The Hunger Games

[coffeewithchess]

CAUTION - SPOILER ALERTS POSSIBLE:

I saw the movie last night, and read all three books a few months ago. I'd give the movie 3 stars out of 5.

Caution spoilers:
I really disliked the shaky / blurred camera work and lack of sound in some key action scenes.

I do agree with this, and said so of one particular scene from the movie...but other than the one scene, I thought it was handled pretty well throughout.

I didn't care for the way the Katniss and Peeta characters were directed in many scenes. They were so flat and down that the movie has a bit of a depressing feel to it. The depth and range of emotions that comes through in the book was completely lost. The supporting cast did better, but even there, depth was missing. In fact, the whole movie generally felt flat.

It's interesting you mentioned this, because I specifically told my wife I thought the actor that best filled his role was Caesar. The problem with directing/being flat and down goes to your next point though...

Character development was weak all around, but especially with the tributes. CGI was weak, and particularly bad with the muttations at the end (missing the huge shock factor for Katniss), and the "girl on fire" could have been much more dramatic. They should have skipped all of the game control room scenes, and Seneca should have had a much smaller role (as in the book).

Character development. That was an issue I had with the first book, and got over it in the 2nd and 3rd book...because I was enjoying the setting more. The Capitol, control, etc....I did tell my wife on the way home though, that I thought Peeta's character in the movie was not given enough background information, to make the viewers understand how "charming" he is supposed to be. While they attempted it a few times...with Haymitch saying he knew how to make friends and such, it wasn't like the book in that it gave more lines about him being excellent at what he does in front of cameras.
As for the game control scenes, I didn't mind them...as I think it gives viewers an idea of how crazy it is, though it's one of those "How do you show propaganda at it's best, and actually show the propaganda?" without having a longer movie (which I would have been fine with).

There were a couple of good, powerful scenes (such as the three-finger salutes). But in the end, I left the theater feeling somewhat let down.

Yea, I did like how they showed District 11's reaction, but they seemed to fail to show the appreciation of District 11 like the author did in the book.
Also, if you read the books, I thought them not including Madge (it could have been done with a 30 second to 1 minute scene at most) was really interesting, and a "Hollywood" way to make something a bit more emotionally connected in the movie.

 

[KCIndy]

One thing of note: I read all three books and there was only one "curse" word through the entire series...which I found very refreshing.
I had read the MPAA rating for it before going to see it, and there was no mention of language at all...but there are multiple uses of the d-word, "My God", and I think one more...each time it happened in the movie, I was literally like..."WHAT?!", only because the book was absent from them. Perhaps I missed them when I read it?

You didn't miss them. They just weren't there in the books. Oddly enough, that was one of the things that impressed me most about the series. Not that I have any objection to swearing or foul language, it really doesn't bother me. But it was only after I had finished reading (okay, listening - audiobooks) to the whole series that it suddenly struck me: There was no objectionable language. None. And the flow of the books really didn't suffer from it.

I've read edited books where "bad words" being deleted made for some really choppy reading. And books where the swearing was described in roundabout ways ("Suddenly, Fred jumped out of his seat and began cursing extravagantly, finishing with a flurry of expletives and a suggestion that was anatomically impossible...") always felt contrived and a more than a bit weak from a literary standpoint.

Of course, the lack of profanity is more than counterbalanced by the sheer amount of violence and bloodshed. If it was a choice between excessive violence on one hand and bountiful profanity on the other, I wonder which would be more disturbing to the "young adult" audience at which the books and movie are aimed?

 

[A. Havnes]

At first, I thought the film looked like an American remake of the Japanese book/film Battle Royale. I might have to see it, though.

 

[Karsten]

An 80% Romance novel, with an underlying anti-government theme in a sci-fi post America. There, saved you the time/money of reading the 3 books. But aside from my dislike of the series, whatever helps us connect the dots, I'm all for it.

So why do you not like it? I know nothing of the plot.

 

[craezie]

I can't wait to see this movie- I loved the book series. I just need to find a sitter for my 3 kids!

I think its awesome to capitalize on the movie to promote Ron Paul; people are waiting in long lines, and the media culture might help them connect some dots that wouldn't normally.

 

[ssjevot]

I hadn't heard of this movie, but once I read up on it it sounds like Battle Royale with more romance and less violence/despair/hopelessness. Battle Royale I think works better as an anti-tyranny movie because it is 100% focused on the suffering inflicted by the totalitarian state.

Not to say this movie may not do that, but people are talking a lot about the romance aspects.

 

[coffeewithchess]

Not to say this movie may not do that, but people are talking a lot about the romance aspects.

The romance aspect is there, but more so in the books...though as I mentioned earlier, the political tones won this series for me. Conspiracy, propaganda at its best, and the fact the author mentioned the word REPUBLIC instead of democracy...when referencing a past civilization/country/government at one point.

 

[Natural Citizen]

Hunger Games was required mandatory reading in high school and a essay due afterward here. I actually objected to it. Perhaps for the very reason we see now which is further commercialization of youth...again, mandatory reading.

 

[coffeewithchess]

Hunger Games was required mandatory reading in high school and a essay due afterward here. I actually objected to it. Perhaps for the very reason we see now which is further commercialization of youth...again, mandatory reading.

Commercialization of youth? Are you talking about making the books into a movie? The "mandatory reading" part, at least when I was in school, was dependent on the teacher. English class, we always had certain books we had to read/write on.

 

[Natural Citizen]

Commercialization of youth? Are you talking about making the books into a movie? The "mandatory reading" part, at least when I was in school, was dependent on the teacher. English class, we always had certain books we had to read/write on.

Summer Reading is required of all high school students in the Christina School District...

All Students will complete the required assignments for The Hunger Games .....

http://www.christina.k12.de.us/Students/2010/SummerReading/OneDistrictOneBook.pdf

 

[Wesker1982]

I really disliked the shaky / blurred camera work and lack of sound in some key action scenes.

THIS!

My wife could barely make it through the movie. She is still nauseous even after the movie too. It is a totally cheap effect. Instead of having to choreograph fight and action scenes, just shake the camera! Even during non-action scenes, the camera was barely ever still. It would tilt back and forth like it was a helmet cam from a bad FPS.

***SEMI SPOILER BELOW MAYBE?***

I wish they would have explained the plot in more detail. I don't think they explained very well how exactly it was that they convinced everyone to accept The Hunger Games. I can understand how people are scared into war by convincing them that they are doomed if they don't destroy the terrorists or communists etc, but I couldn't understand what manipulated the society in this plot. It probably is explained more in the books, but reading the book should not be a requirement to watch the movie.

I did appreciate that it had a little more depth than the average movie nowadays, and the production quality was really high. If the camera and plot complaints were fixed, I probably would have really enjoyed the movie.

 

[helmuth_hubener]

I just saw the movie. I also am in the happy situation of judging the movie alone, not having read any of the books.

First, it is a movie movie. It is a really good movie screenplay. Nowhere does it seem stilted or wrong-paced or have some element which seems to be just there to be "true to the book." It stands alone as a good movie.

The camera work was a bit choppy at first. Crazy angles, cutting around; I'm not saying it's bad, just be warned if you get queasy at such things. Of course, I was in the front row (the best row!) so the effect was exaggerated for me. There was low-light noise in a lot of the shots, meaning they were actually shooting in low-light, not digitally darkening it afterwards; I'm not sure what that means or why they did it. It means it wasn't always that super-crisp "HD" look that you usually have in modern movies. Most shots were, but not all. Towards the end I thought that maybe the shots with noise were supposed to represent shots coming from the hidden cameras showing the Game to the TV audience? I don't know.

It was good story, pretty unique and thought-provoking, and very well-done.

The relevant takeaways:

This was first and foremost an anti-war movie. Strongly, strongly anti-war. This whole Hunger Game thing is obviously an analogy for war, and man is it against it!! It's pro-revolution too (pro-uprising, pro-riot-against the government), but I don't see any conflict there. It's anti-war of the kind of war we don't like, but has nothing against the people sticking their fingers in the eyes of their rulers whenever they can. Right on.

Everyone in power is a bad guy. Everyone. Everyone. I cannot emphasize this enough. As far as I'm concerned, that's it, this movie is a winner right there. The entire government is evil. No one in the government is good, they are all evil, inhuman, reprehensible, etc. The entire media is evil as well. Everyone with power -- the media, the state, the "peacekeepers," -- they are all bad, bad, bad. That point is not moderated. There are no exceptions. The government has no redeeming value whatsoever. Period. And AMEN to that.

In conclusion: anti-war, everyone in power a bad guy... yeah, this is a good libertarian film.

 

[coffeewithchess]

***SEMI SPOILER BELOW MAYBE?***

I wish they would have explained the plot in more detail. I don't think they explained very well how exactly it was that they convinced everyone to accept The Hunger Games. I can understand how people are scared into war by convincing them that they are doomed if they don't destroy the terrorists or communists etc, but I couldn't understand what manipulated the society in this plot. It probably is explained more in the books, but reading the book should not be a requirement to watch the movie.

I did appreciate that it had a little more depth than the average movie nowadays, and the production quality was really high. If the camera and plot complaints were fixed, I probably would have really enjoyed the movie.

The books do explain the "control", if you will, of the citizens in the districts a little more. The movie gave a quick explanation of how the games were setup, and why...but just briefly. I do think this is a movie that multiple viewings may help...but not sure how much if you haven't read the books.
The second book, and second movie hopefully, goes into more details on the districts, giving you a glimpse at them.

 

[Anti Federalist]

I'll wager 400 Quatloos on the newcomers.

 

[MelissaWV]

The future movies go into more back story. Keep in mind that this is an entire civilization, with a history, and you can't spend hours on history and explaining things. As it was, I think it was fairly clever to have the commentators (they do not appear in the book) to explain a few key things. They are things that are explained internally in the books, because they are known by the heroine and hence don't need outside people to explain them.

I actually enjoyed the movie a great deal more than I thought, and I hope beyond all hope that the other movies live up to this and keep the central themes of resistance and manipulation and survival. People going into this expecting a love story (80% love story? really?) are going to be disappointed. I enjoyed the books because a lot of where the characters end up... well... it seems natural and more human than most of the movies we get now.

 

[MelissaWV]

I hadn't heard of this movie, but once I read up on it it sounds like Battle Royale with more romance and less violence/despair/hopelessness. Battle Royale I think works better as an anti-tyranny movie because it is 100% focused on the suffering inflicted by the totalitarian state.

Not to say this movie may not do that, but people are talking a lot about the romance aspects.

The "Games" don't even begin until pretty late in the movie. The other movies do not feature "Games" as much, either, in the explicit sense. The "romance" aspect certainly gets deflated by happenings in the other books, and as much as that's part of the heroine's conflicts (since she's a teen girl), she kind of has bigger fish to fry. So does everyone.

There's war coming, which the movie is gracious enough to point out. There is a great need to control the districts, which outnumber the capital and certainly have more people. There's a huge propaganda machine. There's manipulation.

For pity's sake the place is called "Panem."

People painting this as just "Battle Royale" with different players and a kiss... I don't know what to tell them other than to perhaps reread the books.

 

[Crystallas]

I really disliked the shaky / blurred camera work

That was the only way they could keep it PG-13

I agree, but I am hoping that an unrated version comes out later without the sloppy action scene edits.

 

[kylejack]

***SEMI SPOILER BELOW MAYBE?***

I wish they would have explained the plot in more detail. I don't think they explained very well how exactly it was that they convinced everyone to accept The Hunger Games. I can understand how people are scared into war by convincing them that they are doomed if they don't destroy the terrorists or communists etc, but I couldn't understand what manipulated the society in this plot. It probably is explained more in the books, but reading the book should not be a requirement to watch the movie.

I did appreciate that it had a little more depth than the average movie nowadays, and the production quality was really high. If the camera and plot complaints were fixed, I probably would have really enjoyed the movie.

They completely dominated them in a war 74 years earlier. 13 districts rose up against the Capital and the Capital crushed them, including completely obliterating District 13 with nuclear weapons (Allegedly. No spoilers from the other two books, people). The Hunger Games is a punishment for the failed revolution.

 

[Jingles]

I'm going to see this later with my dad and stepmom for they are coming down to visit. We usually go to see a movie when they come down. So why not? Might as well see what the hype is. Although I'm always happy if something is expressing and anti-state pro-liberty message.

I'll wager 400 Quatloos on the newcomers.

We can't wager for trifles like quatloos. The stakes must be higher!

 

[Noblegeorge]

I saw the movie last night and yeah, its pretty weak. Its a PG 13 American Battle Royale. I will read the books because im sure theres more to it than that but the central idea of this movie is a complete rip off of Battle Royale no question.