Short version: Read the book, but don't see the movie. OR, go see the movie, but don't read the book. Just DON'T do both.

Long version: There really are no words to describe how far away this movie was from the book. It was like going into a theater expecting to see The Terminator, and seeing Braveheart instead. Both great movies, but NOTHING similar about them. Besides the character names, lightening, and some sand, NOTHING, I repeat NOTHING about this movie resembled ANY part of the book. Nothing. I read the book in one day, two days before I saw this movie. I was so excited to see this fantastic book come to life, and I left sorely disappointed.

I'm not sure if the author of the book was involved at all in the decisions that went into the writing of this movie, but they completely bastardized, completely changed EVERYTHING about his story. Even the core motivation behind the 'who and the why' was different.

It simply was not the same story at all. I've seen many books made into movies and I'm familiar with the huge and often disappointing changes they inevitably make, but this was off the charts. I've never seen anything like it.

If you haven't read the books, then go see it. It was fun enough. But please don't bother if you enjoyed the original story; because it's a completely different one.

Since The Maze Runner: The Death Cure came out two weeks ago, I'm going to review the second installment of The Maze Runner franchise that started with the first one. The original Maze Runner deviated from the young-adult romance trope that plagued the recent adaptations after Twilight ended and it received mixed-to-positive reviews. While fans of the book series either hated it or found it ok, it was considered by many to be a much better young-adult adaptation. It had mystery, it had thrills, it had action and it had emotion. People liked it and so did I. Then, a year later back in 2015, I saw the sequel hoping it would live up to the first film, but while it was a decent enough sequel, it did disappoint me and I understand the mixed reaction from both critics and fans of the second book "The Scorch Trials".

There are some positives that worked in the film. The cinematography is really gorgeous including the buildings and the actual desert, not to mention it's solid make-up and CGI effects on the Cranks. 61 million dollars went into the production and much like the first film, it was well spent. John Paesano, who scored the first film, did another solid job in delivering the same stuff he did from the atmosphere to the action music. Wes Ball, who directed the first film, delivered another top-notch direction. Also, the acting continues to be great with Dylan O'Brien, Kaya Scodelario, Thomas Brodie-Sangster, Dexter Darden, Alexander Flores, Ki Hong Lee, and Patricia Clarkson continuing to deliver excellent performances as did the new supporting cast including Giancarlo Esposito, Alan Tudyk, Rosa Salazar, and Aidan Gillen as the Rat Man, Jorge, and Brenda. And then, there's the action sequences which are more intense and action-packed including the chase scenes. Those set pieces alone are worth watching if anyone else checks the movie out on DVD.

That being said, there are some drawbacks that disappointed those who loved the first film and the book series. First, there's the writing, which sadly does feel a bit weak and borrows sources from other zombie-genre related stuff. Not only that, it deviated from the second book despite having some bits of elements which caused an outrage to fans. Also, while the film delivered on the action and thrills, it lacked the mystery and emotion and made the first film work. Not to mention the plot and character development were severely lacking. The new characters were well introduced, but no depth was given to them. Then, there's the pacing which is sadly another weak element to the film. I don't mind two hour films but only when they have development for the characters. The original film had brisk pacing and took it's time for Thomas to interact with the other Gladers and becoming a really great leader and those characters were the ones you cared about. There's some of it here but not enough considering the weak writing and it's deviation from the source material.

Overall, The Maze Runner: The Scorch Trials is a decent enough sequel and it delivered what it promised in the trailers, but sadly, it wasn't nearly as engaging as the first film. I haven't seen The Death Cure yet, but I'm keeping my fingers crossed it would be an improvement. 3/5

For a long time I didn't want to read the books but I did watch the movies. At that time I thought this movie was amazing and then I read the book.

Oh my word, I love this cast because they are pretty freaking awesome, but they really, really, really went off book. I mean the main plot is the same however 99/100 things that happened in this movie are incorrect. If this is your first time seeing it and you haven't read the book just assume that everything you're watching is incorrect, because it probably is. The Cranks are overdramatized, the whole rebel gang in the desert thing NEVER HAPPENED and Teresa was pretty much NEVER there. And Rat Man, whom I love, doesn't look like Rat Man!!!!!! Plus the whole "their blood is the cure" thing is sooo incorrect, because the Flare infects your brain like cancer or a mental illness, which then has residual effects on the body. So to take their blood would do nothing to fight the Flare.

On the other hand the movie is entertaining to watch, if you are not watching it for the story. Therefore I would give it a 7 based on how entertaining it was and a 2 for how inaccurate it was. I do have to say that based on this movie I don't think the next one, the Death Cure, is even worth seeing. If this one was so inaccurate the Death Cure will most likely be much, much worse.