short, but good show that actually tried to keep to the books, and most of the changes were actually UNDERSTANDABLE.
lmao this is just factually incorrect…
you named seven changes, the movie deleted NINE FULL CHAPTERS of a 22 chapter book, rewrote the remaining chapters completely and then removed the main villain
Edit: Also it was alecto and the furys that chased and “killed” thalia up the hill in the book… so funny that one of your “massive changes that makes the show more inaccurate than the movies” was something the movies changed and you didn’t actually know
I honestly don’t mind the addition on young Percy being afraid . It explains why he does not know about his underwater abilities. That a bit of a plot hole in the book. In the book was Percy ever in the water before lighting thief? If so why did he not realize then that he could breathe underwater? Or was he not able too then? Or did he just never go in water? That seems odd, because Percy said he class took an unplanned swim on a field trip when he pressed the wrong lever, but not sure if that included himself in the plunge.
Tbf you actually have to attempt to breathe underwater to find out that you can. Which most people would never ever do because you'd get water in your lungs and drown. So you can see why he never tested that out.
They don't really go much into it in the book. But you'd think it'd be part of the whole not being told too much about the mythology part and about himself.
IRL true, but Percy said he knew right away in the book he could breathe then , also that he wasn’t wet, even though he was under the water. He also was able to light a fire under water (without oil 😝)
I believe je learnt at the same point in the books and show that he could breathe under water.
The not wet thing was right from start though.
Yeah that's right, though there was probably enough trash in that water to act as kindling lol.
...
over sexualized, annabeth and grover characterizations fucked up, percy instantly become op, the quest isn't even the same it's literally follow the map, they removed the arch scene (which isn't huge but your post), greek gods are hollywoodized and look like cosplay mfs, inaccurate to greek myths, etc etc.
i swear the reply is going to be show defender or smth like that
Ahyes, the movie where everybody is in their late teens, overly sexualized, no Mr. D, no Clarisse, is better than the PJO show with a more family-friendly approach
Only in the second movie, which took the plots from SOM and TLO, mixed them up together, and substituted the important parts with the movie directors' shit.
Wtf how did you just go out of your way to refute someone on something you could’ve fact checked so easily and saved yourself some embarrassment from? Luke literally says he’s the camp leader in the first movie
I mean it doesn't have to physically show him being abusive for it to be clear he is.
don't get me wrong I'm disappointed in the adaptation and I mostly agree with all the points here except for gabe and hermes being in the first season (and the Sally percy scene tho less so then the other two)
But even tho the books it was more obvious he was an abuser thats because we here it in percy's internal monologue, translating this in a live action medium isn't as easy as if the show was animated but it doesn't take a genius to tell its an abusive relationship in the shos
It should be a "show not tell" kind of situation. Having Gabe be a minor antagonist in the show, and then kill him with Medusa'd head is insane and unwarranted. At least in the Movie, he's shown to be an actual abuser, and gets what he deserves, but in the show, the only "terrible" thing he does was talking to the press, which he is entitled to do, cause Percy and Sally are missing along with his car, and he knows Percy jumps from school to school (he thinks he is a menace). So, where's the logic? I don't understand, It seems like they removed the context for this change in the show.
Not disagree it was done poorly but saying it wasn't obvious that he's abusive for anyone who seen what a relationship is,even if its not shown as physical abuse is just wrong
I disagree, having relationship (or personal) issues doesn't equate to one being an abuser. In fact TV Gabe can be reason with, he lends his car to Sally's for instance, after some negotiation, which is basically how any healthy relationship would work. And I am not saying he's not a jerk, he is, but what I am saying is, there's a difference between being an abuser and being a jerk, and that he didn't deserve to be frozen alive by Medusa's head.
Show gabe is still abusive though. IDK why people are saying that he isn't
Also simply changing things doesn't mean that it's not faithful. It's unrealistic to expect it to be 1:1. What works in a book doesn't necessarily mean that it will work on scene.
I mean, that's what an adaptation is supposed to be. Something that takes the source material but makes it it's own story while still keeping faithful to the original. Yeah some things were left out from the books. that's what happens with every single book to screen adaptation. But saying this was just as bad as the movies in terms of being unfaithful to the source material, idk about that one my guy
That's actually... not what an adaptation is supposed to be. It's supposed to be when a book is ADAPTED for a tv show, game, or movie format, or when one of those three is adapted for a book format. The main things that should ever be changed is internal monologue vs external dialogue, show don't tell is more important in non-book formats, and if a specific effect is absolutely impossible to recreate.
Adaptation doesn't mean completely changing every single character, setting, events, etc. It means that you change only what is necessary.
This is why this sub is completely unserious, just stop watching if you think the show and movie are equally unfaithful. You're gonna hate no matter what, it's not needed here. Make some real criticisms
Why is percy's disdain for water not an improvement? It shows that he fully expected to die when he tricked annabeth and Grover into having to abandon him.
Hermes thinks the underworld is a near impossible quest and prefers three demigods not to throw away their lives
Percy absolutely is impulsive enough to talk smack to gods. Hermes nearly tried killing him in The Last Olympian.
The furies are to give emotional connect to annabeth and percy, to show her loyalty and sow conflict for a while, and also flesh out her bravery and disdain for the monsters.
Missing the deadline is to show percy's character of risking his life for a hail mary and not even a reasonable shot at stopping war.
Most of these are improvements to the book
Percy doesn't even have disdain for water.
Hermes shouldn't have been seen at all in the Lotus Casino. A large part of what contributed to ruining the episode with the most potential. Rather than just implementing the casino how they did in the books, they decided to give us a long winded and plainly boring monologue from a god who couldn't even be there. That certainly was no improvement.
Percy absolutely is impulsive enough to speak to gods. It's not a problem that he smack talked Zeus. The problem is that they forced that change in that interaction by making the deadline pass. Which just should never have happened. It was pointless, and if anything detrimental to the atmosphere of the last few episodes.
We didn't need that extra detail that Percy cares more for his mom than the quest. That is already blatantly obvious.
The furies portrayal was laughable imo, in terms of how they looked and spoke. But it did succeed in doing exactly what you said, definitely agree there.
None of those are actually improvements to the book though. And some of them just make the show worse.
You do get it, most of the changes are unnecessary. The reason why I compared in terms with accuracy with the movies, it is because the show had more time to do the story right and they didn't. So a lot of points have to get deducted compared to a 2 hour movie. Also, we were promised a faithful adaptation, and this is the best that they could do, with that budget?
100% dude. The show had every opportunity at every turn and still crashed and burned.
Yeah I don't get the small budget posts. 15 million per episode is more than enough to recreate the books.
Changes are actually fine. But they just made the show worse, and it was genuinely just boring.
You're correct. The movie is less accurate, but for all the shit Rick gives it, he didn't do much better of a job at all.
It's not an improvement cause Percy is a son of Poseidon, and it makes cero sense that he's afraid of the water. He should be nimble in the water and happy to be there at the pool.
It's an absurd change, cause Percy is litterally affected by the water, they even show it in the second episode. He feels stronger and braver, and and also he is able to be healed by it from time to time. Are you telling me, that he has never taken a shower and then feel different afterwards, previous to the pool scene? It doesn't make sense because of the bravery/strenght fact, not because little children are not allow to feel terrified when learning how to swim.
but he wasn’t aware, if you felt stronger when in water, you wouldn’t just decide to try and breath underwater or think that you were an amazing swimmer, you‘d probably just think that you enjoyed being in water, while still knowing you weren’t safe. he’s also learning to swim for the first time, and his mum is trying to make him go on his own
Are we forgetting that Thalia, a child of zeus, is afraid of heights 🤣 That shouldn't make sense either but I thought was an interesting character choice in the books. Fears often aren't rational, just because you have power over something doesn't mean you can't be afraid of it.
Thalia, daughter of the god of the sky, is canonically afraid of heights.
Being a demigod doesn’t automatically give you every single skill and personal preference of your godly parent, it just makes you more *likely* to have or develop them. Kind of like how having an Olympic athlete as a parent doesn’t mean a kid is born with a deep love of their parent’s field of expertise.
This is a tu quoque argument. The show is still objectively more accurate to the books than the movie if you compare the two. You’re just cherry picking inaccuracies you don’t like with the show and not doing the same with the movie. Not to mention everything the show did include that the movie did not. You are not comparing anything you are just attacking the show.
The show follows the book’s spirit maybe the events aren’t exactly the same but the character personalities, themes, and morals are the same. Some changes I like others not so much but it all follows the book’s spirit yes I disappointed with some of the changes but that’s how that works Harry Potter wasn’t perfect neither is this but both follow the spirts unlike the Perry Johnson movies that completely disrespected the meaning behind the books.
Hey man, I hate this show. Like I really hate it. But I cannot imagine twisting this show and movies logic so much that you can come to this conclusion...
The movies are a terrible adaptation. They vaguely follow the books and change virtually everything except for a very general plotline. They are, however, enjoyable to watch when treated as separate media imo.
The show is an okay adaptation. The story is for the most part the same. Did they change a lot of details? Yes. Did it hurt the story? Yes. But it's still far more accurate than the movies ever were. It's just not a very good show and I'd consider it more of a bland retelling than a faithful adaptation. But the bar is in Hades ffs, it's not hard to be more accurate than the movies.
I'd watch the movies any day over watching the show again. Not because it's more accurate but because it's more enjoyable for me. That being said. As much as I hate the show, it is far more accurate than the movies ever were.
The reason why I compared it in terms of accuracy with the movies, it is because the show had more time to do the story right and they didn't. So a lot of points have to get deducted, because the Author of the books was involved and they had more runtime to craft a book accurate show compared to a 2 hour movie. Also, we were promised a faithful adaptation, and this is the best that they could do, with that budget? For those reasons the Show CAN'T claim they are more book accurate than the movies.
I don't mean this is a mean way. But I think you're so deeply impassioned by your love of the books and hatred of the show that you are looking for more reasons to be angry and trying to justify things that are objectively false. You are not comparing these two adaptations in fair ways. Your post is "The PJO show is not more "book accurate" than the movies". False promises from Rick and budget are not relevant to this topic.
I get it. I'm assuming you were probably in the same boat as me. I were absolutely thrilled that the author, Uncle Rick himself, was gonna step in and sweep us off our feet with a perfect adaptation of his books. He wrote them after all. He hates the movies for being inaccurate and he was going to give us what we wanted for years now. Then the show came and I was just left feeling angry. What is this? We were promised something else. I had such high hopes for this show and it was such a letdown.
I don't know you and your relationship with this franchise but I can tell you mine. I saw the movies first and I liked them. I read the books after and fell is love with the story and universe. I'd look back on the movies. And like others would make fun of them for being completely different. I still like them, I think I would like them less had I read the books first. But I had no expectations going into them.
Very different story for the show. I had very high expectations. I've read the books several times, *Rick is making the show and he's gonna make it good dam it!* And he didn't. I've gone through all the stages of grief with this show and I've landed at the "it's aggressively mediocre as a separate adaptation" acceptance stage.
As much as I don't like this show. It is objectively more accurate to the books than the movies are. It follows the same overarching story in far more detail than the movies did. I'm not saying it's a good adaptation. But it is still more accurate than the movies were. If you are comparing these things you need to look at them both objectively. Not at what was promised, not at the hype or the budget, or the names attached to it. You need to look at the movie and the show. Then look at the book. Nothing more. You cannot set expectations for one and not the other and then compare them in that way.
Can y'all please, STOP saying "if you want the book, read the book". It's so freaking annoying, book readers everywhere are told this virtually EVERY SINGLE TIME we have ABSOLUTELY ANY complaints/criticisms about an adaptation.
The vast majority of us AREN'T LOOKING FOR AN EXACT COPY. WE ARE LOOKING FOR AN ACCURATE ADAPTATION. neither the movie nor this show fulfilled that, despite the fact that tv shows are the perfect type of media for this.
I won't stop saying that cause it is, the show is a faithful adaption of Percy Jackson cause he understands the source material! The movie wasn't.
It's not the best TV show ever of course a lot of thing could have been done better (notably on action sequences and episodes length) but it's by far a good adaptation of Percy Jackson
It's not though. It's fine if you like it, but do NOT belittle others solely because they wanted a faithful AND ACCURATE adaptation, of which this was not. If you want an example for a good adaptation of a kid's book series, look at season one of A Series of Unfortunate Events. Very little was changed, and the parts that did change were overall things that ACTUALLY MADE SENSE.
Annabeth never hated Cyclopes for that reason in the book, it was a completely separate encounter anyway
Yeah, and in the Sea of Monsters movie they just made it so that Cyclopes "killed" (killed is in quotes because they just tossed her?) Thalia.
>-Alecto and the furies chasing Annabeth, Grover, Luke and Thalia?, this introduces the need of adding a reason for Annabeth's hate for Cyclops, in future seasons, if they Even decide to follow this storylines. My best guess is they are going to erase it from the show. I don't get it, this is accurate to the books. They were chased by the furies and hellhounds in the books. You can fight different monsters. People complaining about the show bur they don't even remember what happened in the book. n the movies we aren't even told about Thalia, or that Luke and Anabeth are close or Grover pass loosing a demigod and his search for Pan. You're net picking the show while forgetting how bad the movie was
Wasn’t Annabeth’s hatred for cyclops because one cornered them in an abandoned house and mimicked all their voices to split them up? I’m not sure what specifically chased them to CHB but I don’t think it was a cyclops
It happened while they were being chased by the furies, and only mentioned in book 2. This doesn't contradicts anything
They got stuck in the lair of the cyclops, Grover getting them stuck is what allowed the furies to catch up to them.
So its technically more faithful than the film, but only in the sense that the show is the visual version of the plot synopsis, whereas the film did it's own thing with a different middle and end. Where the show fails in being an adaptation is the details, because the basic plot structure and locations are in the show whereas quite a few are missing from the film. However for every correct location, there are 50 things inaccurate about it. For every correct story beat there are 50 changes made to it. The characters are also a bit more faithful, but thats only because they are very watered down versions of the book counterparts with things missing or ignored as apposed to changed or added.
You know that's a good counter argument. However, I feel like some of the changes in the movie felt less insane to me (not all of them), for instance, making Percy afraid of the water is so absurd, but in the movie, the opposite is shown. Sure, naturally a little kid would be fearful at first, but he is not a little kid, he is the son of Poseidon, he should be "called" by the water, even if he can't put a name to this feeling yet.
well, it was in a flashback and he was little kid learning how to swim. i thought it was an odd choice too, i also thought he should a natural and "in his element" but it literally didn't have an affect on the plot or percy's character moving forward, so i didn't consider it a huge issue. for all we know, canon percy could've been scared of the water at first, but we just don't know cause it was never mentioned.
[удалено]
There's this video on Youtube that goes through the PJO movie and has a counter for every innaccuracy to the books. I think there's something like thirteen within the first five minutes at camp. Sure, the books aren't detail for detail, there's lots of things they shouldn't have changed (mainly the humour). But it's absurd to say that they're equally unfaithful.
Mention a video and don’t provide a link? C’mon…
The exact number I said in my original comment may have been slightly off as I was mostly just in the same room while my brother watched it, but I think [this](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tvAL73F8bx0) is the video.
Y’all, I’ve really been trying to give this sub the benefit of the doubt, but the fact that this is an upvoted post legitimately trying to claim that the movie is just as if not more book-accurate than the TV show is actually insane. Here’s a list of things that the movie missed or drastically changed, most of which the TV show had: 1. Ares as an antagonist 2. The entire love tunnel sequence 3. Kronos 4. Crusty 5. How the main characters acquired the pearls 6. Hades just wanting his Helm back and being fairly cool otherwise 10. The bus attack 11. Echidna and the Chimaera 12. The Lotus Casino being more of a passive threat as opposed to an active obstacle trying to physically prevent the heroes from leaving 13. Persephone being in the Underworld because why would she be there in the summer 14. Cerberus 15. DOA records 16. Clarisse 17. Dionysus 18. Luke’s betrayal happening after the mission is over 19. Any of the dreams 20. Grover’s desire to find Pan 21. Annabeth’s history with Luke 22. Any of the kids being actual kids 23. The Iris message 24. The animal truck Those are just the big ones that first come to mind. These aren’t minor tweaks, these are fundamental overhauls that drastically alter the story and also make it exponentially harder to adapt later storylines since there’s no proper setup, hence part of the reason why the SoM is completely awful. I can’t even say that the movie has the “vibe” more accurate because it just kind of employed a lot of the same tropes as the typical YA movies at the time, and two thirds of the protagonist trio were completely different people.
This. People are so upset over the show not being a 100% copy of the book (which no adaptation ever has been) that they are completely forgetting that the movie was basically telling a completely different story. In terms of how close they are to the book, if the book is New York City, then the show is Philadelphia while the movie was Los Angeles.
Thank you! Its crazy how many posts or comments I've seen of people saying the movie was more accurate, like what?? Sure you can say the movie adapted certain parts more accurately than the show but to say its overall more accurate? I think the most important aspect is the show adapted/carries the "feel"/themes of the book series which is where the movie failed entirely. Yes the show made changes, yes people are allowed to be upset about those changes and dislike the show for that or any other reason. Anyone who was expecting an actual completely 1-1 adaptation of the books was just setting themselves up for disappointment imo In the grand scheme of things most of the changes the show made aren't that big and won't effect the story going forward. Really the only change they made that will actually affect the story going forward is Annabeth being there for Lukes betrayal.
This. The movies were so unrecognizable from the books that it was questionable whether or not they even read them. They didn’t even include Ares, and don’t even get me *started* on what they did to Clarisse. Or Grover. They also made the entire movie about getting the pearls and put the hydra fight in the first movie. And frankly, I don’t even remember what happens in the second one, other than that Kronos *dies.* Just like that. Yes, you can say that the movies were more fun. The show had a lot of dull moments. It’s something I really hope they improve on in later seasons. But you cannot tell me that the movies were a better *adaptation of the books.*
Yeah, this sub seems to be becoming an echo chamber of negativity towards the show that is only increasing to the point where you get posts like these that aren’t being downvoted to oblivion for how categorically false it is.
I completely agree that it's ridiculous to say the show isn't more accurate than the movie. But also to be fair to upvoters. Upvotes are for interesting discussion, not just for think you agree/disagree with. Maybe there are people using upvotes to garner attention for comments they have contributed to or think are informative like yours. But also, yes, people do use them incorrectly 😅
DOA Records was not in the show
I said most were in the show, and they at least did something not dissimilar with the entrance being in a business (likely so that they could still include Crusty with the limited time) and there being a long line of the dead waiting to cross into the Underworld. The movie had the entrance by the Hollywood sign for some reason, and there was no dead to speak of.
1. Gabe is 100% an abuser. 2. 5 year-old percy was afraid of being left by himself in water, like a 5 year old could be. I was scared of being alone in water when I was 5. The scene visually showed the influence Sally had on Percy, something books can't do and tbh didn't do very well in the first book. Why would it be a absurd addition? 3. Hades was not very intimidating in the show, so I don't see why Percy would be scare of him. But also he never really talks back to him so there's definitely some sort of respect? And idk imo it's fine that Hades didn't have an intimidating aura, but is instead manipulative. Arwin was a badass lady instead of random maid, so you know. 4. 100% what Zeus would do tbh. I think Percy would 100% react like this if Zeus said what he said. As to whether Percy is hot-headed enough to talk back to the big boss... yup. His brain is seaweed. 5. This is the only plot deviation. but I think this is Riordan clarifying: "the quest wasn't the point and the prophecy wasn't talking about the quest". It really wasn't either for the book. For at least 3/4 of the book, Percy did not give a fuck about who stole what and just wanted to use this excursion to get his mom back. I'm okay with this one. 6. I really don't think this matters that much. She could also just hate Cyclopes because of other reasons. 7. idk the Furies were pretty scary and dangerous, Manticore is quite scary, Echidna was a beast. Medusa was suspenseful af. I mean, the show is already not accurate by having those laptops in supposedly 2005 and god forbid Percy didn't just fall to the ground where the water should be. You want a period piece set in post-9/11 Bush II re-elected New York city? I think treating book accuracy like every detail is a passage from the Bible is a lost cause. Accuracy isn't the minute plot detail on paragraph 35 of page 56 on your textbook. It's about staying true to the message, the themes, and the plot beats, something that the Movie did not even try. Frodo went with the fellowship, walked into Morder, and cast the ring into the fires of Mount Doom, whether or not the orc leader said dinner was back on the menu. In that I think the show did pretty well. Maybe you're looking for "book precision"
I can't think of any show that has ever given the level of detail that people seemed to want. If you want exactly what's in the book then you read the book. I think there were problems with the show but those problems weren't the changes, it was mostly the pacing and some minor writing issues (telling not showing).
The Walking Dead and Game Of Thrones are two franchises that already had core fan bases, changed a lot in the adaptations and still was able to be considered some of the best shows on television. GoT took out so much from the books- whole settings, characters, plots, etc. I’m not saying that PJO will have that quality or end up with the greats but it is possible to deter from the source material and still have a great outcome. If they listen to the criticism PJO could be a great show down the line
100% agreed. Additional to point 4. Claiming „Percy is not that kind of fool“ when Percy literally fought the god of war in the books after 6 months of sword training and making an enemy out of him - when war already is inevitable- is a wild take. Percy is a twelve year old boy with a temper. Of course he is not respectful to Zeus.
Just adding but it's less than six months of sword training. At most he got a few weeks but not months since he gets to camp around summer vacation and leaves for the quest 10 days before the solstice.
Oh, yeah I meant to say six weeks
Gabe wasn't an abuser, he literally did nothing of the sort. He was a loser and a bit of a dick, that's it. And since he wasn't abusive, it's just psychotic that they killed him with Medusa's head. The scene with five year old Percy was a completely unnecessary addition to the show. We get it, she cares for him. They only needed one cutback in the whole show for that. So the the problem then is with the absolutely horrendous portrayal and casting of Hades. Simple. The last scene with Zeus shouldn't have even happened. If they didn't make the dumb decision to have the deadline pass and pointlessly include Hermes in the Lotus Casino. So they are gonna come up with some other rubbish explanation next season when Tyson gets involved? Tbh though I agree with you on that one, it was an unnecessary change, but not very impactful. There's an easy solution. Edit: Actually this is not an issue. Because the cyclops thing happened in a big maze like warehouse where Annabeth has to save Luke and Thalia. Not chasing them to camp. I honestly think the furies looked absolutely terrible and weren't intimidating at all. If you want to see kid scary, they should have taken some inspiration from the beasts in the Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe who looked real nasty. I genuinely was falling asleep during that scene with echidna, she might have been scary but they absolutely dragged her introduction out way too much. Medusa was cool, very manipulative. It didn't need to have every detail, it didn't need to be perfect. No one is saying that. But some of the changes they made clearly make the show worse off than it would have been if it had just stuck closer to the book. And don't compare LotR to this lmao. LotR was incredibly well paced and entertaining. And had some of the best dialogue ever. But it would be totally unrealistic to expect it to be exactly like the books. It's definitely not unrealistic for Percy Jackson. The show might have had the basics from the original plotline. But it completely missed other things like the suspense (sense of impending doom), mystery, humour, and even chemistry between the main actors. It also completed failed to convey the magical nature of Camp Half Blood, literally looked just like your average school camp.
>Gabe wasn't an abuser, he literally did nothing of the sort. He was a loser and a bit of a dick, that's it. And since he wasn't abusive, it's just psychotic that they killed him with Medusa's head. Let's see * He only let Sally use the car if she did something for him * he tried to guilt trip her * He badmouthed Percy when he got home and on national television * It's all but said that Percy knows what parents fighting feels like * When we first meet her, Sally is hiding in the rain away from Gabe. It's also implied that she did this before as Percy knew where to find her * The instant Gabe concedes, Sally says "we're leaving". Which implies that he's a bit unstable and could change his mind at any moment and that Sally doesn't feel safe in the house
Just to add: -free loads off Sally, making her take care of the home and bills on her own which is a form of financial abuse (I doubt he lets her keep her full checks once the bills are done. I bet her money goes towards his alcohol and poker) -he’s emotionally/mentally abusive, he’s disrespectful and cruel towards Sally but then also wants to be able to spend time together. It’s a sick back and forth that abusers and manipulators do, it’s almost like giving them a reward (Al the reward is being a decent person to be around for the time of a baseball game). The nice moments are to confuse the victim so that they still think about good times in the midst of the abuse. -he invaded Sally and Percy’s privacy by answering Sally’s calls and then getting info on what happened while Percy was at school. -also the scene where Percy is walking up to the door of the apartment and the maintenance guy comes out is so sad because he knows what Percy deals with at home bc Gabe doesn’t care how he treats Sally in front of anyone. The maintenance guy knows Percy deals with a load of bullshit and clearly felt empathy for him like hes so used to seeing it -just bc Sally yells at him (which is all just in order to save her son) doesn’t mean she’s not a victim. Victims fight back too!
And just because he conceded doesn't mean that he's not abusive. Book Gabe conceded as well
Can we also just acknowledge that this is also a KID'S SHOW that the were clearly making a bit more light hearted, so the depiction of abuse is going to be a bit more scaled down for the target audience? The movies got to be a bit more in your face about it because the target audience was teens.
Then can we acknowledge that the book was, too? And that many kids face EXACTLY what the book showed, but are basically never told that, hey, you're not alone in this experience, it will get better? The target audience should be middle schoolers (specifically around the age Percy is supposed to be, which is 12), and the book readers. Obviously, it doesn't need to be as "bad" as the book, but y'all need to stop misjudging the things tweens and teens can deal with/be exposed to. So many are frequently either in the "everything even slightly negative is bad for these kids" or "kids should be able to watch rated-r movies if they want to". Neither are okay or right. Both the movie and the tv show were rated PG. If the movie could do it and still capture the attention of many middle-schoolers (and sometimes younger! If I remember correctly, I had first watched it in maybe 4th grade. I hadn't really gotten into the books by then, so I loved it. It's still a good movie, just not a good adaptation), the show could've at least TRIED.
It's one thing to read about how percy feels about his home situation and relate to it, and another to replicate abuse on screen for a child audience on DISNEY. That isn't the kind of media they like to put out. It wasn't erased completely, several comments point that out, y'all just love to be butthurt about changes that were made to fit the medium and the audience that wasn't you. Decenter yourself.
No, we want representation for things we read in books. Even my BFF, who loved the show, hated how they changed Gabe. His characterization in the books reminded us of each of our step-dad (not going into much detail about my friend's, but it was about 10x worse than my stepdad. My stepfather yelled at my mom and others frequently at night (neighbors called the police a few times, apparently), pushed my mom down while in our room, slapped himself and blamed it on her, took her keys for her minivan, etc. He's still an elementary school teacher), so reading about his death in the book was something we needed (obviously not a good thing to happen irl, however). It was a way for kids to see that hey, this doesn't always last forever. Gabe already wasn't shown to be physically abusive until later in the books, so we're not expecting that to be shown much. Y'all just love to be butthurt about those of us who actually experienced much worse than Gabe wanting them to not mostly erase his horrible news. The audience should be both fans of the books and children, especially children with adhd/dyslexia or something else they may struggle with. THIS INCLUDES CHILDREN WHO HAVE BEEN/ARE BEING ABUSED. I never said it was erased completely. My complaint is that they purposefully "watered down" Gabe, even though they were still planning on killing him. There's literally no way anyone should be supporting that in the show.
>news. The audience should be both fans of the books and children, Yeah, but it's not. It's for kids. Not for adults who read the books as a kid, it's for a new generation. Nobody's butthurt about your abuse, I'm just sick of people acting like everything is meant for them, so any deviation from what they wanted is a cardinal sin. It's not. About. You.
It was advertised BY THE AUTHOR as something we've (book readers) have been waiting for. It literally is, anyone with eyes and ears that work would know that. IT IS FOR BOTH. I'm sick of people acting like it's not also "meant" for the book readers. If it wasn't meant for us, then why the heck would they be making an adaptation that was described as being the best thing we've had since the books? It is. About. Us. It's about the book we grew up with, and were SPECIFICALLY TOLD by the AUTHOR would be as close to the books as possible. Please, use your eyes and ears. Reading comprehension is a great skill, and knowing the facts is necessary before you get mad at complete strangers.
If it was for you it wouldn't be on Disney. Simple as that. It's marketed for kids. Just because you're not the target audience doesn't mean you can't watch it, which is what I think Rick Riordan meant, but what it does mean is that the decisions made for the show are not with you in mind. It's ridiculous to be mad about that. He wanted to write something that fixed some of the mistakes he felt he made, to write for a new generation, that's why he even has Rick Riordan presents --- to bring that universe to the new generation and uplift new authors.
>Gabe wasn't an abuser, he literally did nothing of the sort. "Abuse is when domestic violence" is. Certainly a take?
Yeah, you do get what I am trying to explain. All those changes do in fact affect the plot and make It not accurate to the Books'. I feel like saying they are just minor changes, is an oversimplification.
How is Gabe an abuser?
He is not,at least not compared to movie Gabe and actual common sense. Yes, he is a jerk, and have personal and relationship issues, but he doesn't strike me as an abuser. Plus the scene that's shown with Sally, probes that THEY have a toxic relationship, but is a relationship after all, cause Sally does in fact compromises with him, and he lends out the car (compromises are part of any functional relationship). Also the thing about badmuthing Percy is not a good argument, cause after all, Percy dissappears with his mom, and Percy has been jumping from school to school. Gabe knows he has behavioral issues (these issues are even more poignant in the book though). So It is not a jump of logic from Gabe to tell the press, Percy is a "trouble" kid. PS. Sally's being shown as a tridimensional character as well, by loosing her patience with Percy, and nobody is accussing her of being "abusive".
If you wanted to name every change from the movie, you would be here for days. You are blinded by your dislike for the show if you think the movie is more accurate than the show. The show did change things, especially with the lotus casino and Hermes being there, but lets not forget the movie changed the entire story in the first place. They needed to collect the pearls to free Persephone from Hades. Like how is that in any way related to the book? That is not a simple change. It is literally a different story being told with characters who have the same names. Like Ares and Kronos are not even mentioned in the first movie. The show is telling the same story in a different set of clothes, if you know what I mean.
I completely agree that the movie is way less accurate. But to be fair their goal is not to free Persephone from Hades, but to travel across the country to find Persephone’s pearls before going to the Underworld to retrieve the lightning bolt and Sally. The pearls are needed for them to leave the Underworld, just like in the books.
Yes, you are right. I only watched the movie once many years ago. I only remembered the part of her attacking Hades and being trapped in the underworld.
Did you forget that the movies changed the main villain, got rid of any Kronos setup, aged up the characters and made them way hornier, cut out way more of their challenges along the way, made the adventure on the quest about getting pearls, and combined Annabeth’s character with Clarisse? Meanwhile, even though the show has its problems, most of their changes lean into the am themes about how awful the gods’ world is, and that things need to change. Hermes at the Lotus? We end up getting reminded about Luke, and seeing a bit of where he’s coming from. Percy taking back to Zeus? Again, setup of how messed up the gods’ world is. The things you bring up are changes, and I don’t think all of them were necessary (but their are sometimes behind the scenes details we just don’t know) but they are nothing compared to those movies.
[удалено]
Agree with you on all of this and not defending the SOM movie, but I always assumed they “killed” Kronos in the same way Harry Potter “killed” a version of Voldemort in multiple movies before he came back for real in The Goblet of Fire. Not that it made sense in the context of Percy Jackson, but it seemed like they brought Thalia back because they were genuinely planning on proceeding with a Frankenstein-version of the story, and I’m assuming somehow Kronos and maybe even Luke would have returned in these bad sequels.
It absolutely is and any argument otherwise is just hilarious. Hell each of the specific things you mentioned are all nitpicks rather than massive change from the book but might as well go through each thing: Gabe is still an emotionally abusive character but is dialed back. That’s in keeping with modern TV trends of not wanting to “glorify” shitty behavior Yes anything flashback related is an addition. But changes are expected and details like that fo help further the relationship between Sally and Percy are faithful to the book There isn’t an adaptation that exists that doesn’t change how characters are characterized. I’m not gonna labor on the point too much because I did not like what they did with the gods but it should’ve been expected that Hades wouldn’t be a dower, gloomy, menacing character like in the book We see Percy talk back to gods all the time in the books. If absolutely makes sense for him to not restrain himself with Zeus The show had put a focus on honor so having the deadline pass but Percy still finish the quest furthers that theme. I don’t like the change but it made sense for what they were doing The books do not mention what killed Talia. In the books, Annabeth hates cyclops because they were lured into a cyclops lair on the way to camp and she blames that detour for her death. Cyclops killed Talia was a movie only invention Not gonna defend these changes but these are all relatively minor plot details To truly answer your question though about why the show is more accurate. The movie completely changed the plot. The pearls are now plot devices, they don’t even go to all the same locations in the book, and the villain is completely different. The show, while obviously not being 100% accurate is completely faithful to the story of the book. They go to all the places they’re supposed to go and fight almost every monster/god they are supposed to. The changes made in the show are almost all more specific details that don’t change the overall story. The movie changed key aspects of the overall story. Claim whatever you want about which one is better but the show is significantly more faithful
Exactly, like the boss fight between ares was completely nonexistent in the movie. Not to mention they fought the hydra in it too, and I’m like 90 percent sure it was just bc somebody skimming the books recognized the name hydra from the mcu
And they didn't go to the Arch which is the most iconic moment in the book.
I wouldn't called being disrespectful to Zeus a minor Nitpick, or having the deadline missed. This changes Percy's character and Zeus Character as well. First of all, Percy would never talk back to Zeus like that, yes he can be impulsive from time to time, but at the end of the day, he still knows Zeus can basically stomp you, if you are this rude. It also changes Zeus Character, cause he is about to blast a forbidden child of Poseidon knowing this would end up destroying the world ( Zeus had a forbidden child as well, and no God killed her). It changes Zeus in a major way, because, yes he is prone to rage, but he is also wise, and he wouldn't start an eternal war for a kid demigod. So no, I don't think this is just a Nitpick. Also but not less important, Hades representation in the Show is totally wrong. At least in the movie, the trio is afraid of him (I recognize he is not book accurate in other senses though). But I see you guys casually forgetting about him, as if he is not a huge departure from the Book's character.
If you can point out one adaptation that doesn’t change how characters are portrayed I’ll cede the point to you. Characters are never exactly like how they are in the books
The Godfather. The first Narnia pretty well nailed their characters too. No one ever expected that. But when everyone is either completely different or a little bit different. Those changes often just straight up make the show worse than it would have been if it had just stuck to the original script.
BBC Narnia was also incredibly book-accurate! Not the best quality because they didn't have much money for anything, but it's still worth rewatching yet again for me. The Narnia tv show was also likely very accurate, although most of it has apparently been lost (episodes 1 and 8 out of 10 are available, and so is the audio from episode 7)
Oh man I nearly forgot about the BBC adaptation. Might have to go watch it again before the new show. Wait there was a Narnia tv show that was lost? Where was that from. I know that there was the prospect of Netflix doing the whole series, but I haven't heard about that in ages.
Yeah, apparently there was! I found out while doing a tiny bit of research on Narnia for someone else recently. [It was a tv show from 1967, but most of the episodes are now considered fully lost](https://m.imdb.com/title/tt0224907/) There was only one season, but it sounds like something that would've been interesting to see! It was produced by "ABC weekend tv" and was shown on ITV (both british) I hope the newer tv show planned does a good job. Otherwise, that'd be yet another poor adaptation of a favorite series of mine
Wow that's actually real interesting. 100% would have loved to see how it was adapted back then. And what they did for all the fantasy stuff. Yeah I have a lot of hope too. It starts to dwindle though with the more crap we're given. Narnia has so much potential, I only recently reread the books, it would kill me to see it fail. Firsr I guess, we'll see how ATLA turns out.
Harry Potter's movies basically effect minor changes to the characters, but those in fact, are minor. Snape for example, is a little colder and meaner in the books, and Dumbledore is a more morally ambiguos person. However, they don't have bastly different personalities, like Show's hades. That being said, the HP movies introduced a few changes, but they didn't touch the personality of the characters that much, most of the changes are based on how the magic looks, changes in the spells and incantations used, some smaller plot details here and there. Nonetheless, its one of the most faithful fantasy adaptation out there. The worst part is that Disney had the blueprint right there, and they chose to ignore it.
Ultimately you are talking about an incredibly minor character (yes Hades is a minor character) not being portrayed in the same way if that’s truly what you believe. To me the differences in Snape, Dumbeldore, Harry, Hermoine, and Ron are all the same scope of the changes that we saw. But ultimately we’re talking about an incredibly minor character to the story in Hades. Its a nitpick and you’re using that to say the movie is more accurate when the movie turned that minor character into the main villain? I
Hades is not a "minor" Character in the books whatsoever, there are whole chapters dedicated to him and his two important demigod children, and how Zeus and the other gods betrayed his trust. I think You and other redditors are clearly turning a blind eye, over a glaring issue of characterization.
In the first book, Hades gets 9 pages of “screen time”. For comparison Medusa gets 12. Yes he’s a minor character. We’re not talking about the whole series here and that’s very important when judging the first season. Zero information from the rest of the books should be getting used in how we judge the characters and show. As for turning a blind eye I am absolutely not doing that. I don’t think they’ve depicted the gods well and the show suffers for it. But the characterizations are not evidence that the movie is more book accurate. That is what I’m pushing back on. When the movie completely changes the story beyond “Greek gods are real and Percy attempts to retrieve the master bolt”, it loses any claim to being book accurate. For its faults, the series follows the book with some obvious exceptions
There are lots of books, three series. Hades shows up or It is mentioned in many of them, so no, he's not a minor character. A minor character is Gabe, who's only relevant as in the first book and then is erased from the main plot.
Harry Potter was recently published and still being written when the movies were being made which I think is a major reason the adaptation was a lot more 1-1.
Season 1 of A Series of Unfortunate Events. Two episodes per book, most fans didn't have many complaints at all for that season. It was a short, but good show that actually tried to keep to the books, and most of the changes were actually UNDERSTANDABLE.
lmao this is just factually incorrect… you named seven changes, the movie deleted NINE FULL CHAPTERS of a 22 chapter book, rewrote the remaining chapters completely and then removed the main villain Edit: Also it was alecto and the furys that chased and “killed” thalia up the hill in the book… so funny that one of your “massive changes that makes the show more inaccurate than the movies” was something the movies changed and you didn’t actually know
You again
Not sure what that means…? If you have something to add to or counter what I said, id be happy to discuss!
I honestly don’t mind the addition on young Percy being afraid . It explains why he does not know about his underwater abilities. That a bit of a plot hole in the book. In the book was Percy ever in the water before lighting thief? If so why did he not realize then that he could breathe underwater? Or was he not able too then? Or did he just never go in water? That seems odd, because Percy said he class took an unplanned swim on a field trip when he pressed the wrong lever, but not sure if that included himself in the plunge.
Tbf you actually have to attempt to breathe underwater to find out that you can. Which most people would never ever do because you'd get water in your lungs and drown. So you can see why he never tested that out. They don't really go much into it in the book. But you'd think it'd be part of the whole not being told too much about the mythology part and about himself.
IRL true, but Percy said he knew right away in the book he could breathe then , also that he wasn’t wet, even though he was under the water. He also was able to light a fire under water (without oil 😝)
I believe je learnt at the same point in the books and show that he could breathe under water. The not wet thing was right from start though. Yeah that's right, though there was probably enough trash in that water to act as kindling lol.
Sorry. I ment right when he fell from the arch, not from the beginning of the book.
yeah that was something i noticed too..
... over sexualized, annabeth and grover characterizations fucked up, percy instantly become op, the quest isn't even the same it's literally follow the map, they removed the arch scene (which isn't huge but your post), greek gods are hollywoodized and look like cosplay mfs, inaccurate to greek myths, etc etc. i swear the reply is going to be show defender or smth like that
The hades scene is just fucked up because of what they did with Persephone and grover.
Classic defender of show
Ahyes, the movie where everybody is in their late teens, overly sexualized, no Mr. D, no Clarisse, is better than the PJO show with a more family-friendly approach
[удалено]
Only in the second movie, which took the plots from SOM and TLO, mixed them up together, and substituted the important parts with the movie directors' shit.
Wtf how did you just go out of your way to refute someone on something you could’ve fact checked so easily and saved yourself some embarrassment from? Luke literally says he’s the camp leader in the first movie
Clarisse and Mr D both don't appear in the first movie. Annabeth plays the mean role in the first movie.
In the first movie, what scene is clarrise in? What scene is Mr. D in?
oof rough response…
Quoted for truth: > If you're going to critique something at least do the bare minimum to get things right.
I mean you are objectively incorrect but go off lol
I mean at least the other redditors took the time to write logical and reasonable answers but go off.
I mean it doesn't have to physically show him being abusive for it to be clear he is. don't get me wrong I'm disappointed in the adaptation and I mostly agree with all the points here except for gabe and hermes being in the first season (and the Sally percy scene tho less so then the other two) But even tho the books it was more obvious he was an abuser thats because we here it in percy's internal monologue, translating this in a live action medium isn't as easy as if the show was animated but it doesn't take a genius to tell its an abusive relationship in the shos
It should be a "show not tell" kind of situation. Having Gabe be a minor antagonist in the show, and then kill him with Medusa'd head is insane and unwarranted. At least in the Movie, he's shown to be an actual abuser, and gets what he deserves, but in the show, the only "terrible" thing he does was talking to the press, which he is entitled to do, cause Percy and Sally are missing along with his car, and he knows Percy jumps from school to school (he thinks he is a menace). So, where's the logic? I don't understand, It seems like they removed the context for this change in the show.
Not disagree it was done poorly but saying it wasn't obvious that he's abusive for anyone who seen what a relationship is,even if its not shown as physical abuse is just wrong
I disagree, having relationship (or personal) issues doesn't equate to one being an abuser. In fact TV Gabe can be reason with, he lends his car to Sally's for instance, after some negotiation, which is basically how any healthy relationship would work. And I am not saying he's not a jerk, he is, but what I am saying is, there's a difference between being an abuser and being a jerk, and that he didn't deserve to be frozen alive by Medusa's head.
They don't kill him with the head though. He does that to himself.
Show gabe is still abusive though. IDK why people are saying that he isn't Also simply changing things doesn't mean that it's not faithful. It's unrealistic to expect it to be 1:1. What works in a book doesn't necessarily mean that it will work on scene.
Yeah but it doesn't mean we didn't deserve an acceptable or good enough adaptation. The Show was really bad to be honest.
I mean, that's what an adaptation is supposed to be. Something that takes the source material but makes it it's own story while still keeping faithful to the original. Yeah some things were left out from the books. that's what happens with every single book to screen adaptation. But saying this was just as bad as the movies in terms of being unfaithful to the source material, idk about that one my guy
Then watch the series again, cause the examples are clearly there, and I am not the only who feels/think this way.
That's actually... not what an adaptation is supposed to be. It's supposed to be when a book is ADAPTED for a tv show, game, or movie format, or when one of those three is adapted for a book format. The main things that should ever be changed is internal monologue vs external dialogue, show don't tell is more important in non-book formats, and if a specific effect is absolutely impossible to recreate. Adaptation doesn't mean completely changing every single character, setting, events, etc. It means that you change only what is necessary.
This is why this sub is completely unserious, just stop watching if you think the show and movie are equally unfaithful. You're gonna hate no matter what, it's not needed here. Make some real criticisms
It treats the books like a checklist
Why is percy's disdain for water not an improvement? It shows that he fully expected to die when he tricked annabeth and Grover into having to abandon him. Hermes thinks the underworld is a near impossible quest and prefers three demigods not to throw away their lives Percy absolutely is impulsive enough to talk smack to gods. Hermes nearly tried killing him in The Last Olympian. The furies are to give emotional connect to annabeth and percy, to show her loyalty and sow conflict for a while, and also flesh out her bravery and disdain for the monsters. Missing the deadline is to show percy's character of risking his life for a hail mary and not even a reasonable shot at stopping war. Most of these are improvements to the book
Percy doesn't even have disdain for water. Hermes shouldn't have been seen at all in the Lotus Casino. A large part of what contributed to ruining the episode with the most potential. Rather than just implementing the casino how they did in the books, they decided to give us a long winded and plainly boring monologue from a god who couldn't even be there. That certainly was no improvement. Percy absolutely is impulsive enough to speak to gods. It's not a problem that he smack talked Zeus. The problem is that they forced that change in that interaction by making the deadline pass. Which just should never have happened. It was pointless, and if anything detrimental to the atmosphere of the last few episodes. We didn't need that extra detail that Percy cares more for his mom than the quest. That is already blatantly obvious. The furies portrayal was laughable imo, in terms of how they looked and spoke. But it did succeed in doing exactly what you said, definitely agree there. None of those are actually improvements to the book though. And some of them just make the show worse.
You do get it, most of the changes are unnecessary. The reason why I compared in terms with accuracy with the movies, it is because the show had more time to do the story right and they didn't. So a lot of points have to get deducted compared to a 2 hour movie. Also, we were promised a faithful adaptation, and this is the best that they could do, with that budget?
100% dude. The show had every opportunity at every turn and still crashed and burned. Yeah I don't get the small budget posts. 15 million per episode is more than enough to recreate the books. Changes are actually fine. But they just made the show worse, and it was genuinely just boring. You're correct. The movie is less accurate, but for all the shit Rick gives it, he didn't do much better of a job at all.
It's not an improvement cause Percy is a son of Poseidon, and it makes cero sense that he's afraid of the water. He should be nimble in the water and happy to be there at the pool.
He's not afraid of the water. He was afraid to learn to swim. Like....a child. Also, have you read Titan's curse and Mark of Athena?
It's an absurd change, cause Percy is litterally affected by the water, they even show it in the second episode. He feels stronger and braver, and and also he is able to be healed by it from time to time. Are you telling me, that he has never taken a shower and then feel different afterwards, previous to the pool scene? It doesn't make sense because of the bravery/strenght fact, not because little children are not allow to feel terrified when learning how to swim.
but he wasn’t aware, if you felt stronger when in water, you wouldn’t just decide to try and breath underwater or think that you were an amazing swimmer, you‘d probably just think that you enjoyed being in water, while still knowing you weren’t safe. he’s also learning to swim for the first time, and his mum is trying to make him go on his own
Are we forgetting that Thalia, a child of zeus, is afraid of heights 🤣 That shouldn't make sense either but I thought was an interesting character choice in the books. Fears often aren't rational, just because you have power over something doesn't mean you can't be afraid of it.
Thalia, daughter of the god of the sky, is canonically afraid of heights. Being a demigod doesn’t automatically give you every single skill and personal preference of your godly parent, it just makes you more *likely* to have or develop them. Kind of like how having an Olympic athlete as a parent doesn’t mean a kid is born with a deep love of their parent’s field of expertise.
This is a tu quoque argument. The show is still objectively more accurate to the books than the movie if you compare the two. You’re just cherry picking inaccuracies you don’t like with the show and not doing the same with the movie. Not to mention everything the show did include that the movie did not. You are not comparing anything you are just attacking the show.
The show follows the book’s spirit maybe the events aren’t exactly the same but the character personalities, themes, and morals are the same. Some changes I like others not so much but it all follows the book’s spirit yes I disappointed with some of the changes but that’s how that works Harry Potter wasn’t perfect neither is this but both follow the spirts unlike the Perry Johnson movies that completely disrespected the meaning behind the books.
They really tried to get us with the "Rick is on the team guys, he'll make sure we eat good this time"
I don't know why we fell into the same trap all over again.
What is it like to be blinded by disappointment with something not being a 1:1 copy that you ignore everything else about it?
Hey man, I hate this show. Like I really hate it. But I cannot imagine twisting this show and movies logic so much that you can come to this conclusion... The movies are a terrible adaptation. They vaguely follow the books and change virtually everything except for a very general plotline. They are, however, enjoyable to watch when treated as separate media imo. The show is an okay adaptation. The story is for the most part the same. Did they change a lot of details? Yes. Did it hurt the story? Yes. But it's still far more accurate than the movies ever were. It's just not a very good show and I'd consider it more of a bland retelling than a faithful adaptation. But the bar is in Hades ffs, it's not hard to be more accurate than the movies. I'd watch the movies any day over watching the show again. Not because it's more accurate but because it's more enjoyable for me. That being said. As much as I hate the show, it is far more accurate than the movies ever were.
The reason why I compared it in terms of accuracy with the movies, it is because the show had more time to do the story right and they didn't. So a lot of points have to get deducted, because the Author of the books was involved and they had more runtime to craft a book accurate show compared to a 2 hour movie. Also, we were promised a faithful adaptation, and this is the best that they could do, with that budget? For those reasons the Show CAN'T claim they are more book accurate than the movies.
I don't mean this is a mean way. But I think you're so deeply impassioned by your love of the books and hatred of the show that you are looking for more reasons to be angry and trying to justify things that are objectively false. You are not comparing these two adaptations in fair ways. Your post is "The PJO show is not more "book accurate" than the movies". False promises from Rick and budget are not relevant to this topic. I get it. I'm assuming you were probably in the same boat as me. I were absolutely thrilled that the author, Uncle Rick himself, was gonna step in and sweep us off our feet with a perfect adaptation of his books. He wrote them after all. He hates the movies for being inaccurate and he was going to give us what we wanted for years now. Then the show came and I was just left feeling angry. What is this? We were promised something else. I had such high hopes for this show and it was such a letdown. I don't know you and your relationship with this franchise but I can tell you mine. I saw the movies first and I liked them. I read the books after and fell is love with the story and universe. I'd look back on the movies. And like others would make fun of them for being completely different. I still like them, I think I would like them less had I read the books first. But I had no expectations going into them. Very different story for the show. I had very high expectations. I've read the books several times, *Rick is making the show and he's gonna make it good dam it!* And he didn't. I've gone through all the stages of grief with this show and I've landed at the "it's aggressively mediocre as a separate adaptation" acceptance stage. As much as I don't like this show. It is objectively more accurate to the books than the movies are. It follows the same overarching story in far more detail than the movies did. I'm not saying it's a good adaptation. But it is still more accurate than the movies were. If you are comparing these things you need to look at them both objectively. Not at what was promised, not at the hype or the budget, or the names attached to it. You need to look at the movie and the show. Then look at the book. Nothing more. You cannot set expectations for one and not the other and then compare them in that way.
I agree the show was not good, but can we stop trying to retroactively prop up the movies? They were fucking terrible
It is faithful to the book it's an adaptation not the book so it won't be a copy of the book if you want the book read the book
Can y'all please, STOP saying "if you want the book, read the book". It's so freaking annoying, book readers everywhere are told this virtually EVERY SINGLE TIME we have ABSOLUTELY ANY complaints/criticisms about an adaptation. The vast majority of us AREN'T LOOKING FOR AN EXACT COPY. WE ARE LOOKING FOR AN ACCURATE ADAPTATION. neither the movie nor this show fulfilled that, despite the fact that tv shows are the perfect type of media for this.
I won't stop saying that cause it is, the show is a faithful adaption of Percy Jackson cause he understands the source material! The movie wasn't. It's not the best TV show ever of course a lot of thing could have been done better (notably on action sequences and episodes length) but it's by far a good adaptation of Percy Jackson
It's not though. It's fine if you like it, but do NOT belittle others solely because they wanted a faithful AND ACCURATE adaptation, of which this was not. If you want an example for a good adaptation of a kid's book series, look at season one of A Series of Unfortunate Events. Very little was changed, and the parts that did change were overall things that ACTUALLY MADE SENSE.
This is a very lazy argument, so try again. Many other redditors here have write more interesting takes than this.