The hair color and ethnicity were not the changes that ruined this movie. The changes that did the damage were much more dramatic. I usually enjoy seeing how screenwriters meet the challenge of taking a book and creating a visual world from it while retaining the feel and style of the book. This one failed. Instead of a young hero who has battled his own demons, you have a stylish Zac Efron look alike whose best buddy is a confident comedian popular with the ladies. The rather heavy handed sexual advances made by Persephone on Grover are really disgusting if you think of Grover as a kid in middle school (yuck).

I found your comments about the people who dislike this retelling rather patronizing. The major changes to the entire tone and substance of the books are what most people find offensive...by implying that hair color and skin tone were what was the most upsetting you made their concerns sound childish. Those were just the most obvious and easily spotted flaws and are indicative of the movie makers lack of respect for their source material. This movie had so many flaws that my daughter and her friends stopped their list at 23 because their hands were growing tired. They have never had so much negative to say about a movie adaptation, nor have I. We wanted to love this movie, and perhaps that is why we are so very disappointed.

Maybe someday one of the kids who has written comments will buy the rights and do it right.. In the meantime, I will express my displeasure by taking my dollars elsewhere (no DVD for this family).

I really enjoyed The Lightning Thief. The comments that "it was a Harry Potter ripoff" are completely off-base.

This is from my blog:

The review industry needs to change. I’ve heard on multiple occasions that professional reviewers enjoy writing negative reviews more than positive ones. That is a shame. Their reviews are capable of priming audiences to hate movies that are not deserving of such wrathful dislike. They’ve created a media world in which being “intellectual” means not liking anything except those things that general audiences don’t like.

The Lightning Thief is a good movie. It’s not great, but it’s better than most sci-fi/fantasy tween movies that are released. Those who go in to see the film without any expectations will probably enjoy it for what it is, while those who anticipate a Harry Potter ripoff will see a Harry Potter ripoff.

Patricia:

The big problem you and your daughter and her friends might have is that you're making a list of "what's wrong" with the movie. That's not why people go to the movies.

Movie adaptations have been done since the beginning of film and it's rare for big fans of a series to enjoy the film. You just have to judge the two separately.

There was nothing more shocking to me than going to see the latest Harry Potter and finding out the last battle scene was completely cut. This is one of my favorite scenes in the entire book series. But you know what? It was still a really good movie. Probably the best of the series.

But I did want to see that fight.

Same with Percy Jackson. The movie, meant for tweens, was two hours. If they had to introduce the subplots about Ares and Kronos and all that, the movie would have been 150 minutes -- WAY too long for this film.

I think it's better to go to the movies to see what's right with it than see what's wrong with it.

I had never heard of "Percy Jackson" up until I saw this movie advertised, so when I found out it was a book series I immediately went out and bought the first book so I could read it before I saw the movie.

Yes, there are DRAMATIC differences between the book and the movie, but I thoroughly enjoyed both works as they were intended to be enjoyed. So what if Grover was black? So what if Annabeth had dark hair as opposed to blonde? These are miniscule things that shouldn't be considered.

On the plus side, these character were not the 12-year olds they were in the book... they were at least old enough to drive (that already made the movie more interesting to begin with). The Hydra was a great bonus. Giving Medusa (or should I say Medusa's head) a bigger role was great... Uma Thurman was flawless. The book jumped all over the place in Percy's quest, so to take the more entertaining parts and flesh them out a bit was a fantastic idea.

On the negative side, I would have liked to see Ares & Kronos involved, but the movie did just fine without them.

If a squel is made (and I hope there will be), maybe they could stick to the books a little more... kind of how the Twilight Saga picked up the slack with the sequel.

I think the Percy Jackson movie was great. People should view big screen adaptations as a separate work.

I didn't like the movie because well I am a fan of the books. I HATE how people say " oh well the movie is a different work of art"
Well the only reason the director got his story is thanx to Rick Riordan!! He should at least stayed loyal to the book!! I mean 12 year olds are capable of acting and fighting they are not THAT young! Look at Noah Ringer from the Last Airbender and Daniel R. from Harry Potter two great 12 year old actors in my opinion.

I never read the book so I was not bothered by what they changed.

I was bothered--very deeply--by the fact that there was (probably unconscious) racism in the depiction of Grover as an African-American satyr. Let's see...dark skinned half animal, comic relief side-kick, most interested in sex of the young characters, and subservient to the white hero... Really offensive stereotypes! Why not make the hero or heroine African-American if they want to appeal to a diverse audience??!!!

i haven't seen the movie yet but i read the books and i have numerous problems with it.....first, ANNABETH is not a bunette she is a blond the book is most specific about it's characters and locations repeating the descriptions numerous times. second, HADES was not the bad guy!....LUKE and ARES were.. LUKe stole HADES and ZEUS's item of power. THIRD Persephone wasn't in any of the books nor should she be in the movie....HADES DIDN"T TAKE THE BOLT. FOURTHLY what really made me upset is that PERCY's SHIELD the one the retracts was'y even given to him until the second book the pictures on it are supposed to represent the quest in the second book. I think the directors and screenplay wrters have recently been bashing the books knowledege in movies....like they take awesome literature that really really descriptive and change alot now....things they don't think mean anything but to us people who read the books know these trivial details make the character. Also the hydra fight doesn't happen at all until the second book...and in the underworld person only sees his mom incased in golden light not walking and talking....she was supposed to magically appear at home.....and u don't find out luke in evil until the end of the book and there's no showdown and the end percy get's poisined.......i'm just sick of directors doing as they please....we the consumer should make the final choice....i mean we do as if we want to see the movie or not but it should matter more tha winning golden globes or emmy's.....perfect example the butching of TWILIGHT...the first onbe was absolutley terrible....the second was very very much like the book.