Talk:Percy Jackson & the Olympians: The Lightning Thief

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Relocated Trivia[edit]

In the section "Production" was the line seen below. It was right in the middle of the paragraph and really didn't fit. Instead of deleting altogether I moved it here, so that it could be added again (if deemed necessary) once some time can be devoted to cleaning up this article and incorporating the line so that it runs smoothly.

During filming, a van started rolling down a hill towards the cast and crew, including Uma Thurman. Pierce Brosnan raced after the van, opened the driver's side door, jumped in and stopped the vehicle.

--67.242.120.197 (talk) 00:50, 1 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yea, I agree. It's not notable enough to make the article and is trivial even for trivia. Airplaneman talk 18:26, 13 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Logan Lerman[edit]

What's up with Logan Lermanreal name Abu Quader? I'm deleting it unless we have citations. BelieVerr (talk) 15:55, 11 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Abuqader (talk · contribs) is vandalizing, as he has done to many PJ articles. I've reported them to AIV. Airplaneman talk 17:37, 11 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. BelieVerr (talk) 21:23, 13 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Box office?[edit]

Where is the Box Office section? Doesn't anyone know? Oh, and seventeen year old Percy Jackson? Either the movie or the article is really messed up. 66.206.233.143 (talk) 13:17, 13 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

If you're talking about gross, you're going to have to wait until the weekend's over (I think, for total weekend premiere gross or whatever). It'll then appear in the infobox on the right. Also, try the "reception" section. Airplaneman talk 18:25, 13 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Does the weekend of President's Day still technically depend on the Queen of England's discretion? I remember hearing something about how the torture confirmations and http://www.equalitytrust.org.uk were going to make a new Liberal Democrat government. 99.56.137.226 (talk) 06:34, 18 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

If you look at the video in this link you'll see a preview that talks about Columbus changing Percy's age to 17.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KWRvmMXsPNI&NR=1&feature=fvwp BelieVerr (talk) 21:22, 13 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

If the film follows the standard 3x-budget rule for recouping costs, it's still some $50M upside down from just breaking even. Considering it didn't even break $100M in the US—and the movie had US characters and locales—I think it could hardly be considered a "box office success." 98.240.123.118 (talk) 22:06, 22 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Mr. D[edit]

I took away the part that Mr. D is the care taker of Camp HAlf Blood in the characters section. There was no proof of it during the movie so it shouldn't be there. It seemed that Chiron was the caretaker. --Jason Garrick (talk) 15:41, 13 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yea, Mr. D is the director, and you're right, Chiron is the caretaker. Airplaneman talk 18:23, 13 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sequel[edit]

There will be a sequel, right? If so, what happened to the part that said sequel???? TELL ME! Percyfangirl44 (talk) 14:02, 14 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I removed it, because it was not well-sourced per WP:RS and WP:CRYSTAL, as neither of the two links offered for that passage indicated that such a sequel is in production. (I left in the passage on Chris Columbus discussed how they cast the film, and moved it to the Production section, since that was accurately sourced.) Nightscream (talk) 16:21, 14 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The director and Rick Riordan said there will be a sequel to this movie Percy Jackson and The Olympians: The Sea Of Monsters. It will be released around 2011 or 2012. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Matt8801 (talk • contribs) 17:26, 15 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

First of all, you don't have to create multiple sections to talk about the same topic. If there's already a section devoted to the topic you wish to discuss, just place you post underneath the most recent one in that section.
As for the sequel, if you want to add material about it, you have to provide a reliable, verifiable source per WP:NOR, WP:V and WP:RS. Nightscream (talk) 18:25, 15 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
According to an MTV article in one of the sources, a sequel is less certain due to the fact that the opening weekend has been such a huge disaster. The film cost $95 million and a moderate opening week should have been between at least $40 to $50 million. Mo HH92 Talk 02:26, 18 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Percy Jackson over performed stated by most everyone. Rogar ebert states it right here http://twitter.com/ebertchicago/status/9066080381. Most critic rate it 3 out of 4 stars. It would be nice if you did more research before you put information down misleading most people. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bamaman52 (talk • contribs) 04:03, 18 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The burden of proof is on the person who wishes to include material, not the person removing it. (Please see WP:BURDEN.) Putting aside the fact that social networking sites do not pass WP:RS because establishing that they are indeed the official page of the person in question problematic, nowhere on that linked page does Ebert (if it's him) state that it "overperformed". He merely says that it's doing well. This does not constitute "research" that establishes a sequel. By contrast, that MTV source is indeed a reliable source, and that page does say that it performed less than was hoped. Also, Mo HH92 did not place the MTV source in the article, nor did s/he say that he did; he merely referenced it. A look through the article's edit history shows that Blytonite added it. Nightscream (talk) 04:55, 18 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

In huge disaster he probably means the grossing of the film not what the critics are saying not enough people are going to see it and as stated before a sequel section has to have verifiable sources The Movie Master 1 (talk) 04:40, 18 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Is (www.metacafe.com/watch/4168117/percy_jackson_and_the_lighting_thief_sequel_talk)a reliable source, cause it shows a video of Chris Columbus talking about a sequel. Percyfangirl44 12:16, 19 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

No, it features a video of Brandon T. Jackson, Logan Lerman and Alexandra Daddario answering a question of whether they'd be willing to do a sequel. No mention is made that the sequel is in production, nor does Columbus ever speak in that video. Nightscream (talk) 20:13, 19 February 2010

I have heard and seen interviews with the cast and directort chirs columbus stating that the actors have been contracted for at least 3 movies and I believe that it was logan who said this too. As for production have done numerous research that says they had auditions for extras for The sea of monsters and that they had finished casting in february. Most of these sites state 2012 for a release date and are crediable but I find even if it is wikipedia deems it not be. I do not mean tp be rude when I say this but how much of what is on wikipedia is true I mean sometimes I go to the references and they are fan based sites and blogs. I think we should really consider to hard concrete research before deeming something is not going to happen as there is lots of time for people to change their minds. Aside from this topic I really hate on critrics say its not worth seeing a movie because they say so but when really the people should really make this decision I find it a waste to read the critical reception page because half the time I do not agree with it but I understand some people like to get a second opinion but for me I just Scroll past it. Sorry for getting off topic but I really needed to get that off my chest. Headstrong 345 (talk) 22:20, 25 February 2011 (UTC)Headstrong 345[reply]

Critical reception[edit]

Critical reception of the film has been MOSTLY NEGATIVE and not MIXED. First of all, it has generated a ROTTEN 48% rating on Rotten Tomatoes which definately indicates that the reception has been mostly negative. On the Top Critics side the rating has been 38% which further indicates mostly negative response. For a film to have a "MIXED" reception the rating should be 50% or more on both sides. Mo HH92 Talk 02:29, 18 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I was going by the Metacritic review which specifically says mixed. No need to react so strongly. PrincessofLlyr (talk) 03:44, 18 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Also, "50% or more on both sides?" That's mathematically impossible. En.Loss —Preceding undated comment added 00:32, 17 March 2010 (UTC).[reply]
"50% or more on both sides?" refers to the ratings of only the Top Critics and the overall scores of all Critics 202.36.179.68 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 07:29, 26 March 2012 (UTC).[reply]

Gabe[edit]

Sally forces Gabe out of their apartment, and as he goes to get a beer from the fridge, opens it only to be turned to stone because Medusa's unprotected eyes are staring right back at him.

I saw this lastnight, and perhaps I wasn't paying attention well enough towards the end, but I don't remember this bit happening... --Charitwo (talk) 15:16, 21 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I think someone mentioned that it was a credits (or post-credits) Easter Egg. Nightscream (talk) 16:57, 21 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I saw it today and it is played during the credits after the cast list has finished. Alexkumar 20:00, 21 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Differences with the Book[edit]

Would it be all right if I created a section that highlighted how different the film was to the book, could'nt believe it when I saw the film, they changed the entire story. I really dont know how they're going to make the sequel now. —Preceding unsigned comment added by RandomWest (talk • contribs) 19:21, 27 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You can't go through and point out every single difference you noticed from the book and the film, that is original research and will become an indiscriminate list. It is acceptable, though, to find reliable sources citing why the filmmakers decided to change certain parts, with the emphasis on the reason and not the fact that it wasn't followed to the T. BOVINEBOY2008 :) 19:30, 27 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Also, new sections should be placed at the bottom of the page, not started in the middle. Thanks. Nightscream (talk) 07:08, 28 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Why can't you create a section about the differences? There are so many, there's bound to be people who come to Wikipedia to check it anyways. I'll create it nevertheless. (xxx 09:22, 9 March 2010 (UTC)) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Marianneyap (talk • contribs)

There are articals on the difference between the Harry Potter books and movies, why shouldn't there be one here? Plus, I do have to admit that this could do with one. You could argue that the film is only the same as the book in that it is about the son of Poseidon who looks for a theif that stole the lightning from the sky. Pretty much everything else is different.Wild ste (talk) 14:58, 19 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I agree that there are plenty of differences, but you would have to be able to properly source them or it's against the no original research policy. PrincessofLlyr (talk) 15:01, 19 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
There will be differences, but as stated above, making a section on them would be complete WP:OR. Using the Harry Potter example is not sufficient. If you can find (and list below) a good number of reliable sources, by all means make it. Otherwise, it'll just be deleted as original research. Cheers, Airplaneman talk 17:28, 19 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I disagree. Highlighting a plot item from one primary source as compared to a plot item from another primary source is obvious and verifiable. As long as there is no additional commentary or speculation, and the list is kept under control, I don't think there's any reason to consider it original research or invalid synthesis. 68.3.119.83 (talk) 12:04, 22 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
According to Wikipedia:These are not original research:
"Comparing and contrasting conflicting facts and opinion is not original research"
"if there are multiple versions of a particular story, and one version does not have a particular character, or has extra characters, that is clear simply by reading or watching the work."68.3.119.83 (talk) 12:16, 22 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]


When was the book written? It sounds like a slight ripoff of Neil Gaiman's American Gods... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.99.207.237 (talk) 10:11, 10 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Age[edit]

Where are we getting Percy's age from? As far as I can tell, it's never stated or implied in the original movie. Looking back in the history, I can see several different ages set, though the "twelve" that the IP addresses kept setting it to is clearly incorrect. Sixteen and seventeen both seem reasonable, but is there any proof? Is something stated in the later movies? – RobinHood70 talk 02:35, 23 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

In Percy Jackson: Sea of Monsters it is stated that the Great Propechy comes true at 20 years of age. Elizium23 (talk) 02:48, 23 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Ah, okay. Thanks! – RobinHood70 talk 03:18, 23 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
If his age is never revealed, why include it at all? Could we maybe say "high schooler" or "9th grader" instead (assuming his grade is disclosed). If we're backtracing his age from a future event, are we even sure whether the events in this film occur before or after his birthday? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 161.69.122.15 (talk) 16:12, 6 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, Percy is very explicitly twelve years old in the first book, also titled Lightning Thief. The first page of that book contains the following text: "My name is Percy Jackson. I'm twelve years old." That's where the common mistake originated. But this doesn't translate to Percy being 12 in the movie. 173.76.131.179 (talk) 17:25, 30 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Category: Summer camps in films[edit]

I just noticed that this article has been placed under the category "Summer camps in films". Does it really belong there? Camp Half-Blood, one of the settings of the film, is a summer camp, yes, but does the article about the film itself belong there? Advice needed. 2ReinreB2 (talk) 15:30, 16 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Percy Jackson & the Olympians: The Lightning Thief. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

checkY An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 11:38, 27 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Working link. Dhtwiki (talk) 15:02, 27 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Percy_Jackson_%26_the_Olympians:_The_Lightning_Thief&oldid=1195143488"